Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. I'll ask everybody to kind of uh bring their chats to a close, which includes us up here. Move towards We'll give city staff a moment. You know, they're still pulling it together. Sorry. No, no, I'm teasing you. Very good. Thank you very much. I want to uh welcome you to the city and planning commission meeting. Um what I will do is ask our one of our clerks to call roll. Chair Winnham here. Vice Chair Will here. Commissioner Balovc here. Commissioner Godert here. Commissioner Miner here. Commissioner Nance

here.

Commissioner Ryan absent. Thank you. And before we move on to item two, approval of minutes, what I wanted to do was um we uh accidentally omitted from the agenda is an item that will be for public comment for nonaggendaized items. And for members of the audience, that means uh if it's specific to an item that's on the agenda, you are um you need to speak to that agenda item and then speak to items that are not on the agenda during that non-aggendaized item. I guess that's in the name, but I I repeated that. Made it kind of I sound like an attorney. Made that kind of complicated. Um sorry about that. And so what I would like to do is ask for a motion if if the uh um group is comfortable here to add item number five which would be public comment for non-aggendaized items. Someone want to say so moved.

Also move. And I'm going to so second. And all in favor? I. Okay. So item number five on the agenda will be for public comment for non-aggendaized items. The next one is approval of minutes, the minutes of August 26, 2025. Uh, any questions, comments, opinions, or motions? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from August 26, 2025. I will second that. Very good. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? I I

Any opposed? Okay, very good. Thank you. And then item number three, announcements. We don't have any announcements scheduled at the moment. Thank you. So, we'll move right on to item number four, planning commission items, consent calendar A. There are not any. So, we move on to public hearings. And the first item is item 4 B 1. And what I will ask before we move into this item and before staff gives a presentation again because there may be people here that aren't accustomed to the protocol, staff will give a presentation. We will have an opportunity to ask staff any questions or comments. Then there will be a public hearing point. We will open and close that public hearing. We will bring it back for any other further discussion and we'll go from there. So, I would ask um uh be attentive to your cell phones if you haven't already and you wish to speak to this item or any other item. There are uh purple cards in the back. If you fill out that card with your name and either the item number or a plain language description of what the item is and get it up to one of the clerks, we will be ready when the time comes. So, with that, I'll move on to item 4B1. It's a plan development application PD 2025 230 as articulated in the agenda and I'll turn it over to staff.

Thank you, chair. Good evening, everyone. Um, yes. So, we're here to talk about the California Heritage Youthbuild Academy and the acronym for that is CHIBA. So, I will be referring to it as CHIBA. It's very fun acronym.

And I'll remind you that some of us are becoming more hard of hearing. So, become friendly with that mic, my friend. Thank you. I appreciate that. And I seem to have no way to move the presentation forward up here. Is there an on button?

We're experiencing some about of Murphy's law here for Did we Did we lose Jennifer? Jen, can you can you manually control? Double triple. Okay. Slide.

All right. Thank you. Thanks. So, the property for the project is at 1400 Industrial Street. Um, so to get oriented here, I've got this screenshot. So, we've got uh Churn Creek Road moving uh north south to the west of the project. Um, East Cypress Avenue. There's that large yellow line to the south there, Victor Avenue on the uh on the east and a mistletoe lane to the north. Um oh, I got a pointer here. Um so we have Lowe's here. So the site, we're all familiar with where Lowe's is probably back behind Lowe's. Um the Uh the name of the cemetery is escaping me, but there's a cemetery here. We've got some single family development to the north and to the um to the east. Uh Slaky Brothers Plumbing Supply to the west and the Center of Hope um housing to the south. The project site is zoned RM9 PD. So what that means is residential multif family nine units per acre in a planned development plan development overlay district. Thanks. Um so uh yes, sorry a little distracted there. um RM9 PD, plan development overlay, and I'll get into what the PD um overlay is uh in a few slides here. And then the general plan designation is 6 to 10 units per acre.

So background, what is the project? So Chiba seeks to build a 36,000 foot charter high school. Um, the building would consist of classrooms, offices, a dining area, and a gym. Outdoors, there would be a basketball and soccer fields. The project presumably what's in the project description is that it would be grant grant funded. So, it's a grant-f funed project. Um, the project statement expects funding through multiple grants, including from the office of public school construction. The plan is for a maximum enrollment of 290 students with 130 students being on campus at any given time. Um, and that's there's off-site programs I believe and um there's also I believe a partnership with um with Shasta College. So some students would kind of be going back and forth between the two campuses. So 130 at any given time at at the max is what would be expected. Here's a site plan. So, this is the overhead view of what the what the project is to look like. So, Alfredo Way coming back from Lowe's up here up Alfredo Way, that's the street on the side of Lowe's would come up here to industrial and you could move out to Churn Creek would be like over here. So, there's just this what's called a knuckle. So, the two streets just meet in this knuckle here and that would be the the street access. Again, you've got residential single family to the north and to the east. This big blue shape here, that that's the actual building. So, that's the scale of the building compared to the entire parcel. There's one point of street access off of Industrial Street to the actual project right here into the parking lot. We've got the large soccer field,

basketball court. Um, and then I wanted to point out there's also there's a u bike and pedestrian trail that's actually a grant-f funded project that the city is involved with, but the but this Chiba project would be doing some grading and prep work for that that comes through connecting Delmonte for bicycle and pedestrian access down to Alfredo and industrial. And then there's this uh another trail that's not quite highlighted, but if you look there is the line there um that's a bike ped connection to uh Penn pen drive and then that connects to this other trail through here that I just mentioned. So, it's the site connects the neighborhood for bicycle and pedestrian access. Um, but you'll note that it does not connect the neighborhood for vehicular access. That vehicular access would still be uh coming off of the two arterials where Churn Creek Road and and East Cypress to the south off of Industrial Alfreda. Oh, one other thing I did want to mention is that Little Churn Creek actually runs right off off the property here. And in as a part of this project, there's a uh what's called a covert crossing um for Industrial Street to cross over Little Churn Creek. And we'll we'll get to that in in another slide or two. So the city has a general plan and the general plan is the overarching planning document for the city. Um and it informs the what the zoning ordinance does. It informs everything that we do in planning. So um how is this project consistent with the general plan? Well the the the zoning district which is consistent with the general plan. Um that RM residential multiple family zoning it allows for schools. Um, and that's one of the general plan goals is

to allow allow um schools and other neighborhood uses in RM RM districts so that they can be close to the neighborhoods they serve. the the site was pre-zoned with that plan development overlay district um with the zoning ordinance and that's because um residential multif family and other uses like schools are allowed there and the zoning ordinance wants to make sure that we have an opportunity um to have some discretionary review of the projects that are abuing the other single family neighborhoods. So to avoid any kind of incompatibility issues with with this school, for example, being a more intense use than the single family residential neighborhood. So this this gives this body and the public a chance to to actually see a real a real project with with what it's going to look like um before it gets approved, which isn't always the case without a plan development plan. the project would be uh interconnected and look attractive and fit in with adjacent infield development. And now I know look attractive is a subjective measurement but the the idea here is that again this project is is is giving attention to the aesthetic design um rather than that not being something considered. Um there there's an attempt to make this look good and to and to fit in with with the neighborhood and with the city. So unlike other public facilities projects of yester year, maybe not here, but around around the country, um the aesthetics weren't always given their their uh the attention that they deserved. So that's not what we're doing here. We're making sure that we're getting something that fits the community. All right, let's talk about circulation. So as I mentioned before, access would be via Alfredo Way and and Industrial Street. Now, um just to make it clear, industrial street right now does not it it stops like right here, but this is

all just dirt. So, um this school project, the Chyber project, um does does trigger secondary access for this whole area as it's the infill development here is kind of infilling to its completion and so that does trigger the need for secondary access. So um the project here to the south as you can see center of hope center of hope is constructing industrial street but Chiba will be constructing what's called out here which is the box culvert crossing. So I'm a planner. I used to call this a bridge but I was informed that is completely incorrect. This is a box culvert crossing. So now I've learned my lesson. This box culvert crossing here if you look at each one of these they look like bars. Picture like gigantic bricks. I picture like let's say this is a gigantic brick. If you pick those up and you look down them, there's like a big hollow rectangular hole that goes through them. So, what they do is they plop down a number of these into into the creek so that water can go through those big holes and then they can pave a street and sidewalk over the top of them. So, um they're all over the place. I never really thought about it until I learned about box culvert crossings. So, um, that's that's what Chiba is going to install here, um, with with some of the grading and everything associated with the crossing. And then they're going to connect the street and sidewalk on both sides to the improvements that Center of Hope to uh, Center of Hope will be doing. Um, so yes, Trib will be building a bridge. I'm going to call it a bridge because I'm a normie. trees and landscaping. So, there are 294 trees on the site right now. The species range from blue oak, uh, gray pine, live oak, black oak, and, um, catalpa. Um, 81 of those trees are planned to be

preserved with 213 of those being removed. Um, a big reason of why more trees can't be saved is the topography of the site. I'll just use this graphic. So it's higher up here and gradually slopes down. This like going north to south, it gradually slopes down. And so in order to get this development to be graded properly, this basically they basically have to put a giant step into the into the site and they're calling it a super pad. I believe that's the term of art. And so the super pad is going to require like flattening out this this whole area. So essentially any trees in there, there's no way for them to to be saved because of the need to do the super PADD to be able to construct the project. So that's one of the limitations with with saving trees. Um that being said, the 81 trees that can be preserved, um the conditions of approval do require a tree protection plan uh with the improvement plans to to protect those trees during the grading. Um and uh there are over 100 trees proposed for planting with the project, including buffer yard trees. So, I wanted to mention the buffer yard. So, because this is considered a more intense use than the single family neighborhood again towards the north and east, um there is the requirement for this project to install what we call a buffer yard. It's a 10-ft buffer yard. And what that means is there's a 10-ft strip of uh of an extra side setback here along this is actually sorry I should explain this is the west side and this is the east side. It's just split across two pictures. So that buffer ought to come moving eastward there, continue along here and then south on those sides of the site between the single family neighborhood and that buffer yard would the idea is that it would insulate the single family neighborhood from the more intense use of the school with solid fencing, some landscaping and a 10-ft setback. So

that's that's also in the conditions of approval um to require that and those trees will also be planted um increasing the the amount of trees that would be installed with the project. As for the environmental so a mitigated a mitigated negative declaration that's the M andd was prepared for the project and that's in accordance with SQA the California environmental quality act. potentially significant impacts to birds and bats were identified. Um these are winged creatures that like trees and they they come and go. So they could even if they're not there now, they could be there closer to construction. So there there could be impacts to um endangered and and special status birds and bats. Um to that end, mitigation measures are included in the proposed um mitigation monitoring program and and a part of the conditions of approval. So those mitigation measures are incorporated into the project and those mitigation uh measures would bring the level of impact on these species down to a level that is less than significant. No wetlands on site, although like I mentioned before, there is Little Churn Creek and some of the off-site work um is is within the area of Little Churn Creek. That being said, there was a separate uh M andD that covers that area of work that was adopted with the center of hope project. So that's outside of that's basically you can think of the environmental for Little Churn Creek is already taken care of. And then for the rest of the site, which is what we're talking about today, that's in the M &D that's before you uh this evening. In conclusion, a mitigated negative declaration was completed and filed with the state clearing house for the project. Appropriate mitigation measures were incorporated. We did receive u

public comments um mostly questions. There was concern about students in the neighborhood, just general concerns with kids um and their presence. Um a neighbor was was concerned that kids would be throwing things at houses. um that is outside of the scope of the land use and and planning aspect of this, but um the neighbor was I did forward that neighbor to um a representative of the project and I believe they spoke and um he had the rest of his questions answered. Um there was also concerns about a about a specific tree um that is actually going to be saved. So that neighbor was relieved to hear that. Other than that um I haven't heard anything else um from the public um about about the project. So with that, staff recommends adopting the mitigated negative declaration and the mitigation monitoring program um determining that that the findings are in evidence and approving this application. And thank you and I'm available for any questions you may have. Thank thank you sir. First I'll do is I'll give you credit. Uh it is a bridge over 20 feet. Federal Highway Administration defines it a bridge and the city participates in that program. So, you're right, but it's also box covers. But, uh, sorry, I had a different career. I had to know those things. Um, so, uh, with that, I will turn it over to other commissioners. You have any questions of staff at this time?

I do. I have you, sir. Oh, go ahead.

I have a couple of questions. one is I found it um again just can you elaborate a little further on the um the lack of a zone wall? I've become accustomed to existing residential a rather intensive commercial use coming in and that commercial use bears the burden of a more robust zone wall 6 foot tall typically concrete block something. Yet, this one says it's going to be left to the director. And from past experience, I know he doesn't typically like these things to be left for him to have to be the referee, but this one is spelled out that the director is the referee on what happens to that existing wood wall or wood fencing. Did I re you understand that correctly? And can you articulate a little further how we came to that conclusion for this project?

So, mostly correctly. So some of the explanation in the details of how we got to the actual condition do speak about the director being able to make a determination. Um that determination is already baked into the condition. So that determination there is latitude for the director to determine that um in this case especially with with residential to residential. One's just multif family and one's single family, but it's still residential to residential. So when the uses are are closer in similarity, the director can determine that like a a wood fence is adequate. Um it does still need to be solid 6 foot tall. So in this case, we are we are using that rather than having a a block wall. Block wall seems um in this particular case um at least in staff's determination at this time to to essentially be a little bit overkill. Um but so in in staff's estimation, a wood wood fence is sufficient. Um that's that's how we got there with that condition.

Okay. Thank you. Now, please apologies for the interruption, chair. Um is that is any of that due to the slope? If I remember right from the diagram, that was kind of the high side of the lot. So there sound like there might be some retaining wall or some more that that might be a little sit a little higher than like the soccer field and the other improvements.

Yeah. So there is a slope. It should should be a little higher there. Um against the houses they should be generally they should be a little higher than the school. Um it has to do with the slope. I mean there's other factors. I mean just the placement of the like the building itself. It's it's not against the fence. it it's the the the areas of the site that would be used the heaviest are already away from the the existing subdivisions and so um the concerns with with buffering them aren't as high as there would be if like let's say the high school backed right up to somebody's fence um that would be a little bit more there I think there'd be more scrutiny and staff's estimation of what kind of barrier would be necessary there in this case um the school is oriented more on the south side away from the away from the existing development. It's already set back from the houses pretty far. Um and so wood wood fence was was what we opted for in the draft conditions.

Okay. My my second question had to do with fencing also and that is most schools, not all of course, eventually find themselves up against security concerns and next thing you know, I'll be blunt, they look like jails, right? There's a whole lot of rot iron, very very tall rod iron fencing put in. Are there any pro? Whereas this project well-designed, the aesthetics are in fact um not brutalist. I had to think about that for a moment when I saw that in the staff report. Um very nicely done. And there are other examples of very nicely done, especially charter schools where they don't have what I would call rather brutalist fencing. Um, has there been some thought to that? Because it would be a real shame to some of the decision- making it feels like that's gone into this project is influenced by how nice the architecture is and how nice the site is designed. But if this all of a sudden has fencing like the adjacent state subdivision of the state public school, um, it'd be a real crying shame. So, was there some thought to that? Is there anything that should be considered or is it just a risk we take? Because again, we always I know this is really really harsh, but we don't approve an applicant. We don't approve an amazing group of owners and operators. We approve a school and that thing could be sold tomorrow. Pretty freakishly unlikely. But what what what how was any of this considered and how do we make sure this stays looking nice?

Yeah, those are excellent concerns and excellent question. So, as the city right now, we can put these conditions on the project because it's privately owned um and um and it it basically falls within our jurisdiction right now. um moving forward. Now, I'm not like a big school development guru, but moving forward as it develops and as grants come through and as um as the project moves forward, it's very possible, maybe even likely that the school could be transferred over or given or become part of the state or perhaps the state would buy the would buy the property and at that point we would just lose jurisdiction and we wouldn't be able to speak to the fencing. It would be state property.

Yeah. So if if I may, I agree that that that's one scenario, but what about the scenario where it remains a private charter, but they choose to do fencing like you see on Del Monte because of security concerns? Well, the fencing would have to be in accordance with the zoning ordinance, which at least would look better than what the state does because the state doesn't have to follow any of your ordinances. Again, I say a public a regular public school is a state facility. So, okay. I'm all right. I just I I can't speak to what I mean, we'd have to see specifics. I mean, I I could imagine a scenario where the city felt that decorative row iron fencing could look good.

I mean, we've done that with commercial rather than like barbedwire chain links, you know? Yeah, decorative rod iron. So, if that's what you're referring to, I mean, I could see the potential for that, but today that's not proposed. Okay. Yeah. I just wanted to fluff that up a little bit because it's a concern of mine for, you know, I've lived here a lot of years. Yeah. And you know, things have a way of changing over time. Yeah.

Um, now the other one that struck me as a little bit odd and and if you can clarify or I should say I just was confused. So, we're requiring a dedication of a 30- foot wide public rideway that could or may or may not ever be used in the future to tie into Derby Lane should that become needed, should property be acquired, etc. Right now, there's no rightaway down through that area. I assume the civil plans don't show, nor are there conditions of approval for any improvements to that area. The architectural plans depict an access road and the tree preservation plan takes credit for saving trees in that area. So, what's the real intent?

Are you talking about the this area here? Yeah. So, I mean, it's a road right away, but we're taking credit for preserving trees. So, my understanding here is that that would be offered for dedication. Um, and and maybe maybe Josh Anthony might want to speak to this. I don't want to speak out of turn, but there are no plans for Oh, I'm sorry. I was talking about this area here. Oh, yeah. This whole area. There are no plans north of that line. Yeah.

Yeah. 30 feet. Yeah. uh the the city like them to offer that for dedication and my understanding is that we at this time would not accept that dedication but the offer would still stand in perpetuity so that at a later date maybe 50 years 60 years if this cemetery somehow were to develop or for some reason a street were to come through here that we would have had the ability to get that public right of way in the future. So, it's it's kind of in a way it's basically future proofing that right ofway access to the best of our ability, but there are zero plans to my knowledge to do anything except for let that dedication sit out there in the purgatory. Okay. An irrevocable offer of dedication that you don't really have plans to use. Correct.

Correct. Okay. Thank you. Now, one one last question. It's um standard condition number 22 um is not checked. And is that a typo or is this project not required to follow MS4 requirements? Yeah. So, um our water quality expert had me deselect that and then added a condition. Um Oh, you've got a custom condition that I probably skimmed over. There's a custom condition and the my understanding don't highlight that anymore. You're pointing out that I probably didn't connect the dots. No. Well, the idea is there is some MS4 treatment um that's in the public right ofway that that the city does not uh

Oh, I'll accept if it it's covered. If if it's in there, then I'm good. The idea is the city's not taking on liability for something that that staff feels the city's not able to take liability for. And so, the conditions are crafted to that effect. Okay. So the MS4 happens, the private entity ends up responsible for maintaining. Correct. As Okay, thank you. Yeah, that that was it. I woke up in the middle of night thinking of a couple of those. Anyone? I think over here there was a flinch earlier. Good.

I have one quick question. Um, I noticed I remember uh reading through the packet that Center of Hope was required to build that I think it was this section of Industrial Street, but that this project would be required to build it if Center of Hope hadn't completed it. Um, maybe you could just expand just a little bit more on that. It looks like starting to feel like that would be a pretty significant burden for this particular project. Um obviously I think the hope is that the center of hope is able to complete that. Um but could you expound on that just briefly?

Yeah, absolutely. So we actually have a an application for an encroachment permit right now for the construction of Industrial Street here. So um that's actually moving forward, but you're you're right and um and the concern is still there that hypothetically um it's not built yet. So if it if it didn't get completed, where would we be left? Um, so there's there's a lot of back history with this, but the the parcel map that originally created the Chiba parcel is from 2004. And that parcel map actually already has a condition on it that says that the minute anything gets built on this, even a single house, that a connection from Industrial Street or Delmony needs to be made um to give access to this parcel. So that's that's conditioned from, you know, 2004. Um yeah. So if Center of Hope was not to construct industrial street, that condition would still stand. And there's a condition here that basically that's what this the way the condition in this permit is worded is to basically fall back onto that and says, "Hey, when they come in for CFO, if Industrial Street isn't isn't completed enough to connect Center of Hope out Industrial Street, we're falling back to that 2004 condition that requires them to do so." And the point is is that we will have secondary access regardless or Center of Hope wouldn't be able to open or I'm sorry, Chiba wouldn't be able to open. That's not a scenario that we're anticipating. It looks like all the stars are aligning. Um it's not it's not like oh maybe this will happen. Well, I guess technically everything's maybe it could happen, but like I said, there's the the permit for the work for Industrial Street is in right now. It's in like cycle four. So that that that is something that looks imminent and um and all the all the everyone involved in here are good faith actors and there's a lot of open communication. So it seems like everything is coming together.

Okay. Thank you. Please can you uh so just going a little further west on industrial where that ties into Churn Creek. You know what I'm talking about? I don't know if you have a map you could pull up all the way out to Churn Creek. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, right there, industrial. Have we already talked about that? How that would tie into Churn Creek? We haven't talked about that, right?

So, because I'm just looking. It looks like it's a um you go north on Churn Creek. It's kind of a right turn only into that area. So, it's there's no traffic light. There's no traffic signals. I just think of like school buses. I don't know. Charter schools use school buses. Have we talked about that? There is a traffic light there. No, no, but if I may, I know he's I think he's referring to that right in only that only goes to the post office. Yeah, that is immediately south. Isn't that like right here? That Oh, yeah. was was in invented when the post office and the adjacent bank were developed. Okay, gotcha.

As a I think the technical engineering term was a holy crap, we have a problem. This is the only thing we can come up with. Yeah, I wasn't involved. And um so it does that jog to the north and then hits. Yeah. So you go in on that other street and then you split uh to either one, Del Monte or Industrial. And the map is a little um misleading in terms of right away because the road does go all the way down. Gotcha. Okay. To the creek. Yes. No. Very good catch. That clarifies it. Please. I'm good. Thank you,

Michelle. nice presentation and your package was very thorough. So I only really have one question today. Um it's in regard to the intersection of industrial and Alfreda and I'm will there be stop signs there at industrial Alfreda? I if Josh if you want No, we're not planning on putting any stop signs. just wondering about if we're the applicant is saying most of their students will be walking.

So my concern is that there's adequate crosswalking and stop sign so that the um students can get across that street and also during um I mean they're going to have it looks like they're going to have a gym and a big field where they could be holding events. So facilitating people exiting events, it might be helpful to have some stop signs there.

Yeah, it's something we can look at further with and discuss with the applicant. Um, we do have a planned crosswalk from east to west there. So to get the center of hope one folks over to the east side of Alfreda which then they have a continuous path right in um and Alfreda and Industrial and this area will function as a local road. Um but obviously there's stop signs in neighborhoods on local roads. So yeah, that is something we could we would definitely evaluate and look look at or some speed tables just something to recognize the pedestrian nature. Yeah. Okay.

Okay. Yeah. And and just to to tack on to that, I do believe that the design of this um can't really zoom in, but there are features in here, I believe, that are trafficcoming features. The way that there's these little bulbouts and the way that it kind of neck downs at the crossing, and it's pretty necked down in here. So, there are kind of some or built-in kind of organic traffic stopping um or traffic calming um measures, I think, in the design. I'm I'm not a traffic engineer, but I believe that's already some of that is already baked in, I think. Yes. Of question regarding access. Um I presume that the at the at the northern part of the property there's a looks like a paved path there. Is that what that is?

Correct. Are vehicles going to be able to travel on that in an emergency? Uh yeah, the the plan would be for that that could be utilized uh as an emergency access for emergency vehicles only. Um the city standard for trails um at the connection to pin would likely be applied and I think you've seen that certain places where we have the collapsible ballard um which stands up during normal times but then police and fire have a key to drop it down or parks. So it could function as that if needed, but it will not be public vehicular access.

Yeah. I think the one thing that that concerned me not noting what happens with in so many other areas with fire is that this the focus on the access to the property is at one entrance and then there are three three other arteries that that play into that. But there's nothing in in the northern part of it. I'm just wondering if there's any thought given at the very eastern end of the parking lot to have have a path there that could be used as an emergency exit rather than having to go around to the front of the property.

And I think there was consideration and discussion I know as they've gone through the process. I don't remember exactly why that access right because it was first shown as a temporary fire access but there was discussion earlier in the process about connecting to Pen Drive. Um I'm I don't remember the details of where that went but in the end I do know that the fire department was was happy with this design and that that's how we got here. So, um, yeah, I was I wasn't suggesting that be that that would be regular access, but in an emergency,

it would be great. There could be an at the opposite end of the property, they could have a place to uh to leave in an emergency. Right. Right. Yeah. Well, I mean, in in a I guess if it was a real emergency, hopefully people would um if they needed to exit the premise, they could leave on foot and get get through there into the neighborhood. Um this is also it's not in a very high fire severity zone. So okay

um in terms of like wild land fire sweeping through here that's less less of a concern. Anything's possible but this is not I mean this is in the middle of town infill development. So um like I said the fire marshall was was satisfied with this design. Um but yeah feasibly people could leave on foot or on bicycles or whatever to the north and they could leave via automobile to the south. Thank you. Any other questions or clarifications of staff before we open the public hearing? With that, I will um open the public hearing. We have one comment card. It's uh Mr. Mike Dormer.

Oh, I'm sorry. Please. Uh yeah, if if you wish to speak on the item, go ahead and bring it up to these folks or or wave it. We'll run out there and get it, too. We just didn't see it. Thank you so much. Good afternoon, members of the plan commission. My name is Mike Dormer with the firm of Sheridap Sawyer representing this project. Um, I want to really um highlight Danny's efforts on this project. He really had a short time frame by which to make this occur and came through with flying colors for us. And as usual, staff did a great job. Um, we're very satisfied with the conditions and uh ready to build a school. So, I'm here for any questions.

I have a question. The short time frame was due to grant funding or is there a reason for the short time timeline? The short timeline, was it due to grant funding or is there another reason for this? It was funding related. Yes. And they have the funding or is that contingent on this going through? Yes, they have the funding. Got it. And by the way, um I have Devin Carter from Nichols Melberg Rosettto and the school representative Kathy Taylor as well. She's the uh principal. Very good. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

Okay. The next uh speaker is Kendra um Kohler. Hopefully I got that right. Thank you. Uh Kendra, go ahead and head up to the lect turn. Hi, good afternoon. Um the reason why I'm here is because I am one of those people who have a backyard backing up to this. Um, so I think it's a great project. However, I do have some concerns such as the fence that you are the um the wood fence that you are building instead of the concrete fence that is going to block out more of the noise coming from the schools. Um, I am a school teacher and I never want to live next to a school. I would have bought next to a school um because I know how loud and how awful it is. And so that is my concern with my neighborhood as well as with the students um hopping over the fences. I am also concerned now that I hear that there is going to be a pathway put behind my house um which is going to drive all of our animals crazy with all the kids going back and forth. So that's also a concern. Um, and then with the environmental study, you know, I think it's great that they're looking out for all the birds and whatnot, but I'd like to know what is the plan for all the animals that live back there. There are foxes back there. There are raccoons back there. There are um jack rabbits back there. There are turkeys back there. There's multiple things. Um, so it's not just the the birds that are losing their trees. Um, And then another concern of mine is are you going to be putting out I sorry I'm at a loss right

now of um the meters to to detect the the um air quality because what's going to happen with my house I mean all that dirt and all the soot and everything that from the buildings you know is anybody going to be responsible for that and I think that having a one of putting up the the the u concrete wall before building would not have would serve two purposes. One, it would keep out the noise once it's built, and two, what's going to keep out the mess of the neighborhoods from it being built. Um, yeah. Um, so I guess that's it. I mean, nothing I can do about it. I'm not happy about it, but I I my biggest concern is not having a a a proper wall to protect our neighborhood that we've been there for a lot longer before the school even came to came about.

Well, that's it. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. So, seeing no more cards, I'm going to close the public hearing. uh bring it back now for commissioners to ask further questions of staff or any clarification. Um I will say what I heard uh Miss Kohler speak to as wildlife zone wall versus woodw wall trail impacts which is I think part of your VIP project that is pending which is a separate public works project and then air quality uh impacts. So, does anybody have any particular questions of staff or staff have any opinions they wish to offer on those items?

I have a question. So, that that trail, is that the one in the upper leftand corner? Is that where you're is that the trail you're talking about? No, it's the it's the white one at the top unshaded that runs parallel across the top. The north side that way. Okay. That's the one that's I believe for your VIP grant stands for something. convict or something. And then the one that is shaded on the left is part of the one that's called the V Gap C A T uh grant that also includes a bridge right up there in that upper left corner, a ped bridge to get across the creek.

So th So those paths pathway so those are different than this school project. We're just kind of stacking them on the school project. Are they included? Correct. Yeah. So our our projects when submitted for the grant applications included so this right this would have just been a vacant parcel

and our trails would have gone through it. We would still need to acquire rightway those projects both still go through the squa process um possibly even ana process which is the federal squa uh because they are federal funds from the federal highway administration. So, um, they're going to go through there, look at the same environmental effects plus a little more because of the federal requirements and and and again has has to do the same thing that this project contemplated. So, so if I can clarify, so basically this is a separate project, this is a separate project, and then Chiba is a separate project, and they're all kind of coming together at the same development time.

And Chiba has a requirement to do some preliminary grading and accommodate those future city projects. Correct. Correct. Thank you. So th those trails, but they're tying into other trails that you already have or you plan on building trails. They're they're going to tie into the sidewalk that goes down Alfredo Way. Yeah. That then ties into a sidewalk on Cypress. So, that's how we're going to get the connection there. And then it ties into Delmonte. And there'll be a ped bridge that'll cross the creek and drop you on a sidewalk. It's it's going to be a large sidewalk, a 10 foot wide sidewalk. Sure.

And that'll connect to the backside of Mistletoe School. So the the thought is is to get school children an access that currently they have to go around mistletoe you know which mistletoe is skinny road with not quite the pet access but with our project we will be improving mistletoe as well. So we're kind of the entire area is getting trails andor sidewalks along major corridors right for the active transportation portion of it. So that the concern I have is just you know you've got this public trail and so anyone can just go onto that campus. We're talking about walls and fences but we're just going to let a un I guess I don't know is there going to be a gate there at night or a fence to keep out random people from going onto that campus or

um what I was told was that the campus security itself was worked out and the trails the public access through there should not affect the campus security. was can the schools I mean there I guess we can't ask some questions but I don't know I just just kind of just have concerns with that u you just have randos just walking on on about this campus and all hours of the days and nights you got kids and everybody else I get the kids need a path and stuff but uh I mean do we can we vote on what are we voting on just the school or we voting on these trails as well on the school on the school right yeah so the trails are just a separate thing. Correct.

Trails are partially separate. I think some of the right of way is connected to the conditions of approval at the school, but there could be other ways to get that right away. Correct.

I think just having a public trail go through a school high school. It's just odd. You just have just random people just walking on about the campus with kids around and things like that. We're talking about a, you know, fences and security and all these other type of things. It just seems kind of vulnerable. Um, that's just me. So, I mean, I kind of have a history with law enforcement and security and things like that. So, I mean, if the school's comfortable with random people just walking on their campus with their staff out there at night and everything else, then I guess it's up to them.

They've already thought about it. So, thank you. Commissioner Goer, would you point out on the diagram where the fence the I'm interested in the the linear footage of that proposed fence. So, it's going to go all the way the length um the length on two sides, the whole length and then this length. It's it's considerable distance. Um, I should have noted how much it is, but just for reference, like each one of these parking spaces is like nine and a half ft wide.

So, hund hundreds. Yeah, I observe that it's a lot of linear footage and that's probably staff being sensitive to the cost of a wall, but we often times I can't remember the last time we allowed a fence on a commercial project or a residential project. Hence,

a wood fence. Yeah. Um, are there any enhancements? I mean, I I didn't get back there to look at the condition of the existing fence. I mean, is it in good condition? Is it going to be completely replaced? Are there um concrete posts, you know, decorative post or is it just going to be like a dogeared residential fence?

So, okay. So, so two parts of those, existing condition and then what's conditioned with the project. So, the existing condition of the fence is um there are some areas that are just chain link. So, they aren't solid fence. There are some areas where the fencing is dilapidated and then there are some areas where the fencing is um in good condition and in a few spots the fencing is in near mint condition. What side of the trail is the fence going? Uh the fence would go on the north side. North side. Yeah. Of that trail. And that's so that you could use the existing the existing fence that is in place could be utilized.

So it's conditioned with some flexibility. So, the condition reads, and of course I have my paper over there. Um, the condition reads that a solid wood fence um would need to go around the whole thing. And it and it says that the the uh let me just read it.

Why paraphrase when we got it right here? We have the technology paper. So, it's a 10 foot. Um, the buffer yard. The existing board fence shall be repaired and or new board fencing shall be installed to provide a solid barrier. So, it's a little vague on purpose. It allows the developer to either work with existing property owners to refurbish an existing fence or it gives them the ability that gives the school the ability to put up with their own fence behind the other fence. Um it's and some of the cyclone fence would be allowed to remain.

There would need to be a solid barrier. So they would either have to replace the cyclone fence or build a fence right next to the cyclone fence to complete the solid. I do um understand Miss Kohler's concern about noise. and the neighborhood that's a longestablished neighborhood. Um, and I'm wondering if there isn't a compromise where we have a wall running along the northern Well, I guess there's residents all around it. I don't know. I I I feel like there's sort of a lack of consistency and not requiring a wall for this project even though it would be a significant expense.

Yeah. Yeah, and I might just add um staff, we we did discuss this at some length actually a number of different times as you can imagine. Um and when staff brought it to me, we we sort of walked through some of the rationale. So Danny hit on some of it. One is that the the uses aren't as dissimilar as if if this was like a commercial zone, a buddy and a residential is it is an RM zone uh to a single family. So that's for one. for two, the the intensity. I think we're all thinking of this as a standard public school and in which it's not and maybe the the applicant or the representative could speak to that a little bit, but you're not going to have the same hours, the same intensity of uses, the same student population. In fact, a number of their students operate off campus throughout the week, then come back or they're in uh concert with the Shasta College. And again, I'm looking to you if you want to add some more detail. So, it's not your traditional public school use like we all kind of think. Another thing we considered was the Danny mentioned the building is offset. So when you think about a buffer yard, what are we buffering? What are we buffering? We're buffering light. We're buffering noise. We're buffering activity against the the the adjacent uses. And so in in that respect, you don't have as much of that intensity from this particular use in staff's judgment. Um Lily did just grab a measurement and we're talking about almost 2,000 linear feet of fencing. So, uh, to your point, Commissioner Goer, that is a consideration, but it's certainly not the only one. Otherwise, we wouldn't be doing our job. I mean, we had to sort of be able to defend it, of course, and I feel like it is defensible. Um, but certainly this body could require the block fence or something more substantial. Absolutely. But at that amount of linear feed, it's a significant cost to the project. You also have something like 20 or more property owners to the north. Was it Danny? I don't remember offh hand, but

um so we talked through the existing fence. Would you replace it in kind? Would you put a fence up against the fence? And we sort of left some of that uh to be determined through the course of construction. But um after talking it over with staff, we feel as though we have a pretty good defensible case. If this was again, if this was a commercial project, a higher intensity use, not a charter school of this type, um and it was commercial to to to residential zoning, I think we would keep with our standard. Um certainly that's that's what we'd be proposing but that's the reason we're bringing that before the body today but again certainly this body's prerogative if uh you wanted to require something more substantial miss anything thank you

guess the other thing is what whatever fence they do build becomes their responsibility since it's a condition of approval whether it's a fence next to a fence or a fence replacing a fence I would I would interpret this and I'd like to hear that confirm that it becomes a school's responsib ability to maintain it. Yes, it' be on there. Yeah. And the the condition reads that the property owner shall maintain all buffer yard board fencing as necessary to maintain a solid barrier in perpetuity. Said that I only I highlighted the sentence above. Sorry, that's twice. You got me. We're not reading. I have a question. Yeah. So, let's go ahead. Commissioner,

I was hoping the applicant would talk on what the field usage and the basketball courts would be used for because it isn't your atypical school. From what I understand, it's more of like a trade school. So, do they have teams that would be utilizing this? Do they have physical education that would be utilizing that? Do we know that answer?

What I'd like to do then is is use my discretion, invite the applicant to come up here as part. We're not reopening the public hearing. You're just um engaging with us uh and you know, keep the questions and comments specific to what we're what we're asking about. Hi, Devin Carter. Thank you very much. Um, I just wanted to point out that there's a fancy that from this red line here down to this point, it's about a five foot difference in elevation. So the residents are going to be five feet above the school here. So there's a just a barrier in height. So the fence is at the top of a hill,

right? And it looked like from the grading plan, it's closer to 10 feet at that pen avenue. And so that's correct. Definitely supporting your assertion that it has a little bit of a feel there buffering from the school site itself, not the trail, which is a separate project that has not been environmentally approved yet. And if staff can probably confirm environmental approval for the trail is actually a council action, right? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So now now to the school then uses activities. I think if I that's what I heard from Commissioner Willm. Um and then also concerns about the blending of um uh wandering people versus school operations.

So we do have some of that same concern that we want the the schools secure. So, I think we are looking at um fencing that would be um aesthetically pleasing and um would still separate the school from the um from the trails so that we had security for that. Um and and then to answer your questions about um the use. So, we have a career technical education high school. So we are very focused on um on career pathways and our students are often off-campus. So we have a construction crew, couple of them that go off and they are building micro shelters, homes um affordable housing and then we have a culinary crew that goes to commercial kitchens and provides um food in in a number of ways and caters different um community and private events. And then we also have a medical careers pathways that we're de um developing and we have a fire science um pathway. So they are out at the firehouse. So that's why I think that he's referring to the fact that um our students are often off-campus and not on the site specific. Um we also have a homeschool um component that they can come and also participate in the career pathways but then they are um they are um working on their academics from home. So it is a blending and um an opportunity for young people who would flourish in a more career technical education um format than maybe traditional schools. Um also your question about sports teams. So we do not have sports teams at this time. We don't have facilities to have sports teams at this time. Um, I don't anticipate us necessarily having sports teams, although um, we're trying to make

it a a nice resource for the community as well as our students so that if that is something that um, everyone finds to be a benefit, we would certainly want to offer our gym and our fields to various organizations that would benefit from that. Um so um is there other other questions that you had specifically? Yes. Um are your hours generally business hours like 8 to 5 or do you have night pro night programs for your students?

We don't have night programs at this time. We do have an adult education program and uh we have right now a large CDBG grant to offer workforce recovery training to low and middle inome um community members. So we offer some of our same programs to the community and if it came to a point where community members might be interested in that and it you know worked out in a in a variety of ways then we would be willing to offer that. But that is not in our direct plans at this moment.

Okay. And are you um including any lighting on your fields or ex outside basketball court at this time?

Just just the parking area parking and um outdoor uh hard hardcape. And just to touch real quickly on access, there was a comment about uh fire earlier. And the concept is that a fire apparatus has access to all sides of the building. This is showing a Y shape for a fire apparatus to turn and they can also use the basketball court to be able to turn around. And one of the main reasons we nixed the concept of access from Penn was really because of disruption um of the neighborhood to the north of traffic coming in and out and this was the preferred vehicular access point if that helps answer the fire question.

Another question from Commissioner it's a good idea with the school. It's a good thing you grew grew out of the school place that you're in now. So, I think it's a great project. But I did hear you say you talked about having fences on the other side of the trail because of security. So, you have concerned that with security talking about enclosing that trail away from your school. Did you did you mention that? She mentioned that I thought. Yeah. So, you know, this is a schematic design. We we haven't moved into the next level of design work, design development and construction documents where we get into all those details. So,

I'm just trying to clarify. So, I think that would help the neighbors to know it there could be double fencing at some point between the two. Correct. Yeah. So, that was what I was getting at.

Yeah. I'll follow up on that. What I'm seeing is now now I got my glasses working. I see you have some conceptual fencing and some security showing. What I like about it, if you were to point to it near Penn, is that it's down at what I would call the toe of the slope or go right there because you end up with a trail. Ultimately, we're creating an environment and there's going to be a wood fence trail open to the public, a slope with some landscaping maintained by somebody I hope. And then if there's a fencing that's more security and school related down at that toe of the slope more towards um closer to the parking and the drive aisles not only there but if it were ever contemplated also around the other side near the um detention facility and it's kept up close to the parking and drive aisles then it doesn't become as I'm sure Devin you wrote these terms in here something about I don't know that I forgot I forgot the architectural term now you know the brutalist look um and and now I'm starting to feel better about it we're getting we we're anticipating that very very few schools end up not building fence eventually they all hope they don't and we hope it's a really cool environment like the 1950s so I've read about um but it happens and I'm I'm thinking thinking that something that might be helpful would be a condition when the times comes we're out of motion that says any fencing contemplated by the school has to be um architectural in style example given rot ironish style. We overuse that term. It's not really rot iron but that's style. And it needs to be tucked very close to the paved and

curved areas so we also don't create a a god- aful tunnel up top. you know, where there's this we've got a couple of those in town. Th those are just awful for uh police, fire, trash, security, everything. I'd love to be able to see kids playing on that slope when they're walking their dog and still not getting into the school.

Yeah. And you know, Chiba's, you know, wants to be and has been friendly neighbors with the city. You know, we've been working on this together. And there was concepts of having this pathway come down and cut through, but you know, this seems like the best way to not directly have the path cut through the campus. Um, we'd like to make, you know, this is very expensive. You know, fencing, lot of area. So, you know, the building perimeter could be there's not a lot of exits out of here um except for emergency purposes out of the classrooms. So, um we could have the front of the school kind of be the secure perimeter fencing around the back and then back here. Um, and keeping I think we would like to keep the front open and not have like you're saying a fence right at the back side of the sidewalk. That has not been anything that we've talked about at this point.

Right. I understand. But five years from now, 10 years from now. So, I I just know that I'm leaning towards when the time comes, some sort of add-on condition that says should the project choose to put some security fencing in, it needs to be tucked close to the paved and hardscape areas of the project to allow natural buffer areas adjacent to the trails and detention basin. not changing who's responsible for maintenance, but aesthetically it become it meets the function while still maintaining a better um situation for the entire community. I think the other one

that I'd be curious about is is again the concern and and and I'll just mention it and then walk away from it. I'm not going to propose anything, but really it's the lighting of the playfields that things become a nighttime or after hours and that um while the immediate plan is not to build any lighting other than there could be some security lighting. Um the question is should there be some sort of boundary or controls put around that so that the people that live there don't suddenly end up with nighttime kids soccer going on which may be a wonderful thing but that's not what we're here to prove today. That should be the subject of a distinct clear um noticing clarity to the public and approval should something like that occur. Um you know so that's that's what if someone else wants to take that one on. and I've just stated my my concern. How's that one?

Since I got an opportunity to come up here, um I want to say thank you again to the city and the planning department. And um the question was, do we have a grant? Yes, we have a $30 million grant. Um half of it is loan, half of it is grant, but we have that opportunity to come to the community and hopefully build something that really benefits the community. and and that is our goal certainly to benefit not only the young people but the rest of the community and we trying to be really respectful of that and choose things that would um would really uplift the whole community and so yes our grant is um needs this um approval in order for us to um move forward to the next step to be able to draw down those funds. So it is important to us and we really appreciate the opportunity.

Thank you. And I want to say before you step down because I I jumped right into my and and I have this tone that that my kids remind me of periodically that sounds like I'm I'm I'm rather stern and really I I just talk this way. Um blame it on my mother. Uh but the um I want to tell you that that number one, I've heard about this project the last couple years. I've heard presentations from your organization. It's like gold standard platinum. Everything you're doing hits all the bells and whistles. So I want to make sure that that that I I should have said that first. I love the project. Um, you know, to to to me it's a support project. It's just a couple of these items um which may only be one for me in particular that circles back around to be of concern. So, I look forward to the project being implemented. I think what it will serve and do for the community is like off the charts. So, thank you.

Thank you. We're looking forward to making it really awesome. Yeah. Thank you. So, that any other questions of staff, Mr. Carter? Anything else? He's going to wander away. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Goer.

If down the road the applicant did come did want to install um field lighting to facilitate evening games and that would require a permit. Would that be an opportunity? I mean, would it have to go would you have to notice 300 feet around the project and would people have an opportunity to chime in on whether they want that?

We were just discussing that here uh sort of as a sidebar. Um I think technically the answer today would be this is and you guys correct me if I'm wrong, but we're entitling or this body would be approving the construction of a high school campus in substantial conformance with a site plan. So conceivably today you're approving that that that use. Now if they wanted to add lighting, I don't know if it technically would require an amendment to this permit. I think it probably would just be a building permit. So the answer to your question is likely no. There wouldn't be additional noticing or discretionary approvals associated with a future lighting. Um Lily, you were mentioning perhaps this could be conditioned to require that. You want to touch on that a little bit?

Yeah. So uh this is a discretionary approval. So it is at the pleasure of this body that you could add a condition that if future lighting is proposed for the ball field that it would require an amendment to the use permit. Then that would require it to come before this body noticing of the public. So that could be how you want to approach it. Would would that also allow this body to revisit um screening or buffering requirements due to the lighting? Everything is up for review. Yeah. Is on the table.

Yeah. There could be mitigation measures or other factors associated with the lighting times time restrictions, use restrictions, right? Um etc., etc. So I I I think there's some wisdom there as well as some wisdom. I don't know that we need to bring it back. Sorry, Michelle. Bring it back to a

separate item. I you know, the the idea of some it should they do some security fencing beyond what's presented on the drawing. I'd hate to have them have to come back to us. I think we could describe that in words as another condition. And so it gives them the flexibility to do more like fencing like you know kind of where they're proposed put some sort of aesthetic expectations on it and then they're good to go unless they want to do something different.

Yeah. I think I would also just add in terms of buffering um you know you're likely mitigating you know when it comes to light impacts your buffer yard uh really does a better job in terms of the trees or the plantings right because they get taller than the sixoot fence. your block wall fence is mostly going to mitigate more like noise, you know, disturbances of that sort, which you could maybe argue would be exacerbated at a future time if they did have sports or other events out there. So, um, both the wall and planting could be re revisited potentially as new buffering requirements in the future um, if and when that did occur. Thank you, Lily. I appreciate the thought you went in put into that and I like it,

Mr. Chair. May I make a comment about the lighting? I think I am okay with what you're discussing regarding the fencing. Um, we could probably do something relatively straightforward that gives them a lot of clarity. My concern about the lighting is that anything I I would see the lighting as an advantage. I think lit spaces are always better than dark spaces for security and um for keeping good activity versus bad activity um back there. My concern would be if they if we put something in place that means they have to go through amending something like this. That's a that's a relatively ownorous process for not a big improvement that would largely be beneficial for security and safety. Um so I'd rather my preference would be to leave the lighting condition that they have to come back out. Um, we are conditioning this, like Director Pagan said, as a school. And anybody who lived within the 300 feet knew this was going to be a school and they probably didn't know that it wasn't going to be lit. So, the assumption, I think, is that there's going to be a lot of lights. There's going to be a lot of people um around. This is probably the best case scenario that I would imagine most people could have imagined from a school. a very low intensity, low impact school, but a school nonetheless. And so I think it's going to start on the way better side. Um, and I would rather not require the project to have to come back and amend a use permit to put lights on their field. Um, my preference, I have no no issue with the fence and saying that we want to have something more decorative and more crafted than just

Mr. Chairman, I just like to clarify my position. I recognize there's going to be security lighting. I'm talking about stadium lighting, which is a whole another um impact on the surrounding neighborhood and it wouldn't be on all the time. It would only be on during games. So, it wouldn't be it's not security lighting. Correct. Yeah. I just don't think that they need to come back and amend a use permit to put lights in. my my preference. And to clarify, you would extend that thought process to not come back should they start running sports teams out there at 9:00 at night? I think we're approving I'm okay with that. I'm just

Yeah, I think I think we're approving a school use and um that's the expectations are going to be that it's relatively intensive and then to have them come back, you know, multiple times for as they want to change their programming is I I think unnecessary. That's helpful. Thank you for clarifying.

We're discussing over here too in terms of lighting. Um, looking at the zoning code, I mean, in terms of it, it it it says verbatim uh for exterior lighting of commercial office and industrial developments. So, Danny was reminding me that we don't generally enforce or regulate lighting across uh property lines and single family residential, for example. So, if your neighbor's coach light or something is spilling over, you know, we don't get involved in those arguments, nor does the zoning code really address it. But I would I would sort of say that um if they were proposing to put stadium lighting in the future, the zoning code would interpret that as some kind of commercial project. At least I would say at this juncture. So if they came in for a building permit to construct stadium lights in the future, they'd have to meet the zoning code which says you can't have any light spill over across the property line. So that we would expect a phototric. we would expect an analysis to show through whatever means necessary that they're not spilling that light over into the abuing single family zoning district. Um so that that would be my interpretation today of our zoning code. And I'm looking at the planners over here to my left to make sure I'm saying that right. But um just just food for thought. If they do get a building permit, they still have to meet zoning code. Could we clarify that in a condition that stadium light lighting would be treated as a commercial use

and require that type of treatment? Yeah, I was just going to say I'm actually working on a condition, a couple conditions from this discussion and yeah, I mean we could add the condition if this body wishes something to the effect of and it's half written here. something to the effect of any future outdoor facility lighting shall meet the requirements for commercial lighting per section. Yeah, reference the zoning code. The zoning code just to clarify that in the future we could do that.

And the zoning code has all those those uh requirements, right, for shielding and light spillover and light intensity, etc. We didn't address the um conditions for air quality, but that's also in code just to we never touched on that, but that was a concern and they have regulations they have to follow.

Yeah, I was um in terms of the public comment, I think there was the concern about the the use once it's constructed producing some kind of emissions, which I I don't know exactly what those would be. Um pretty unlikely it have much, but during construction that's certainly a valid concern. And so yeah, our code and our grading ordinance as well as state regulations so on and so forth require dust control and suppression and practices to keep all that knocked down. So that would be handled through our codes as well. Yes.

So I'm going to try something. I think I heard that Danny has crafted a suggested condition related to stadium lighting that he might want to throw out there. And then I don't know if um normally it wouldn't be but but I I would like to attempt to craft something if you haven't already relative to the um additional security fencing they may do. I have.

Oh, you're all three times you've like to take a crack at I'll I'll defer you. I I would love to hear your suggested ways from what you've heard that might might be what you think you've heard from us related to those two items and then that might turn into a motion. I don't know if I would call it a suggested way. I'm just trying to get there. Um, so it's a starting point that you I understand you're you're facilitator. Yes. Um, but for the fencing, uh, the wording I've cooked up here could be something to the effect of any future security fencing shall be decorative and placed at the edge of or interior to the area of hardscape improvements.

That was way simpler said than I did. Thank you. felt like I was I felt like I was mocked there rightfully so. Can I can I ask a question? Does that does that allow them to when um the representative from the architect was up here they talked about using the building as uh some of that perimeter to lower cost and then make you know kind of a front half back half thing. Do you think that accommodates their desire to do that in the future or are we restricting them from doing that? Um, you mean like if they wanted to use the building as part of the perimeter of the fencing? Is that my understanding? He

he talked about having a I think it would be a north south fence. Um so that the parking lot would be kind of exterior to the fenced area and the facilities behind the building or to the um east of the front of the building would be kind of interior to a fenced more secure area. That language accommodate their desire to do that. to me what the language says I'm not entirely following but I just to maybe clarify what the language does say I I think what I wrote was that the fencing um besides being decorative I had to put on my my planning hat there and put in the word decorative that it shall be placed at the edge of or interior to the area of heartscape improvements. So that would mean anywhere where the hardscape improvements start the fencing could be there or anywhere interior. So I need a pointer. Just checking it. It

So, the idea is that the fencing could be here or it could scooch inwards more interior to the heartscaping improvements. So, for example, if they wanted to put fencing Oh, my battery just died. If they wanted to put fencing along the north and then or they want to put fencing kind of more around that orange area, like if they wanted the parking lot to be outside the fencing but the school to be in, that would be fine with this condition. But what it does is it excludes fencing moving outward from the hardscape improvements. Is this body trying to uh put more um objective requirements on the look of the fence or the location of the fence or both?

My concern is more location. I It's like it there's not much we can do about the look other than decorative and hopefully good decisions are made and it does become a little overwhelming. You see that all all over town, you know. we've seen where it's like, oh, oh, shoot, that's um that's just kind of an ugly situation now, even though they tried really hard. Um, and so some of that we can't control and we live with it. Um, I I I actually like what Danny wrote. I would just say near the edge as opposed to at the edge because it might set back off it a little bit, but either around that edge of the hard areas, which are

paving or concrete. If there were additional fences beyond what's already shown um interior to the site, then that's okay because they already have some showing also. Okay. Although at some point it I'll be sad. They'll get over it. Well, the trust them, these are good people. They're going to do something amazing. The only concern I'd have with the language of near is that it's not very specific. So is a yard is that near? is three inches near like what? Both. Okay, perfect.

Well, I'm I'm sensitive to, you know, Mr. Carter's comment about we're at preliminary design at best right now. So, um if something I don't know what the applicant, they might want to speak to this, but if I don't want to preclude them, unless this body of course wishes it so, but if they come in with a fence layout and we're trying to interpret a condition and what you know, it could get difficult for us at staff level to permit this fence later on. So, um maybe I see Mr. Mr. Dormer coming up maybe could offer us some more specificity for this body and for me to understand what the plan is with future fencing.

Um, just to make sure we're really clear because I think it's a pretty good chance that there will they will want to put a fence along the edge of the pavement. I think that's where Russ was just going.

Yes, sir. And I think we want to be able to do that because I don't think that we're going to want a public trail to be able to have access to the school grounds. And when I say school grounds, a lot of the schools that you see, I know the last newest one I can think of, they really protect the buildings. Now, public schools were built with the chandling fence all the way around. This one's not intending to do that. I can see even maybe a joint use kind of a situation where this field could be beneficial to the school and it could be beneficial to the city or RysL or whatever. I don't think we want to fence this whole thing off. But, you know, the problem is in the day and age that we live in, there are people that will do bad things to these buildings. So, I can see fencing along the buildings, but I think it's going to be really important to be able to fence this to separate the public trail from the school at least from the school buildings. That's my opinion.

Yeah. And I think in in concept I think we're on the same page. Okay. Just so that the fencing is decorative. It's not crowding up

and maximizing my space at the expense of all the rest of the public. It's it's thoughtful. It's generally around the edge. you you stop short of it, but there may be some point and again that's where the condition um maybe say and minor deviations approved by the director. He loves that but you know on that on that south side in the middle it may be that okay well that's a nice spot someday. So I I don't personally have objection to it. I I see it as inevitable someday. Unfortunately, the world we live in. Um it just we we we can all I'm not going to name them, but there's really horrible examples out there and and then there's thoughtful examples.

Yeah. No, and we're we want to be the thoughtful thoughtful side. We want something that looks well but does what it's intended to do. So, I think we're I think we're in agreement.

Good. Commission, just a uh just a comment on that. So I got a little nervous when I heard you know kind of outsourcing this to AYSO and not picking on them as an organization but um you know third parties do like to come in and use fields 8:00 on Saturday morning and whistles are blowing and teams are lining up and you know the field field is being leased out and if I lived in that neighborhood I'd be like furious like seriously like what's going on here and once that starts once you you can't put the genie back in the bottle and it just goes and goes and goes I don't know where those people are going to park, where they're going to use the bathroom, um what they're doing. Uh I mean, leaving trash behind and things like that. So, um I don't know if we have anything if this body can do anything uh with that, but that's just some concerns. The other concern is um right now that's just an open piece of woodland, right? There's nothing there. And it seems like the school's okay having public trails go through their campus. Um, and but we're going to put a fence up to keep the public away. Why? I mean, do you have to allow trail public trails to go through your campus? I don't think you do.

I mean, I don't I don't think you have to. It's I mean, the way I understand it, we're voting on that and those are two other projects. They're kind of stacking in here, but I mean, I don't feel like you have to let public trails to go through your campus and just to put a fence up to keep people away from it. That doesn't make any sense. So, uh, if you're worried about security and things like that, then remove the public trails. They're they're not even I don't even know if they're there now or whatever that is, and make the city figure out another way around that to keep your campus secure at the end of the day. Or use that that money that they're going to spend on those trails for extra fencing or whatever that that you need. So, I mean, now is the time to do it. It's just raw earth that's out there at the end of the day. And um but the minute you let those trails in there, all sorts right away passages or rideway laws and all sorts of other things happen.

People getting injured, you know, uh people just wandering in there and building encampments and things like that. I mean, you just don't know. You just don't know what's what's going to just rear its head there uh whenever you allow that. So,

I I appreciate the concerns. We're trying to be a team player. We want to work with the community. We want to we like trails. We like kids being able to walk to school in a safe manner. Um, so we're we're all about that. Um, on the other hand, we want to make sure there's protection both ways. So, I don't think we have an issue with the trails, you say, going through the campus. At the end of the day, they're not going to be going through the campus. They're going to be going around the campus. Um, and there'll be protections, maybe some fencing to make sure that that occurs. But no, we don't want to prohibit the grant funded trails that the city is planning on doing. We're we're okay with that. Got it. But you could probably ask for them to be gated or something at night.

Yeah. I mean, I wouldn't want to go into that campus at five or six o'clock in the morning. You never know. You don't know who's on that campus at all. I mean, look out. It's just tucked back in there. You got random trails just kind of going in and out and things like that. So if we're thinking about security, you got to thinking about it the whole way. Sure. But thank you. Thank you, Mr. Dormer. So Danny, do you have facilitated condition language that addresses all of that? You can't address all of that. So I'm just saying any any minor refinements and then we it's probably uh time time to think about a motion and a vote.

I just added your near the edge And I just wanted to make one suggestion just to be consistent with how we've conditioned projects when it comes to aesthetics and also to be sensitive that we are uh not imposing too much of an ownorous condition on the applicant is that uh we add on at the very end that uh final review of design of the fence is subject to review and approval by the development services director. So, it doesn't come before this body, but we do have some oversight.

Yes, thank you for that clarification. That's what a couple of times I think I poked the director in the ribs that that was that's what I assumed would happen. Metaphorically. So, for clarity, does that mean that we don't want the word we don't want to say that it shall be decorative?

No. I I believe you want to leave it there so that you're giving some guidance to your boss. Um and you know that that captures the expectation and then we probably convinced ourselves we can't solve all of these issues and we need to do the best we can with just articulating these these couple of small items in there and uh then maybe a motion for everything else. And I see Commissioner Goer ready to say something. I called the cops. I'm prepared to make a motion, Mr. Chairman. I was counting on you. Are you ready?

I would like to move that the planning commission um determined has determined the necessary findings for approval are in evidence. Adopt the mitigated negative declaration and mitigated monitoring program and approve plan development plan application PD 202500230 subject to the draft conditions of approval including new conditions regarding um sport field lighting and fencing as stated by staff. I would second that motion.

Second. I was sweating there. So, we got a first and a second. Thank you. Any other discussion or comments? So, are we voting on those the the separate trails? I understand those are two separate projects. Is that being lumped into this vote right here or we're just voting for the school, right? Ju just specifically the school project. Thanks for clarifying. Yeah. The extent of the school's responsibility is to dedicate the rightway for the future city projects and do some minor grading. as I read it just to set the stage for the separate city projects to do the trail work. Yeah, understood. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Chair, as as part of the motion, would you like staff to read the proposed conditions or did we get enough earlier? P personally, I trust. Very good.

Trust. Well, did he change them from when he read them? You're going to hold that against me someday. He read them at least twice. Yes. Didn't know if you wanted part of Well, there is a part that I added. Oh, let him that last that last part. Yes. All right. We want to hear it. So, we have any future security fencing shall be decorative and placed near the edge of or interior to the area of hardscape improvements. Final review of the fence fencing shall be to the satisfaction of the development services director. That was the amendment I made to that one. Would you please read the lighting one while you're at it?

Absolutely. any future outdoor facility lighting shall meet the requirements for commercial lighting per section 1840 uh 90 of the zoning ordinance. You comfortable first? You're comfortable second with that? I'd like to call for a vote. All in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed? I wanna I want to take a moment just to really compliment everybody this and and I was sitting there going I'm really kind of being a jerk you know asking these questions and then I decided you know the school's a big deal and when one approves we don't approve schools as an infill development between industrial multifamily and decades old single family very often. So, I appreciate that everybody took the time to help us work our way through that and you were patient as some of us had to think in a circle to come back to uh go again. So, thank you very much for for that item. With that, we will move on to the next item on the agenda. Should we take should we take a six minute break before we go on to the next agenda item? I think I probably need to. So, why don't we take a six minute break? We know we can't trust Jennifer to keep the timing, but sorry.

different. Yeah. Yeah, you're trying to figure it out. It's impressive.

So, with with the crowd's permission, I will uh bring this meeting back in session. And we are now on item 4B2. It's a reszone application 202501027 with a whole bunch of words in the staff report. And I will turn it over to staff to give us a presentation. Good afternoon. Uh my name is Michelle and I will be giving the presentation on the annual text amendment. Uh let's see. Okay. So essentially the uh text amendments come before uh the commission um for review on an annual basis typically towards the end of the year. Um so the last one that uh was adopted by city council was uh in November of 2024. Essentially the amendments are typically minor in nature and intended to clarify the intent of uh the existing regulations. um also to uh provide flexibility in administering the ordinance um and also sometimes in order to comply with uh changes of the state or federal law. So our first one that we'll be going into would be uh regarding accessory dwelling units. Uh so essentially um this is all driven by the state housing uh California state or California department of housing and community development. Uh essentially they've uh have passed a series of legislation since our last uh ordinance update to accessory ding units back in 2021. Um and so all all of this is uh to be reflective of all that. Um so the number of types of units essentially it our ordinance at least allows an overlap of

the different types of ADUs that the state uh has allowed um and also in conjunction with one junior accessory dwelling unit. Um there are different variable heights um that the state is allowing uh these structures to be uh constructed at 4 foot uh setbacks for your side and rear. Uh for front yard setbacks essentially uh accessory dwelling units uh with a floor area of 800 square feet or less are not subject to the front yard setback which typically in uh residential districts is their 15 ft. Um, and then architectural compatibility. We essentially changed the the language uh that we currently had in our ordinance uh because it was a bit more subjective uh to be in line with the state legislation because they require more objective uh criteria. Uh essentially owner occupancy and deed restrictions. um they've lifted those uh restrictions for accessory dwelling units and are only requiring those for junior accessory dwelling units. Uh so separate sale uh or conveyances essentially uh these units accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are not to be conveyed separately or sold separately from the main residence. Uh certificate of occupancy essentially uh we will only issue those um in Sorry. Uh the certificate of occupancy will be issued to the accessory dwelling unit only if uh the there has been one issued for the primary dwelling. Um and then essentially addressing non-conformities. So situations that uh are existing on the property. Uh essentially we can't use that to kind of uh uh restrict or deny the application

for accessible dwelling in it. And then uh also we can't enforce um the ren remedy of uh violations essentially uh within a certain amount uh time period if it's not deemed to be a health and safety uh issue.

Well, please we got a question. Well, Michelle, I think it would be helpful for the public and probably for us up here for you to give us a description of the difference between a ADU and a um junior ADU.

Sure. Uh most properties you have your your single family or your multif family dwelling. An accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit are both accessory uh to the the primary dwelling. uh where the accessory dwelling unit is um essentially a unit, a separate unit um that has everything uh the primary dwelling has. It's just that it's limited to a maximum square footage of 1,000 square feet. And your junior accessory dwelling unit, uh those units typically are found within the primary dwelling um and only allowed in single family uh zoned properties with a single family house. uh those are limited to 500 square feet and they must be within the perimeter of that the existing house.

So a typical garage conversion correct would be con considered a JADU. Correct.

Okay. [Music] And so uh essentially the other uh sections within the zoning ordinance that are in relation to accessory dwelling unit, we've also touched upon those and made sure that those were compliant. Um so section 18.15 uh essentially is the zoning uh exception section. Um and previously at least we had language that um required um lot sizes. Essentially this the current state um has said that uh uh we can't use this to apply or as an application for uh accessory ding units. Um uh see here in section 18.30 30 and for rural lands district, we added the uses of accessory ding units and junior accessory dual units as being permitted uses. Um same uh with the residential section of section uh 18.31. Um so we're allowing junior accessory dwelling units within those districts in the commercial and office districts. So 18.32 is your office districts. for allowing accessory dwelling units in conjunction with multif family uh dwellings um and also in conjunction with commercial districts. And then uh towards the end in section 18.33 uh 050 essentially is just minor word changes to be a bit more objective regards to parking. Uh we've kind of revised the language a bit to only require a parking space for each new detached accessory dwelling unit built on a lot with an existing dwelling. Uh let's see here. Um in the list of terms section 18.60 uh we added and define a junior accessory dwelling unit as a new

residential housing type. Uh let's see here. Uh in ah we also uh added and defined living area Uh and then that concludes the accessory dwelling units. Essentially we'll go into the trash enclosures um section which is section 18.40.120. So essentially it's to modify trash enclosure requirements to address organic waste recycling. Uh we've also done a few things. Uh essentially uh so this is where it's a bit different. So, we had our um proposed ordinances to you guys and we found that there's been a few things that we've kind of changed since then. Um so, for this section right here on page 148 of the staff report, uh we've added actually it's page 149. We've relocated the section. So the proposed language reads trash enclosures with a 50- foot unobstructed approach shall be located so that the front load equipment and it kind of uh trails on. We propose to actually strike out that added section and we're adding it to a different section uh which would be found on page 150 which I'll get to in a bit or 150. Uh the another section that we are revising. Uh so essentially the proposed reads that the size of trash enclosures and or recycling container enclosures shall be determined by the solid waste division and will be based on the container sizes required by that division. Uh the section that will be striking out is the last sentence. Acceptable configurations of the enclosures are depicted in the following illustrations. Uh because we have actually uh removed the illustrations from the proposed ordinance.

And then this is the section that we'll be adding the uh 50 foot unobstructed approach um section two that we removed from the the previous section. And then other types or other code sections that were amended uh in relation uh to parking and vegetation for screening landscape screening uh section 18.41.100 41.100. Uh we're revising the height of vegetation within the vision triangle uh in order to be consistent with the another section within the the the parking ordinance. Um and then 18.42 which is signs. We've made a uh correction to a reference for on-site real estate or on-site real estate signs and construction signs. Um and then the last section is essentially we're removing uh the term tent as an accessory structure type uh in the accessory uses and structures accessory structures and uses section 18.43.02. So essentially the next steps um essent uh is ordinance adoptions are legislative action uh that require council approval. And so we uh next step essentially would be uh to a recommendation uh from planning commission to city council. Uh we'll have the uh council public hearing uh and then which will be the first reading. Um it'll go to a second uh reading um and then if everything goes well then it pretty much becomes effective 30 days after the second reading. And so in conclusion uh we're here conducting the public hearing. Uh the amendments essentially would clarify the intent of the existing regulations uh comply with state law and uh determine that the passage of the reading municipal code regarding uh chapter 18 zoning is not a project according to SQA and recommend the council adopt the

proposed amendments. And that is it. Thank you Michelle. Any uh questions of staff from the commissioners? Um just uh couple quick questions. One, the tent removing that as accessory structures. What's the just kind of curious like was there an issue that came up regarding tents in that or was that never the intention for that to be accessory structures? It seemed o it seems odd that it was there in the first place. So um curious about it.

I can address that. So, um, that's been in our code for as long as I've been here, over 20 years. And, um, we've had some difficulties with really regulating, um, accessory structures. And when you really think of tents, tents are really temporary. So, this section of the code is really to address permanent structures. So, uh, we we didn't feel that it was appropriate to keep that in the section of the code. So people can still put up tents and there's still guidance for how they can do that. It's just not in this section.

Yes. Um tents can be used on a temporary basis typically for like temporary sales, things like that which are subject to like the fire uh they have to use a fire resistant type tent which then fire department reviews and

Yeah. Okay. Um thank you very much for that. Uh my next question was I noticed the junior ad ADU is only considered legal um if the primary if the owner was an occupant of one or the other. Um so if somebody moves out if they decide to turn it into a rental is are they going to be obligated to make construction changes to that junior ADU to get it back into compliance? Do they have to modify things? seems like it could be a little bit problematic to manage that. I'm not totally sure why we need to require that. So maybe start let's start with if the primary if the owner of the property moves out um does that are they required to make changes to the property to get it back into compliance and not be an AD junior ADU?

Yeah. So um it's as you know this is all driven by the state to provide permanent housing. So um when we look at uh in this scenario if the owner decides to move to a different property is not owner occupied on that site what would we need to do? I would think that they would have to remove the kitchen out of one of the units. And most people would choose the accessory dwelling unit because it's the smaller unit because it's the kitchen that makes it a full unit.

So, we're saying that if somebody decides to move to rental or they decide to move to Minnesota to take care of their grandparents, then they got to go rip out the kitchen. Yes. However, it's hard to enforce because we don't track who li moves and who leaves, right? We don't know if it's owner occupied or not. Is this is that particular requirement something that's state driven? It is. Wow. It also seems that it seems like I might challenge that thought because is there is there a code thing that says you can't have two kitchens in one house? I can have three kitchens in one house if I want. Right. Technically, no. No.

No. That's not how we interpret the code. Yes. As defined in the code as well, don't visit my house. Let's Let's change the code. Let's change the code. We'll go to your house tonight. Let's change the code to say you can have three kitchens in a house. Let's go. Let's keep our kitchen separate though. You know, barbecue. I mean, then Jeremy's house. No, I'm sorry. That That's something I never would have guessed. So, I stand completely correcting. Huh. is all I can say. So just to just to clarify that is required by the state seems to have that that that particular language. Yeah. As well as a am I saying the term right? Deed restriction. Deed restriction.

We make them sign a deed restriction saying you know it might it must be occupied by a primary occupant as well. And would that then go stay on title stay with the property? I mean, if someone did move and sell or I'm looking at So, I'm not the only person that's like, "This seems like a bad idea."

No, you are not. Um because but however, at the same time, they are correct. This is currently in state code. But there is some question as to whether or not it may or may not be constitutional. But at this point, this is what we have to do. And we're going to have to do a little bit more digging into that area before we can make a determination if we can reward it in any way. But currently, this is what the state is requiring us to state at least as to the junior ADUs.

And when when we accept building permits for junior ADUs, as part of that plan check, we're required to ask them to do a deed restriction because of state law that says, I understand I have to someone has to live in the primary residence, you can't rent out both units. So, is it just like we just gonna kind of all wink at each other and say, "Okay, we'll just not worry about this one and we're like we're not going to send this over to code enforcement or something like that or well, we we practically have we have practically have no way to enforce it." Well, we we do our best by requiring the deed restriction before we issue the building permit and before we finalize a building permit.

Um, so, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I mean, last I checked, that's what we were doing, and I think I saw one not too long ago. So, we go that far, but then once that building permit is finalized, um, we don't know the comingings and goings of real estate transactions and when someone's moving out of their home, etc. So, it's it's practically difficult to enforce. Yeah. Okay. But if we're issuing a building permit, we're doing our due diligence to at least follow state law as best as we can. Okay. And then the last question is is is it also state law that um neither I think this is for ADUs in general as well that neither of them can be used as short-term rental or is that local code?

It's state law. Again, the purpose of these laws was to create permanent housings. Yeah. And they specifically spelled out that you could not do anything less than 30 days. So, it cannot be used for for short-term rentals. Okay. I may have other questions later, but I may commission. The state has overridden. Yes. Um, it's my understanding that city code requires a single family dwelling to have covered parking for two vehicles. If I turn my garage into an ADU, am I going to have to have a carport? Actually, the state has waved that. If you convert your garage into an ADU, a junior ADU, you do not have to replace parking.

You don't have to. Do not. Thank you.

So, just so I understand the scenario in case I get called upon to help Commissioner Miner. Um, but if you had a junior ADU, which means it's attached or included in in the primary building and if you had a door in between, which might be a common situation, hotel type door, lock both sides, and in that junior ADU, you did not have a range or a stove, and I move out, then I got nothing. I got no building permit action because I could have my kid move in there. I could have anybody move in there. It's just part of my house. But if I've got a range or a stove, and this is probably defined more clearly somewhere, then you're saying that has to go by law. We do we do get into a bit of semantics when it comes to this. So, we've had people who want to, let's say, um, turn their ADU into a a granny flat or into, for lack of a better phrase, a man cave or whatever, right? You have your, you want whatever. You have to decommission the ADU so that it's no longer considered an ADU.

So, people will come and say, "Oh, well, I've pulled my stove out and I've capped the gas line." Admittedly, it's kind of silly. And on the day-to-day for us to enforce it, it's pretty difficult. But by the letter of the law, if you remove that cooking appliance, you now you now don't meet the definition of an ADU. Okay. Um, but we have all sorts of other issues with that in terms of uh, you know, PV and separate meters and all sorts of other things that go along with that that drive us a little crazy, too. But, um, I'll bet you do. Yeah.

Yeah. And so would you also characterize that what you've done here is do what you have to do to meet the state requirements and nothing more because we know the state requirements are rapidly changing and and next year there will be more barring the unforeseen and obviously you have to interpret as best you can keeping as much flexibility as we can here without someone from um our state attorney general's office calling up our city attorney.

That's correct. Yeah. Staff is not proposing anything beyond what the state is minimally requiring. Um and and Mr. Schlleg will touch on that some or I missed the very beginning of Michelle's presentation, but a lot of this is stemming directly from HCD's review of our ordinances and review of our housing element uh program actions. And so um they're looking at us closely and making sure that we're following our housing elements. So these are these are required steps that we need to take. Yeah. And I I I believe it's prudent to do so. I you can you can buck the system as long if you disagree as long as you want, but it's really not going to help anybody. Might as well comply as best you have to. So thank you. I have no further questions. Please.

I do have one. Yeah. One other question. It's outside of the scope of the changes that we were making this time, but it's come up before in other conversations um when people have tried to do an ADU. the architectural compatibility issue. I had an issue with a friend who was putting a ADU on or wanting to put an ADU on their property. They didn't like the color of the main house, but um there was it had to be the same color. They would have actually loved to repaint the main house. It just wasn't like it didn't look that great and it was old and tired. But they ended up having to paint the ADU the same color, which they would have loved to switch and they would have had to repaint the main house first and then come back and do this project later. So, I I don't know if we can I just have a little bit of an issue with requiring that these, you know, new projects that we want to look new and, you know, obviously not majorly different than the main house, but using the same building materials and using the same colors when they may be old and tired or from a different era that we'd all love to see updated anyway. So, um I don't know if any of those are we can add. It looks like we took out some flexibility there. Now they need to be the same instead of the same or similar. Um, but if at least colors it' be nice to have a little tiny bit of flexibility in there. Not have to make it look the same as an old tired house that got their garage, you know, got the garage re um turned into an ADU. Was it was that driven by the state saying just they need to be objective standards?

Yeah. So, it's just objective. So, you may choose to act the whole thing if you want. Um, but we decided to kind of just keep it as is. Um, and just change it to be more objective. So, yeah. I think the intent is the state's trying to make us use objective standards so so as to not allow So, it's easy for someone to get through the process, right? Yeah. Which I like. Yep. I just also don't like that they might have to do the same thing as an old tired building. It's right next to What packet page are you are you on by? Oh, 174. Um, it's item six. Thank you.

Looks like probably J. No, item six on 174 at the top. At the top. 174 at the top. Oh, okay. It's like if we have an old tired house and then somebody wants to put an ADU, it has to look like the old tired house. That's what that reads to me.

Uh internally, we can be a little bit flexible to that. I think we could work with the applicant to indicate like on the plans that uh you know, colors to match something like that, but we don't dictate the color. Uh but it's just more important that the buildings match in color. So if they want to paint the ADU the new color that they wanted and eventually they'll paint the old house, we're not going to go and you know site inspection and double check that, but it gives us the flexibility to to allow them to choose the color of their their structures. So are you saying we do have that flexibility?

We can have the flexibility. Yes. I think my my friend got a different story, but that's, you know, this was a couple years ago, so maybe things have changed or he just got what he got at the counter. Um, but I mean, the intent is that the the buildings look and feel like they're on the same piece of property. One's green and one's red, you know, it doesn't look like it's on the same. Certainly. Certainly. So, so I think meeting the intent is that both structures will will be compatible and have the same paint color. I think that's more important than choosing which one gets painted first.

So So the state hasn't gone so far as to say we can't require architectural compatibility, right? Because that I could see the state and I'm I'm learning alongside some of you admittedly on this exact topic, but it says that the standards need to be objective, right? Correct. Not what they need to be. They're allowing a local jurisdiction to still require architectural compatibility, right? But it just has to be an objective standard. Correct. That's the way I understand it. So just removing or similar is the only proposed change.

I'm wondering was this now we're getting really into deep in the weeds, but I agree with commissioner that's important. Is this something identified by state housing when they came through this particular item or was this more okay this is in along the line of what they're talking about? So the question is can we just leave this one the way it is or can we just take out and end colors? Pardon me sir. Or can we take out end colors? Just say that they they don't have to be the same color or that the colors need to be complimementaryary. Well, I'm going to look at my planners here, but I think the state law requires us to remove subjective terms, right?

Yeah.

And so our staff went through and HCD more or less said, "Hey, your ADU ordinance needs to meet state law." And so I don't know if they necessarily spelled out every little detail for us. That was our staff's job to comb through it and make sure it met state law as best as we could. And state law says, "Hey, your ADU ordinance cannot require subjective uh standards." So that's why they struck or similar because it is a subjective term. To your point, Commissioner Miner, this body could could remove colors. It's at the discretion of this body and ultimately city council to change code in that manner. So this body could do that. I'm looking at my staff here to make sure I'm but but the charge from the state was you move subjectivity

the subjectivity. So maybe yeah or complimentary would be subjective. Um but okay, I'm satisfied with the discuss with the discussion on it so far and I will give the the the mic away. We can return to it later. Anyone else have any questions or comments? Commissioner Goer,

most of my questions have already been answered. Thank you. But I did have um regarding the um vision triangle vegetation change. What was what height was used before? What is the current height actually? Um the section was actually stricken by accident. So we're just adding it back in. Oh, you added it back in. So there's really no change. There's no change. Okay. Yeah. But we just noticed that it was missing. So what happened here? And it was just a typo and we inadvertently removed.

Okay. Um, regarding the trash enclosure and the amendment where you you're not determining a driveway length or that access, is that going to make smaller is that going to make it easier for smaller developments now? don't have a lot of room. And yeah, the way it was originally proposed in your packet, it made it subjective to the point where it was if or or you get to put this 50 foot unobstructed uh uh area in front of the trash enclosure where it actually has to be included. It has to be 50 feet with all trash enclosures. Okay. So, we took it out of there and put it in the design section.

Okay. where then they have to design it with the 50 foot uninstructed area. Very good. Thank you.

Back to you, Mr. Miner. Public comment.

Oh, geez. I forgot where we were. Thank you. So, uh, with that, what I'd like to do is, um, open the public hearing. Do we have any, uh, comment cards? Seeing none, I'm going to close the public hearing, bring it back to the commission for any additional conversation or um input or suggested modification. I in I'll offer I I think I'm supporting Mr. Miner here that in general it's not worth fighting the state on this stuff would be my take. As frustrating as some of these things, if we really got in the weeds, some of them are pretty frustrating. Some of them are really positive. um we're we're going back to doing good stuff in some cases, but something like this, I'd also be very open to saying, well, that's okay if we're risking on one item. And uh and we have more flexible language here because I could visualize I'm not an architect, but I could visualize even even two modern facilities that have this really cool contrast in different materials and it works on that lot and in that neighborhood with their whole environment, you know, we can also see really bad things happen. Um, and also to be forced to put 1970s T111 on an ADU because that's what's there now with the same, you know, tan brown paint would would be unfortunate when maybe we can still go a woodish but something a little nicer. So, I think we're on the same page on this one. I think the the biggest thing for me was colors. You know, I could I we could go we could try to mix building materials as well. I think that does get a little more complicated and that that feels

um it feels like another step. You know, I'd be open to it. Um but at this point, I would make a motion if and then we can do further discussion. I'm ready for a motion. So simple motion I would accept staff recommendation and strike colors from packet page 174 top paragraph. So instead of saying and colors it would say and roof pitch for as the main dwelling unit. Thank you. I'll second there.

We have a second. Thank you. Any further discussion? Uh, all in favor say I. I. Anyone opposed?

Thank you. Next item is item 4 B3 reszone 2025 01030 to consider some additional amendments to the zoning ordinance and I see staff is ready to go. Okay.

Good evening chairman, commissioners, members of the public. David Schlegel, senior planner for planning division, and this item is the housing opportunity overlay district zoning ordinance amendment to text and maps in the city. Um, whenever I talk about things related to the housing element, I never know how far back to go, how much to expand upon. So, if you have questions, feel free to ask. I'll just summarize that every eight years, we look at our city, we say, what is the housing need projected out over that period of time? uh it's called the regional housing need allocation and it's broken up by affordability levels and then we say okay do we have enough capacity for that and we zone for that we make sure there's capacity um at each income level if you look at our current housing element it says all the higher density stuff would be more affordable to lower income households kind of the medium density would be more affordable to moderate income households and we have excess capacity for the rest um in single family zoning and whatnot. Beyond that, we're also look looking at governmental constraints on development and how do we make sure that that capacity gets filled, removing any governmental barriers. And we're also adding action plans, action items uh in a plan that over the next eight years we would implement. Um and just bottom line, we have a current certified housing element over uh 2020 to 2028. It covers all our income levels. we have excess capacity in our zoning and among those sites we had 18 vacant highdensity residential sites that we identified accommodating up to 1100 units at low-inccome level. Um under state law if if any of those sites have been identified in a previous housing cycle there's other things we have to do. We had 13 of those sites and 11 of

them still remain vacant today. What uh one of the components of state law does is says you're going to uh add some incentives for those uh parcels to get built upon. Uh so what what the state law says I'll just actually go to that section. A lot of words there. Let's just focus on uh if it's a vacant site that's been included in two consecutive planning periods. It's not adequate unless the site is subject to a program in the housing element requiring a reszone. uh then we would allow housing developments um with at least 20% units affordable to lower income households to be built by right and that's what we did. We have a activity 2.5 in our current housing element that says we're going to do just that. Um in addition to that we're also adding incentives to uh sites that aren't identified uh in those excess capacity sites or those adequate sites. um multif family 12 15 and 18 uh densities 12 12 units per acre 15 and 18 units per acre. Uh ultimately we hadn't done that yet and we got a letter from the state that says we we need to do this uh expeditiously and so what we do are doing is proposing some changes here to our code. Currently our code offers the incentive to uh 20 or sorry u 35% units of affordability projects. They can build at 20 units per acre in any RM12 15 or 18 multif family sites. Uh we're change proposing to change that to be consistent with our activity 2.5 to be 20% as a threshold for uh it's kind of like a density bonus allows you to build at a higher density. And we're also proposing an overlay district that would identify the other sites that are eligible for byite development. When I say byite, I mean

they don't go to a discretionary body for approval. It'll go to the board administrative review, planning commission, city council. It's just come in and get a permit. If you're building 20% of your project at affordable building levels, you could build at the higher density and you can just get permits. Um, essentially the proposed changes would um meet the activity 2.5 and be consistent with uh state law. And if I could back up just a little bit um to talk about the 20 units per acre, I think we should probably mention that too. So state went through um all jurisdictions and and kind of identified what would be you know doing a proforma if we built a multif family project what would be affordable at market rate without any affordable housing dollars and they they determined what those densities would be throughout the state they prescribed us at 20 unit per acre density. what we did in our 2020 2028 housing element said well we actually have these other densities that can fulfill that need and we demonstrated that using data. Um what you might see is going forward states continually wanting to see that higher density um trying not to be uh you know project like Nostradamus the next housing element cycle but if we don't meet our capacity in construction in this period that period or that amount of units carries over to our next cycle and then we zone for that and it's typically going to be the default density unless they can accept our data again at a lower density. Um, all that to say, uh, the incentive is just continuing to increase and try to make sure these places get built upon. There's 13 sites here. I think it's 19 parcels. And I wasn't going to go through each one of them, but ultimately, uh, that amounts to, if you build them at 10 units per acre, 714 units. If you build them at 12, 15 or 18 respectively, you're getting about a,000 units. Um, our new

maximum with those incentives would be about 1500. And as you can see, these sites are spread out throughout the city. Um, we have other sites that have been identified in this cycle that weren't identified in two cycles consecutively. So, they're not uh qualifying for this list. Just an example. Uh, this this location is south of Highway 44, uh, west of Shasta View Drive. Uh, it's on some flood planes, so the 12.69 69 acre properties reduced to 8 acre developable area and ultimately with this change maximum units would be 160 um which is an increase from the RM12 of 64 units for this site. So, uh, just getting a little more units out there, allowing allowing that, uh, economy of scales to, um, maybe present some type of project that could work. And, uh, with a stroke of a pen, this past July, state, uh, the governor and the legislature, uh, made this action exempt because we are, uh, taking an action that was part of a certified housing element, a reasonzoning effort, and that is now statutoily exempt under section 2180. 085. With that, uh, staff's going to recommend that planning commission conduct a public hearing and, uh, recommend a city council approving the zoning text amendment and map amendments, uh, in the staff report. I'll be happy to answer any of your questions.

Thank you, Mr. Schlegel. Are there any questions of staff? Commissioner Goer.

All right. Um, so I was on the planning commission when the Safeway Lowe's shopping center was um approved and at that time before it was it was zoned for um multif family resident. It was a big parcel and the planning commission was you know some of us said well you know is that's part of our housing inventory and we're taking it out. Is that going to be a problem? So, I'm wondering, do we have enough housing? Do we have that leeway moving forward or are we going to have to stick with that multifamily zoning if another commercial use is proposed?

That is that is in state law. It's addressed directly that we don't lose capacity in any reasonzoning action whatsoever. So, um, we've had people wanting to do other types of projects on sites that are identified for residential and we have to demonstrate that we would have enough capacity and we're not losing dropping below that arena level or we would have to reszone somewhere else. Okay. And that's kind of what we've directed folks to to look for. Um, this is an ADU or JADU. These are multif family. So, are there going to be some objectives? Do we have the leeway to have objective design standards?

We do. Um, any type of uh housing project that's subject to state law, they they want to see objective standards only. And I think, you know, part of that discussion on the previous item, uh there's an there's an desire by staff to take on I feel like there's a desire by uh members of the public as well to take on developing some type of different design standards that are objective that we could then apply to projects. It's a longer I feel like it's a longer item that we'd have to get direction on. We couldn't do it right before we brought this to you for the ADU ordinance and definitely uh are under a time crunch for this one too. So,

okay. Is there a plan to will there be transitions from the lower density residential to the multifamily? Because you can look at the Magnolad neighborhood as a perfect example is why you don't want to insert multifamily housing in the middle of residential units. Yeah. I mean, I think that's considered anytime we identify a vacant site. Um, making sure it's an appropriate location for multif family. There's not really any development standards that would regulate the form on site next to other lower density housing types, I don't think. I mean there's some u sky plane uh requirements and things like that but okay

we could go a little further with regulating form. What we're finding is we're having less authority over uh density. Okay. Um do we have the infrastructure to support these densities? You can look at the example you just gave us. That example I just gave you actually does have a kind of a glaring problem. does have it. Uh secondary access for any project over a certain number of units would have to be provided. And uh a bridge over Cypress Avenue is kind of the only one I can think of being viable there over the I'm not sorry I'm not showing the the flood plane there, but there is a significant flood plane that you'd have to span for anything over uh 49 units. So um

so it would just be a cost of development. We could go sight by sight and find things, but it would just be that be cost development. we wouldn't have to condition in the project. It would just be meeting our city standards, right? So did So that would go with traffic capacity, too. Well, in terms of anything we look at under SQA, these items are exempt. So I mean, we could ask for uh an understanding of what type of traffic impacts and and improvements to the frontage that folks could make, but

beyond that, there's not like mitigation measures happening for these sites. So, if it if that project that that you've got up there makes the intersection go to I guess we don't talk about level of service anymore, but I always think like level of service f if it degrades if it's going to degrade it, we have no recourse. Oh, I think we have general plan policies uh to seek not degrading our level of service. It's just outside of SQA, I guess, where we normally tackle those issues. Okay, I see. So, you do it outside of SQA. Yeah, we we did leave that in the general plan too um level of service. We still condition projects potentially.

So um just closing um so it seems like if these projects meet the objective standards they will just bypass the planning commission altogether these sites. Yes. Okay. And if if they use 20% affordable housing, 20% affordable, right? And will will the public be notified when a large byright housing project is proposed? Uh, no. Typically, there's no notification process, discretionary project process. Yeah.

Okay. So, that's it. Thank you. Could you explain again how the state is calculating the density that you said if we don't use it rolls over? Can you clarify that a little bit? I could just clarify that there's a prescription for our size jurisdiction, a suburban jurisdiction of 20 units per acre that they expect that or they hear from developers that if they are able to build at that density, they can offer units at market rate to affordable low-income households without any, you know, restriction on tenure and and making sure they're using uh other affordable dollars to to restrict that unit. They're just saying we build it at that economy of scale, we can sell it at this price point.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah. So, they the state went through a process. I'm not familiar with the process they went through, but identifying that density for our jurisdiction, but it happened a long time ago, actually.

Uh let's see. Have we had a public hearing yet?

Okay, very good. Then, uh I don't know where my head is today. Uh what I'd like to do is say thank you, uh Mr. Sgel, and then I'd like to open the public hearing. We don't have any comment cards. I'm going to close the public hearing and now we'll say, do we have any other questions or comments or is anyone ready for a motion? Um, so I'll make the motion that we approve the resoning or conduct upon conclusion recommend that the city council find that the amendments to the reading municipal code and city of Reading zoning map are exempt from the California Environment Quality Act and adopt the ordinance amending title 18 zoning of the Reading Municipal Code and amending the city of Reading zoning maps as specified in the draft ordinance. Second.

All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Thank you. It passes.

Thank you very much. Uh those are uh hard challenges that staff takes on. Thank you um for both of you. Uh, item number five was an add-on and item number five, at least as I articulated it, is a um um non-aggenda a public comment period for non-aggendaized items. And what has been handed to me are one, two, three, four, five speaker cards in the order they were just handed to me. I will uh call on you to come up and speak. knowing that since it's a non-aggendaized item, um we really don't have authority, the attorney would say this more more eloquently, we don't have the authority to take these things on and save them. We have or solve them. We have the opportunity to listen and learn. And so we we look forward to hearing from uh members of the audience today. So with that, I'm going to say the very first one is uh Steve West and then the very next one will be Blake Dorsy. stiff.

Yeah.

Hi everybody. My name is Steve West. I guess I should talk into this thing, huh? Uh the reason I'm here today is because uh my wife and I bought a uh house in Sunset Terrace a few years back and we absolutely love it. And then recently we were told that they're going to uh the city has been planning to do this for some time. Uh they want to build a uh bike trail in the canyon behind our house. And I don't know, have any of you guys seen this map at all? Have you? I hope you don't vote on this without looking at this. But um basically this is a they they call it a bike trail, but what it is is a it's a park, a 30 acre park that has just uh looking at it, I I added up about it's got about 20,000 feet perimeter around it and um and it's about 3/4 of a a mile long. Um, this park uh basically has uh uh the trail wants to go through and it's eight I don't know if you guys know this, but it's 18 feet wide. The trail's 12 feet. It's lighted and you guys were having concerns about lighting uh that it's going to turn into something that it's not supposed to be. Um, basically what I see, and I've talked to a a retired police chief, a retired firefighter chief, and a current policeman, and all of them agree as long as well as other people that this is going to be a

perfect storm of circumstances for a homeless park. And uh because it's 3/4 of a mile long and it's 30 acres, it's like the third largest park or in Reading, California. and um because it's so long and so uh uh has so many places for people to go and park and and uh it's going to turn to me it seems like it's going to turn into a um a big homeless park. Is that my timer?

Oh. Uh anyway, uh I know a lot about homeless because I I owned a company that we did uh uh or I did I retired, but we did uh soil samples after the homeless left and I got to see what that had what that was rot and basically you have trash, you have uh human waste with toilet paper, you have needles, hypodermic needles and So once you build this park, the people that live around there are not going to want their children to play in there. And it's going to turn into a place where people are not going to want to live there anymore. And because they have homeless living behind them, they're not going to be able to sell their property for what they're worth.

Okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. West. Um appreciate you taking the time. Appreciate the input. Next, we had uh Blake Dorsy. And after Blake Dorsy is a Marcy McGetric West. I think I got that one right. Oh, I have a timing up here. Hello, my name is Blake Dorsy. I'm a resident of Sunset Terrace for 25 years. A reading resident of 56 years. I'm going to be talking fast because I have three minutes. Um, when TR Woods designed our neighborhood, he didn't want the um the green belt touched. And I know that because I live in the second house ever built in that neighborhood. My next door neighbor lived in the first one and her name was Mrs. Woods. When I first met her, she was married to Tiar Woods's nephew. And when uh I bought my house, I checked with the city of Reading Planning Commission and was affirmed that nothing in the future was going to be done to that green belt. When I reiterated that to Mrs. Woods, Mrs. Woods said, and I quote, TR when he built this neighborhood wanted that left untouched. He was he was a designer. And so when people go about changing things like that, what I'm left with is somebody who walks around a museum with the paint pallet and sits in front of a goan or a dea and says, "You know what? That's just not right. I can do better than the designer." And then goes up and paints something on it. It's not It's not your job to do that. It's the designers. The other thing is City of Reading can't afford it. I mean, City of Reading is great about shiny, pretty little grants. Oh, we got a grant. Pretty pretty grant. Let's do it. Let's build it. Let's spend money. Well, then the bills come due and then you have to pay for the upkeep. And right now, if I'm not mistaken, the city of Reading is having a very hard time doing that. The sports complex can't find $5 million in in a few years. It's going to be deemed unsafe. Um, we've just had to by attrition not hire any more police

officers. Uh, uh, the fire department is is in trouble. Our general uh uh upkeep of our roads is So when you think about doing this, don't think about the grant. Think about can you would anybody in this room purchase uh a Ferrari with your um, oh, I got my refund from the IRS. I've got $50,000. I'm going to go buy buy a Ferrari. Well, that's all great and it sits into your garage until it's repossessed because you can't make the payments. So, what is being repossessed from the city of Reading? Our roads are being repossessed in in in as much as they're falling apart. Um, you you you just nobody in their right mind spends money that they can't you can buy it, you know, but it's it's like a somebody buying a whole bunch of houses as an investment. I bought this house. I bought this house. But can't keep them up. They're going to fall apart, but I I have them. Well, this is a you know, a perfect um uh uh argument was made for not putting this in by Thank you. 30 seconds is when when somebody in on this board said, "You're going to build a trail. My god, are you going to put a fence in between you and your property? Do you know what happens on trails?" Yeah, we do. Only we don't get that fence. You know what our protection is? Manzanita and my backyard fence. So, we're going to have people wandering around our neighborhood and 100 feet from my backyard that I don't know at 9:00 at night. Ask yourself, is that what you want in your neighborhood? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dorsy. Next, we have uh Marsha McGetric West. Following that, David Short.

Yes, thank you. It's Marcia. I saw that the second time and I chickened out. That's okay. I said I know I'm not getting Don't start the clock until I stop mandering. Okay. Start. Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening, uh, commissioners and staff, planning staff and all present. Um, thanks for this opportunity to meet with you and inform you of our concerns. My name is Marcia McGetric West and a representative of the friends of Jenny Creek, a community group existing since August 2022. Our members pledged to help protect Jenny Creek, its habitat, wildlife, and the residents living on the green belt. We are all ages of walkers, hikers, and bikers, and we'd like to inform the planning commission of our concerns for the city's proposed construction of a trail through the Jenny Creek Green built between upper and lower sunset in the West Reading. As my two friends here were talking about, we have found it really hard to get information over the years, but here's what we have learned. The community, excuse me, services plan proposes constructing a trail uh actually 8 to 12 feet wide, paved and lighted through a 30 acre Jenny Creek green belt. Here are some things we have learned and the important reasons we oppose this construction. They are uh surveying to cut 65 plus oak trees, an estimate by an engineer working with a funding donor. And this would displace wildlife nesting migrating birds during construction and beyond that. This would disturb the watershed by removing trees and plants causing erosion and taking shade from habitat, wildlife, and the creek itself. Paving and lighting will bring added

public access. We are uh opposed to that because of the increasing possibility of crime, theft, encampments, fire danger, and inviting unwanted individuals near our private properties. Our concerns are that this would cause irreversible harm to the green belt habitat, wildlife, the creek, and its endangered fish and impose upon the residents with additional public access. We are asking the city for alternative improvements to existing trails on Overhill Drive and Palatine Trail, both leading to the river trail uh to connect. Uh we are asking the city uh to use the tools to dis uh at their disposal to protect the Jenny Creek wershed. We feel the best way to protect the biodiversity of the Jenny Creek wershed is not to build a trail. So we thank you for your time and listening to our concerns. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Next I have David Short. Following David Short is David Ledger. Can can I ask a question to staff? Reload that. We we we are allowed. How about we go for two two two more? Well, let me just let me just ask a question real quick. So, uh staff so with these trails that we're talking about, do those come before the planning commission like the the

So, this uh project that they're referring to is uh what we call the Jenny Creek Trail. It is going to require a use permit and it will be coming before the planning commission at a future time. Uh we are currently uh we just received the application from our community services department end of August and it's still incomplete and uh still needs a lot of work before it comes before the planning commission. Okay, got it. And then the Sunset Terrace, is that the neighborhood? Is that is that also coming before the planning commission?

Uh they have submitted a petition that's part of the record of this application. Um, Miss West has submitted that with over 200 signatures and that will be attached to the staff report. Okay. Thank you. Is this part of the replacement of pump house one?

Actually, a separate project. It's will be connecting close to pump house one. Uh, pump house one, if you recall, will have vehicle access off of Overhill. Um, this project proposes no connection to there through Jenny Creek, but will punch out at a location just north of Overhill. Um, and they'll connect on Overhill to the Pump House Trail. With permission, I'd like to hear from the next two and then and then probably hear from the city attorney on what we should or shouldn't engage in because I know these things become a little bit tricky on non-aggendaized items.

Please.

Thank you. My name is David Short. I'm an avid mountain biker. I love trails. I love all the trails that are around here. They're amazing. And I thank the city for their part in creating this system. It's a amazing thing. a real credit to the city that we're all proud of. But unfortunately, every trail comes with a downside both in terms of habitat destruction, but also in terms of the impact on surrounding communities and this all has to be taken into account. I saw a trail plan for the city that was uh drawn up in 2018, I believe, and the Jenny Creek trail is on that. But there are some trails that are out there now that weren't even on the plan. Uh there are two trails in the Salt Creek Height subdivision that go all the way down to the river trail. And they're fantastic mountain biking trails and hikers use it and runners. I was on one of those trails this morning. It was amazing. But when you add it to the existing trails, any more trails, I think, would be just redundant and damage some habitat that is really valuable the way it is. It's like a wildlife preserve down there right now because it's it's not used. It's um pristine. So, uh when you think about the trails down there, as uh Lily Toy just pointed out, there's going to be the uh pump house trail. There's already the Palatine trail that goes to uh Sunset Terrace. Then you have the 10 Bridges Buventura Trail and now the uh two Salt Creek Heights trails. So I think that this trail uh proposed trail would be non-essential, not vital and uh really of limited use

benefited benefiting only a small percentage of people that live in the vicinity of the trail head in one part of Sunset Terrace. So when you consider the impact of this trail in balance, I wish the city would focus their efforts on other trail systems that are in development and not proceed with this one. Thank you. Thank you, sir. And the last card that I have is Mr. David Ledger.

All right. Um, good evening, uh, commissioners. I appreciate all the time you put in for all these meetings. Some are quite long. I know you put in a lot of work. Um, I'm here to talk about the Jenny Creek Trail. I was asked by friends of Jenny Creek to to tell them what I thought about it. I walked the area. I led a field trip there. When I led a field trip there, I was leading it. I was surprised at all the birds that were there. And as I was in front, I kept flushing them out, indicating it's a very fl um fertile um habitat. And um also where the trail is going to go, it's going to be quite steep and it's going to be where the the open space is quite narrow, maybe 100 ft wide. And I haven't been able to get a plan. Um I've sent in two PAS, actually three, but only one to planning. That was just like a few days ago. So, I'm not blaming them, but uh

um I didn't get one. Tip Barry Tippen told me go to um parks and I did not get one. It's been 11 months. Anyway, um I'm The one important thing is the salmon and steel head that are in there. As all of you know that they're threatened and you probably when you did the water pump project and approved that that you were aware that there are salmon and steel head in that creek. I talked to a retired CDFW uh employee who told me he'd seen steelhead trout at the north end of the creek where Bracken Gardens was. Same with Randy Smith who's a conservationist in this area. I think many of you probably know him. He's with the Rotary. Um so he's seen salmon pools schools of salmon up there at the Bracken Gardens. So it's very important um this area for the for the fish. If you put a wide trail through there like I've heard proposed 12 feet wide with three feet of gravel on each side and then a deep cut in an area that's 100 feet wide, there's not much let habitat and you're going to set get going to get sedimentation into the creek which will smother any eggs that are down there or fingerlings. So, um, so that's important. And also, um, the vegetation there and the blue oaks that are up on the hillsides, all those leaves that fall in the river are important for the food web all the way down the Sacramento River to the Sacramento Sacramento Bay. Uh, the Sacramento dam cut off all that food source, including, you know, the woody debris that comes down. It takes a while to break down, but there's various insects that live off that, and they live on the bottom of the creeks, and so that's what the fish feed on. So, it's important for Jenny Creek and also down all the way downstream. That's why the uh Bure of Reclamation spent $166 million on restoring Battle Creek because it comes out of the uh Lassen and through Coleman. They've taken out one dam and several diversion dams and

also millions of dollars have been spent on restoring Clear Creek and both those are because of salmon and steelhead trout. And so, um, that's why I'm opposed to this wide trail in this area. It's a very important area and a very narrow, uh, habitat. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Ledger. So, with that, I will close the the um, public comment period. And I would like because I do know enough to know that we have to be cautious how we engage in this topic, I'd like to turn it over to the uh deputy city attorney um because we have some constraints on how we engage in this topic.

Yes, that is correct. Um, if you really want to have a very good discussion on this topic, you would probably need to request that it be put back on a future agenda to be brought back so you can actually have some discussion, maybe get some additional information about what this project is. Um, because it's not agendaized, you really can't have that disc type of discussion today. Right. Thank you. That's the way I recalled it. Uh would it be appropriate in the event there were any very specific questions as opposed to a communication or opinions just questions of staff to clarify beyond um okay it's something that may come our direction at some point because there's an application

um it is such a fine line it really would be very prudent to put it off to have a more formal discussion later that's what I thought you would say want to throw you two softballs. So, um yeah. Uh so I will no I won't say anything. I will uh with that move on. I'll say any other discussion amongst the commission being very cautious and respectful of the attorney's comment that oh let let's ask that. Yes, we can you can direct that that be added to a future agenda. That's about the only thing you can do.

That that'd be good. What would the I haven't seen that done in planning commission in a while. Not in my term here, just as a dis commission item, a discussion staff briefing, another public input period. It wouldn't be a public hearing. We could do anformational item of some some kind to give you a status update. We'd probably want to talk with our director of community services, Travis Menny, and perhaps the city manager's office to uh get their their feedback and take on it and then see if we can bring back anformational item for you. That'd be my suggestion. And that takes either a motion or some level of concurrence. It's a concurrence item.

Can we have Can we have something where I mean it seems like we're these trails or I don't know. I mean maybe it's just tonight but the city get a bunch of money with trails and grant stuff maybe that's a larger discussion because if and I mean if Sunset Terrace is that the neighborhood I mean I imagine there's other neighborhoods that are affected so maybe a general discussion on the city just building trails. Uh that's what yeah I I think if I talk with director many um he oversees community services he oversees our trails master plan for the whole city etc. So the conversation could be multifaceted where you hear about maybe an update from parks on the trails master plan and citywide efforts in terms of trail planning and then in specific we could talk about the Jenny Creek trail project as well.

I mean and it sounds like there was a P sent over to community services or development that wasn't answered in 11 months. Not I have I not you can't answer that. But I'm just saying it's like, you know, the community is asking questions. So, we take PAS very seriously and we respond to them diligently. So, I I can't really speak to other departments, but we're working on that.

It sounds like we just got one a couple days ago in planning. So, um there's also some sensitivity on this project because if a P is submitted before the applicants even put in an application, we we don't have to disclose incomplete information to the public because that and my my attorney here can correct me if I'm wrong, but she's nodding her head yes. So far, if we disclose incomplete information to the public, it's actually doing them a disservice. It actually confuses things. It makes matters worse. So often times we want a complete application with all the correct factual information and then of course have an obligation to to disclose that at that time. So that if they submitted it a year ago, and I'm looking at Lily because she knows she's the project planner on it, but we just got a complete app. Not even we don't have a complete application yet. They submitted it a few months ago, couple months ago. So there is a nuance there in terms of the California Public Records Act request that we have an obligation to disclose of course, but we want to make sure it's factual complete information before it goes out to the public because you can imagine it gets really it can get very confusing when you have four different versions of a SQA document out there circulating, right? So we we're really careful about that. So that's probably why in this case 11 months ago they didn't get the documents they were seeking, but I think in short order they'll be getting everything that they've been requesting. So, excellent. I'm glad you added that. So, I heard perhaps inviting Travis Manny trails. Where are we? Where are we going? A little deeper dive into Jenny Creek Trail as well as another opportunity for public to have input um along the way.

And it sounds like Sunset Terrace, too. I mean, let's just include them. They are an existing neighborhood. You might not have picked up on that. That's a Yeah, they're they're a beautiful old neighborhood. You staff will we'll do some work between now. Well, let's just include it. I mean, it's a neighborhood that's being affected, so let's not exclude it. They're they're in with us, okay, often. Uh friends of Jenny Creek is an organization, right? Okay, great.

So, what we'll commit to is in a couple weeks we have a planning commission. Uh and I'll provide you an update at that time of next steps on this during my uh director's report. And and I and I would just I would circle back on that P, Jeremy. I I know you have an opinion with that, but you're waiting for a complete report that to then give it out. I mean, a PR is a P. They can, you know, this isn't some investigation. I think you could give them whatever they ask for. We defer to the city attorney and they they make those calls. I I understand, but waiting a year for information. Well, it depends

as well on where it is because under the P, we are we we can't release drafts. Um, so if we have drafts of environmental documents or something like that, those are not public records under the P. I understand their specifics, but just, you know, maybe just communicate with whoever's given PAS because they're just sitting at home waiting for information. We we do communicate with them. We do. We do communicate with them and we well or acknowledge it or something. We do, you know, I mean, it's just that's that's the whole reason they're PAS. So when you're just lacking any sort of communication, just give them give them something. We do like whatever that process is, just maybe just recommend whoever's handling those to

Yeah, we're required within 10 days to respond, right? As you as you know, um uh from your time in public service. So, we respond within 10 days and let them know what that we're working on it and we sometimes have to spend more time with our city attorney's office to determine what's disclosable, but we absolutely do communicate um and take it very seriously, right? We have an obligation to disclose. So, um

all these folks here, I think, have me and Lily's contact information. In fact, I think we've emailed with a number of them, so they know how to reach us. And I think we're getting pretty close to disclosing all the records they've been requesting. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm going to move on to item number seven. Uh, any other commissioner's comments? I'm going to move on to item number eight, director's report. Anything else the director of staff would like to add?

I'll just give you a brief update on the riverfront plan. So, um, we've had good discussions with council members. We plan to bring that back to council in November. So, um, likely not November 4th, but our second meeting in November, we'll be bringing back to council, uh, some answers to their questions from the last council meeting. Um, and then hopefully we'll have a fully defined scope and we can then launch uh, full steam ahead into environmental and uh, and and writing the report. So, also continuing work on the tree ordinance. Uh, we did lose Kent Emanuel due to budget cuts. So, I've been remiss and not able to get to that as quickly as I would like to, but that should probably be coming to you in November, December as well. So, just a couple little heads up there. And that's all I have.

Very good. Thank you. And with that, I'm going to say the meeting is adjourned. Thank you very much.