Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

? ? ? Thank you. Thank you.

to the February 5th, 2026 Planning Commission hearing. I'll call the meeting to order at 1 p.m. Ms. Carman, can we please have a roll call?

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'll begin with Chair Boss.

Present.

Vice Chair DeLucia?

Here.

Commissioner Barnwell? Here. Commissioner Bauke? Here. Commissioner Peterson? Here. Commissioner Wardlow?

Here.

And Commissioner Wiscombe? Here. We have a quorum. Thank you.

Thank you. Let's get started with preliminary matters. The first topic on our agenda today is the request for continuances, withdrawals, postponements, or ex-agenda items. Ms. Arseniega, do we have any? Thank you, Chair Boss. We do not. Okay. And do we have any announcements or appeals?

Thank you, Chair Boss. We actually have three exciting announcements for you guys and the public. The first and foremost, the draft housing plan, EIR, is now available for public review. It's online at www.santabarbraca.gov backslash housing EIR. You can also search through Google and find it. Public comments on the draft EIR will be collected through March 17th. Additionally, the draft EIR will be presented at the March 12th Planning Commission for Planning Commission comments. So look forward to digging into that. And also the public, we're looking for comments. The other is also exciting, the draft inclusionary housing and in lieu fee study is also now available for public review online throughout the month of February. Written comments can be submitted via email no later than March 1st. Additional info for that is also on our city website, SantaBarbaraCA.gov. backslash inclusionary dash housing dash requirements. The final study is tentatively scheduled for planning commission consideration on April 16th following the completion of the public review period. And then lastly, we have the Cal Poly Regional Planning Graduate Program doing a studio project tomorrow on Friday, February 6th from 12 to 2 p.m. at City Hall. They're looking to gather community feedback on preliminary goals and recommendations for their study of the De La Vena Corridor. So if you're interested in following their work and study of the De La Vena Corridor and potential improvements for community vitality, welcome to attend that. It's a public workshop February 6th, Friday, 12 to 2 p.m. at City Hall. That is it.

Thank you so much. We'll now move on to item C, review consideration and action on draft planning commission meeting minutes from two hearings. So we'll take these separately because I believe there's different attendance. We'll begin with January 8th. Are there any planning commissioner comments on the January 8th minutes? Okay. And are there any public speaker comments for these minutes?

I do not have any speaker slips for the minutes.

Thank you. So if no comment, it's going to get a motion to approve the January 8th Planning Commission minutes.

So move.

And a second?

Second.

Ms. Carman, can we please have a roll call vote?

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'll begin with Commissioner Bauke.

Yes.

Commissioner Wardlow. Yes. Commissioner Peterson.

Yes.

Commissioner Barnwell. Yes. Commissioner Wiscombe. Yes. Vice Chair DeLuccio. Yes. And Chair Boss. Yes. Motion passes. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll move on to January 15th. Are there any Planning Commissioner comments on the January 15th minutes? And if not, are there any public speaker comments for these minutes?

We do not have any comments at this time.

Great. Then can I get a motion to approve the January 15th Planning Commission minutes?

I'll make a motion.

Second. Okay. Ms. Carving, please have a roll call vote.

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'll begin again with Commissioner Bauke. Abstain. Commissioner Wardlow?

Yes.

Commissioner Peterson?

Yes.

Commissioner Barnwell? Yes. Commissioner Wiscombe?

Yes.

Vice Chair DiLuccio?

Yes.

And Chair Baas?

Yes.

Motion passes. Thank you.

Thank you. That takes us to item D, comments from members of the public pertaining to items that are not on today's agenda. And due to time constraints, each person is limited to two minutes. Ms. Carman, do we have anyone in person or remote that would like to give a public comment?

Thank you, Chair Boss. At this time, I don't have any speaker slips for general public comment. But if anyone in the room would like to speak under general, you can approach the podium at this time. But I'm not seeing any movement towards the podium. And I would just like to remind the audience that if you would like to speak under a specific item, that you can fill out a speaker slip on the clipboard that's at the back of the room. And you can bring that up to me. I will call your name under that item. But I'll move on to virtual participation. If anyone online would like to speak under general, you can raise your hand at this time. but I'm not seeing any raised hands, and we did not receive any written correspondence, Senator General, so I'll give it back to you.

Thank you. We will now close general public comment, and we will move on to item 3A, which is 101 and 103 North Milpa Street and 825 East Mason Street. The proposed project involves a request for a conditional use permit to allow the sale of beer and wine for off-site consumption at El Rey Market. And we have staff here to provide a presentation. So Ms. Fennessy, please introduce yourself and the floor is yours.

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'm Julie Fennessy, Assistant Planner. I'm here to present the project at the El Rey Market for alcohol sales. The proposed project involves a request for a conditional use permit to allow the sale of beer and wine for off-site consumption at the El Rey Market. There are no changes proposed to the building or existing site. The market was previously converted from a bank with interior improvements under a building permit that was completed in April 3rd, 2025. The required actions before the Planning Commission today are a conditional use permit to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption with a Type 20 license under the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. and a CEQA determination that the project is exempt from further environmental review. For some background, a conditional use permit is required for off-site alcohol sales with ABC Type 20, which is beer and wine, or Type 21, which is beer, wine, and spirits licenses. This project proposes a Type 20 license, so it's beer and wine. Applicable uses include liquor stores, beer and wine stores, convenience and neighborhood markets, retail establishments, wine shops, and service stations. The CUP requirement does not apply to on-site alcohol sale uses or alcohol manufacturers. So here are some aerials of the project site. As you can see, the project site is comprised of three separate legal lots with distinct addresses and parcel numbers. The addresses are 101 North Milpas Street, 103 North Milpas Street, and 825 East Mason Street. 101 North Milpas Street, if you can see it on the aerial, is developed with a parking lot and trash enclosure that serve the market. 103 North Milpas Street contains the market building and associated on-site parking. 825 East Mason Street is developed with a parking lot that also serves the market. The three lots operate as a single site through a recorded covenant of easement that provides for off-site parking and a shared trash enclosure. Operationally, the market is a full-service market that sells a wide selection of fresh produce, meats, specialty foods, deli, and bakery items for off-site consumption. The market does not have any outdoor seating. The request seeks to allow the applicant to expand its inventory to include beer and wine sales, which requires a new alcoholic beverage control Type 20 license. The proposed expansion of the alcohol sales constitutes an increase in off-sale alcohol activity under the City of Santa Barbara off-sale alcohol requirements. As a result, the project triggers the requirement for approval of a conditional use permit and must demonstrate compliance with all applicable findings and operational standards. Conditional use permits allow review of uses that are generally consistent with zoning but require special consideration to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties. CUP approval requires findings outlined in the Santa Broma Municipal Code that address public welfare, general plan consistency, architecture, site design and traffic circulation. As discussed in Section 9 of the staff report, the project meets the required CUP findings. In addition to the CUP findings, the city requires specific findings for alcoholic beverage and retail establishments. This includes that the use shall not have significant adverse impacts on the crime or nuisance activities. and that the business must be compatible with the surrounding properties and not adversely affect the neighborhood livability. The police department issued a public convenience and necessity letter on April 16th, 2025, finding that the proposed operation satisfied the public convenience and necessity. Additionally a CEP may only be granted if the establishment complies with the performance and development standards outlined in the Santa Barbara municipal code Unless the Planning Commission approves a variation to prevent unreasonable hardship for or for any other reasons consistent with the zoning ordinance criteria The application complies with all the requirements except for one standard for which the applicant is requesting a variation I will provide a summary of these standards now The ordinance sets criteria for new off-site licenses, including ABC license capacity, low to average crime rate areas, and a minimum of 500 foot separation from residential zones and sensitive uses, unless a planning commission variation is approved. The applicant is requesting a variation to the 500 foot distance requirement due to the proximity to a residentially zoned lot. And here you can see is the 500 foot radius map and that the subject property is located within 500 feet of a residentially zoned lot. The market's primary objective is to operate as a full service market establishment to serve local residents, workers, and shoppers while contributing to the vitality of the surrounding neighborhood. Police department feedback indicates that this site satisfied the public convenience and necessity and benefits the surrounding community. Therefore, the market's adjacency to the residential area serves this purpose, and a waiver of the location and distance requirement is supportable. And here, as you can see, I have the project site highlighted in yellow, and then R2 is a residentially zoned area. OK. Alcohol sales and display are restricted by container type, size, and location. Wine must be sold in containers of 750 milliliters or larger with multi-pack exceptions. Beer and malt beverages must be served over 32 ounces with smaller containers sold only in multi-packs of three or more. Alcohol may not be displayed within five feet of entrances at checkout counters or adjacent to checkout areas. As you can see here on the floor plan, there will be a refrigerator for wine and beer more than five feet from the store entrance. The applicant is proposing to comply with all the requirements pertaining to the container size and product display. Alcohol retail establishments must meet the standards for lighting, noise, litter, window visibility, and signage to minimize nuisance impacts. The site has no active noise enforcement cases, and on-site lighting complies with the city's outdoor lighting ordinance. The project meets the Santa Barbara Municipal Code requirements for lighting, noise, waste receptacles, and clear window visibility. No drug or tobacco, paraphernalia, sales, payphones, or drive-through walk-up windows are proposed. Accordingly, the project complies with all the applicable operational standards. The project must also be found consistent with the city's general plan. For some context, the land use element identifies the project as being located in the Milpas neighborhood. Milpas Street is developed primarily as a commercial corridor with residential uses located above and behind many of the shops. This commercial area serves not only the surrounding Milpas neighborhood, but also the Eucalyptus and Riviera neighborhoods. A complete list of applicable policy is included as Exhibit D in your staff report, but I'll focus on a few policies here. So for the neighborhood and mixed use planning, land use element policy LG4 encourages the mixed use commercial areas and this project is consistent with that policy by combining retail and food and beverage uses. Policy LG15 promotes neighborhood serving commercial uses, healthy living accessibility, and reduced carbon impacts with specific support for small markets and grocery stores in underserved areas. The market aligns with these policies by operating as a full service market that serves both of the Milpas neighborhood and the broader Santa Barbara community. local serving commercial growth, economy and fiscal health policies, EF2, EF4, and EF14 support commercial growth that protects community character, retains local businesses, and serves residents and workers. The project repurposes an existing commercial building, avoiding new commercial development or building expansion. By operating as a full service market, The project meets the local needs and is consistent with these policies. For environmental review, staff has determined that the project qualifies for an exemption from further environmental review under Section 15301. Section 15301 allows for the operation Permitting licensing and minor alteration of existing private structure is involving negligible or no expansion of former use. Staff has reviewed the proposal and site conditions and has determined that the project complies with all the conditions of this exemption. So staff recommends approving the project, making the findings for the staff report for the environmental review and the conditional use permit. We have police department staff here today, Annalisa Hood, the police services coordinator, and Brian Miller, the commander. We also have the applicant, Sherry Olson, here, and two of the managers from the market for questions.

Thank you.

Great. Thank you, Ms. Fennessy. So I understand we also have a few folks representing the applicant, if you'd like to make a presentation at this time.

Good afternoon, Chair and members of the Commission. My name is Sherry Olsen. I'm on behalf of El Rey Market here. And we read over the conditions of approval and concur with them all. And we're here to answer any questions that you may have for us. Great. Thank you, Ms. Olsen.

Well, I think that takes us to comments from members of the public pertaining to this specific item. Ms. Carman, do we have anyone in person or remote who would like to give public comment?

Thank you, Chair Boss. At this time, I do have one speaker slip for in-person public comment, although there is no name listed. So if you want to approach the podium now, you'll have three minutes to speak.

Thank you, Planning Commissioners and Chair. I'm sorry, we're having trouble hearing you. Can you lean in a bit? Thank you.

Thank you, Planning Commissioners. Can you hear me now? It's not on.

Try now.

Hello. There we go. I submitted public comment, written public comment late, and so I'm going to just stick to what I wrote. to keep me on track and within time. Thank you for taking my comment. I'm here to request that the CUP be denied or that additional conditions be added. Although the market purportedly meets all the requirements of the CUP, this is a discretionary entitlement, and as such, you may deny the permit or add further conditions. I own the property directly across the street from the market. And unfortunately, it draws a large number of homeless people who are often inebriated. They hang out, sleep, urinate, defecate on my property and loiter at the bus stop right next to it and across the street in front of the McDonald's. I've had two different individuals break into my property within the past two years. The most recent one being in August, and my kitchen looked like someone had been stabbed. I also have a large number of boxes that pile up at my property and the homeless people like to sleep on these boxes. And I've noticed recently that these boxes are typically produce or food boxes. They're labeled eggs or lettuce or something like that. And so I suspect they come from across the street. And I will remove five boxes one day and then come back and there will be five more. These kinds of issues are not confined to the immediate vicinity of the market, and they do exist throughout Milpa Street, and I think it gets worse as you go toward the freeway. There is alcohol already sold on, I think, every block of Milpa, starting from Sprouts all the way to the Santa Barbara Bowl, and I obtained a list of those, the alcohol licenses from the ABC website, and it's attached to my public comment letter. I feel like the proliferation of alcohol is an adverse effect on the neighborhood. And I know the staff report says that there's a scattering of residential, but the R2 is actually the entire east side going all the way up through the Riviera. And in fact, there is multifamily residential right next door to the market. and a sobering group living facility, also across the street from the market. For these reasons, I'm asking for a denial. But if a denial is not to be had, I request for your consideration that a condition of approval be added to require the trash enclosure be locked and closed at all times, and that the time limit be modified. Right now, it says... the community development director can grant an extension or the permit becomes permanent if you record it.

Thank you.

Thank you. With that, I don't have any more speaker slips for in-person public comment. If anyone would like to speak, you can approach the podium at this time.

Hi, everybody. I'm sorry. First time I ever addressing anybody here. My name's Javier. I'm one of the general managers at the store. As I heard the lady, during the construction of this building, which took about, I don't know, about a year, I personally noticed all the homeless on her property, which is before we were even there. And there is a lot of homeless moving stuff around back and forth. They don't necessarily come from our building. They are there throughout Milpas. And I don't see any reason why we should be held back from our beer licenses. That's all I wanted to say. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. With that, I will move to virtual participation. I do see one hand raised at this time, but if anyone else would like to speak, you can raise your hand at this time. But Natalia Gavani, I'm going to give you permission to speak. You should be able to unmute.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Good afternoon, Chair and Commissioners. As a business owner on the 400 block of Milpus Street, who neighbors Pat's Liquor Store, alcohol and the selling of it is a constant and troublesome issue for business owners and residents. On a daily basis, patrons and vagrants buy alcohol on the Milpus Corridor and with their entitled attitudes, drink it and then dispose of the empty beer cans and bottles on private property. so that it becomes the problem of someone else to clean it. There are currently 34 alcohol establishments on the Milpus Corridor where one can obtain alcohol within the Milpus Mile, which extends from the beach to the Santa Barbara Bowl. To say that El Rey Market should not be granted ACUP is an understatement. The Eastside District is a district primarily made up of family residences So I would urge this commission to seriously take that into consideration regarding this issue before you today. Furthermore, it is also a district that continues to aesthetically struggle, and this would only exacerbate the problem. If you truly care about the Eastside District, as many of you have stated in previous meetings, honor it by not granting this CUP today to El Rey Market. Our Eastside community is already saturated with alcohol establishments and doesn't deserve to be burdened anymore because our planning commission lacks the backbone, insight, awareness, and ability to say no more. I urge all of you today to deny Thank you.

Thank you. And with that, I see one more hand raised for Christelle Barros. I'm going to allow you to speak at this time. You should be able to unmute.

Good afternoon, Planning Commission. I, like the in-person speaker, also wrote a letter, but not in a timely manner. And I wanted to specifically address something that was said in the preliminary presentation about protecting our city's character. If we want to protect our city's character, we do not need one more alcohol selling business in the Memphis corridor. We have an oversaturated market already. And now I'll read the brief letter that I wrote to the planning commission in a non timely manner. I'm a longtime resident of Santa Barbara. I live on the east side near Milpas Street. I remain active and diligent in my attempt at working side by side with others to protect our Santa Barbara community, especially our underserved and under-acknowledged east side. I'm opposed to issuing a liquor license to El Rey Market or any establishments along our Milpas Quarter. There's too much alcohol available in this sector already. Additionally, our east side Situation and problems are compounded by the large population of homeless, mentally ill, and drug and alcohol addicted already here. Please do not allow any more alcohol in this already overly alcohol-saturated neighborhood.

Sincerely.

Thank you. Uh, and with that, I don't have any more participants online. I will recognize that we received written correspondence from Richard Garrett and give it back to you.

Great. Thank you. I'll now open it up to my fellow commissioners for questions. And I see vice chair, delete you first.

Yes. Oh, I'm sorry.

Um, I have a couple of questions. Um, I have a question for the applicant. If the applicant, if we can have the applicant come up here for a moment, please. The speaker mentioned something about trash enclosure. How is that handled?

We do have somebody giving us quotes, and we should have it ready within two weeks max.

Okay. Thank you. That was my question. I have a couple questions for staff. Understanding this, there's residents within 500-foot radius, and you're just counting the residents correct that is a zoned residential lot, but there are other residential properties around the market, correct, that are within the commercial zone?

Through the chair, Commissioner DiLuccio, yes, it is the ordinance speaks to residentially zoned lots. There may be residential uses.

Okay, but this is a this is addressing the one across the street that's in a residential zone versus all around the market there are residential homes within a commercial zone.

Correct.

Thank you. Also, the conditions of approval, there is a condition, correct, that this would have to come back in one year if we approve it for a review by the Planning Commission. Is that correct?

I believe so.

I think it's in here. It says the planning commission shall require an annual review of any new and existing alcoholic beverage retail establishments. That's on page four or five of the conditional use permit.

So that any new, if it were new, but this one would not need to come back to you unless they were doing a substantial change.

This is not new? The market was never there before.

It also says existing because it was my question too. Any new and existing. Yeah.

This was a Wells Fargo before this became a market. So this is a new market. Correct. So this would come back to the Planning Commission for review after one year, correct?

Not the market. I'm not following.

It says the Planning Commission shall require an annual review of any new and existing alcoholic beverage retail establishments. So this is new. So it would come back to us after one year if we approve it, correct?

Let me look at the language. I'm not understanding with the one year. So they are coming to you now. There's an annual report to the Planning Commission every year that the police department does for all alcohol CUPs and existing establishments. So this would become part of that program. So you'd be getting that annual report. on this one through that process, but these applicants would not need to return to you in a year.

Thank you for the clarification, but it does read in here.

Okay, so perhaps we need to look at that language.

Yeah, perhaps you do. And also, I haven't seen it on your report since I've probably been here.

We just did one. Did we just do one? Was that in the summer? It might be due again. So it was in the summer. And then if you recall, I do want to remind you at that meeting the commission was supportive of having that annual report provided via written reporting every year rather than a public hearing every year so that you guys would get that report from the police department on an annual basis likely through your email communications through the PC secretary. And then there's provisions if there's concerns or considerations then a public hearing could be requested.

Okay, so it is in here, though, something. So let me... I have one final question about the Conditional Use Permit, the product display on page 205. That doesn't read quite right to me. It says the display of alcoholic beverages is subject to the following standards, and it says, well, from an ice tub, I understand, but then it says within five feet from any store entrance or exit, So shouldn't it read like something not within five feet or not on a checkout counter? I think Commissioner Wiscombe.

I had the same question, and I would just change standards to prohibitions. I think that solves the problem.

That needs to be in there because now it reads like, yes, you can have something by an entrance. You can, yeah, okay.

So we can change that when we get to deliberations, yes.

Those are my questions. Thank you.

Okay. We'll move to Commissioner Wiscombe.

Both of my questions were answered. Those were exactly the two questions I had. But on the reporting, I think we should just say the Planning Commission shall require an annual report, written report, and that will take care of the review because I don't ever recall reviewing these annually.

Commissioner, let's come through the chair. I think after reading it, what Commissioner Lucio was saying about the annual review is under a condition for reporting. So I think it is what Ms. Arciniega was talking about.

Right, but report is better than review. Report sounds like it's written instead of that. Okay. I agree. And just to... You two, I think, may sit down. We've had some... public commenters here that are really opposed to this. Could we have the police come up and just speak to what your review process is? And I really appreciate your being here. Thank you, Commander.

Of course. Good afternoon. So part of our review process when we get the CUP request through the planning department is to review the calls for service in the area. and determine whether there's, for our PCN letter, whether there's an adverse problem with, the criteria we use are specific to the nuisance related things that come with alcohol sales, public intoxication and littering So it's not overall crime, but it is specific to whether we determine whether alcohol sales there would increase the problem. When we looked at the calls for service for this specific location, it fell within the average. There wasn't a an above average problem in that area. And so when we deem that as being the case, also looking at the fact that this new business will fall under those standards that we're going to be able to have a little more oversight and not control, but to do our annual inspections and they fall under those criteria and standards, it does more lean towards us approving that there is a public necessity.

Okay. And when you say area, what would your area be? Would it cover where, I never got your name, where the speaker lives that talked about having trash on her property and A LOT OF HOMELESS ACTIVITY ON HER PROPERTY?

THE STANDARD THAT WE USE IS THE BLOCK, THE ENTIRE BLOCK OF THE ADDRESS FOR THE LOCATION.

OKAY. AND DO YOU USE ACROSS THE STREET, TOO, OR JUST?

WELL, IT WOULD BE ACROSS THE STREET WOULD BE THE SAME BLOCK, YES.

OKAY. SO YOU'RE NOT, I DON'T REMEMBER THE MAP, ARE YOU GETTING INTO ANY RESIDENTIAL AREAS? I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR BEING HERE. And I guess my last question would be for, again, the manager of the market. You said you're getting a trash enclosure and you're getting quotes for it now.

So because we do create a lot of trash, we have bigger trash containers for the space. So the doors don't fully close, but we keep them close to each other as much as we can. For that reason, we just need to extend the doors out so they can properly closed.

And will you be locking them?

Yes, correct. They have locks. Oh, they do have locks.

So you're getting new doors so that they can fully close? They can properly close, yes. Oh, great.

We're missing probably like around a foot. Okay. That's something that we've been working already because we did have a city official come out there and mention this, that somebody's taking out trash from there. We don't see it, but we know that doors don't close. So we're taking care of it.

So you're actually taking care of... This woman's request to add a condition of approval that requires trash enclosure be closed and locked at all times.

Correct. And I would like to state that that property is vacant. She only comes there at least once a month to clean up her property. So there's nobody actually living there.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. I think that answers all my questions. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Great. Commissioner Bauke.

Madam Chair, Commissioner Wisdom just asked my questions, which was about the trash enclosure and making sure it's going to be locked, because you could surely unlock it when you need to use it, and I think that should be part of your operation. That was my question, so thank you.

Any other questions from commissioners? Commissioner Wardlow.

For staff, just wondering, on the waiver, I assume that this is a waiver that is granted to a number of the establishments that sell alcohol in this area. So this is a common practice, or is this unusual?

Through the chair, Commissioner Wardlow, that is correct. So the location standard is one of the common standards we have because it includes proximity to residential uses. So for instance in a mixed use building that standard is immediately non-compliant. So I believe all if not most of the alcohol CUPs you've seen today have had that standard. We do, part of your findings is making sure that that's appropriate to waive and also the findings for the CUP itself for the alcohol use that it is an appropriate location considering um, safety and nuisance, et cetera. So we do rely on the police to police department to help inform you in that decision with their crime statistics and their knowledge of the area and the operations, um, on the street. So, um, that's the kind of support we have to help you make that finding, um, and feel comfortable with it. But yes, location is pretty common, um, in terms of a standard to be waived. Thank you.

Any other questions from commissioners? Not seeing any I do have one out of curiosity are any businesses as a standard practice on along the Milbus corridor are any of them required to have locked enclosures for trash or recycle or Do most of them probably have either open or sometimes they lock it but on their own accord Commissioner Chair boss I couldn't speak to locked I know trash enclosures are required by the zoning code and waste management and

for screening purposes and also to ensure that it's accessible to trash and recycling vehicles. I don't know about locked per se.

Okay. Thank you. That was my only question. Any other questions? If not, I'll open up to Commissioner deliberations and comments and we'll start with Commissioner Wiscombe.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to comment on your question, I'm thinking if the city came out and said that you need to fix the doors so that they close, I think, and the gentleman says they'll be locked. I think it must be a city requirement that at least the doors close. Well, yeah, I don't know about locked, but at any rate, I sympathize with people that do have problems in the corridor. I know that some people that, one person that spoke I know has been talking about this for many years. I do support the project. I think the market serves a very good and important use in that area, and that they should be, with no problems, they should be willing to sell

BEER AND WINE FOR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED.

AT ANY RATE, AND I THINK THERE'S JUST A COUPLE CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE. NUMBER ONE IS ITEM NUMBER SIX IS ON PAGE TWO OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND THAT'S UNDER PRODUCT DISPLAY. VICE CHAIR DELUCCIO TALKED ABOUT IT. And we should just change the word standards to prohibitions on that, because these are prohibitions. And the other one is on page four of the conditions of approval under reporting. And I think it should read, the planning commission shall require an annual written report of any new and existing alcohol beverage retail establishments. And other than that, I'm ambivalent about adding the locked thing to it. I think the gentleman spoke to the fact that it was going to be locked. So I'm fine with the rest of it, and I can support it. Thank you. Thank you.

We'll go to Ms. Arciniega. Chair, boss, I just wanted to offer some wording for Condition 15 that Commissioner Wiscombe was just speaking of. I went back to the Planning Commission staff report from the annual alcohol report that we did, and I wanted to kind of mirror the language we said at the end of that report. and add a sentence, so let me know how you feel about changing the reporting condition to read as follows. The owner shall participate in the annual police department inspection program. Inspection data shall be forwarded to the planning commission annually. Should the city administrator or the chief of police determine that there are unresolved or continued violations, a report of these violations shall be presented to the planning commission for review at a public hearing.

Okay.

Great. Thank you. Appreciate that. As far as other comments, Commissioner, Vice Chair DiLuccio.

Thank you for researching that. I'm definitely amenable to that and the other condition. I sympathize with the neighborhood, and I am in favor of supporting this, however. I'm leaning toward the PCN letter that the police department had issued, and it sounds like you've done your thorough analysis and you looked at the crime stats on the whole street. And with the condition that we do have in place within a year, I guess I'll look at how it's going and if there are issues. I would imagine if there's issues even before then, maybe they would be dealt with accordingly, I'll just say. I was a little taken back about how we measure residential by the same type of zone, by a commercial zone. across the street when all around this particular business, it's in the commercial zone, but they're residences. So that concerns me a little bit. It's not going to stop me from approving this, but maybe at some point we can relook that. I just want to throw that out there. And I also did some due diligence also on this extra due diligence, learning that El Rey has a market on Montecito Street. So I actually went over there also to see the setup. And basically, it's beer. The shelving has beer across it, the glass shelving. And there's very little wine at that establishment, and that's sitting in the little round chest. So I just wanted to just point that out. And I think I ran into the same manager over there that we saw on our walkthrough. So based on all that, I am supportive of this with a couple of modifications to the conditions. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Bauke?

I'll support the application, but I would like to see some language added to Condition Approval 7 about locking the trash enclosure and staff, however you would like to provide that language, it would be appropriate. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Barnwell.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm supportive of the application. I am also supportive of the concerns of the neighbor's And when they express those concerns, the details end up being things like cardboard boxes and stuff, but what the real problem is is the homeless and housing and the city of Santa Barbara's need to begin to address those things. They're a much deeper and more complex issue, but they're really at the base of what we're talking about when we talk about those events happening on that street. So I once again speak directly to that issue We need, as a planning commission, as a city, we need to address those things much more quickly and more thoroughly than I think we're now doing. Insofar as the locking, I don't know how we do it, but it seems to me like every trash enclosure should be locked. Certainly, at a minimum, every trash enclosure in a mixed-use zone area where there is residential. But thank you, Madam Chair. I'm supportive of it. I had a little comical thought. We need to be careful because the restaurant is El Rey which means the king, right? So we've got to be careful about what we do here because we don't want any repercussions from the king. Anyway, thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Commissioner Wardlow.

Thank you, Chair. I, too, am going to be supportive of this. And I feel for the neighbors, and I think that this is an issue that we need to address, but not through an individual basis of being penalistic to an applicant that is providing a service to the community and is in their rights and compliance. So I also agree with Commissioner Bauke and his ideas around how we can condition the specific enclosures to ensure that trash isn't being pulled out.

So thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Peterson?

I'll be brief. I'm also supportive of this. I hear the concerns of the neighbors and sympathize with that. I think there are larger issues at play that are beyond our purview here in regards to some of these problems. But I also think about equity and larger and smaller businesses and State Street and Milpus and wanting to make sure that we provide economic opportunities for whoever is applying for them. And so along with the good work that our police and city staff have done in terms of the guardrails and the conditions that I also support, I will be supportive of this. Thanks.

Thank you. Any further comments? Okay. I'll ask staff if you can please predict the purpose or proposed actions for a motion. And I want to make sure I have the comments correct for the conditions of approval. I think on B1A, change the review language to the report language that Ms. Arciniega recommended. C7, consider a lock enclosure. And I think it was C1, but it was changing from standards to prohibitions. Did I get that right? C6. C6, thank you.

Okay.

And if there's a slide that says what our motion should be, that would be helpful. Great. So I'll ask for a motion. There's the staff recommendation on the slide. We'll ask for Commissioner Wiscombe.

Thank you. I'll be happy to make the motion. And we're using the language that Ms. Arciniega provided for the reporting.

For B1A, yes.

Okay. Great. And this also grants them the modification because of the 500 feet crest. Okay. Thank you. So moved. And second.

Okay. Ms. Carman, can we please have a, I'm sorry, any further discussion on the motion? Okay. Ms. Carman, can we please have a roll call vote?

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'll begin with Commissioner Wiscombe.

Yes.

Commissioner Barnwell.

Yes.

Commissioner Peterson. Yes. Commissioner Bauke. Yes. Commissioner Wardlow. Yes. Vice Chair DiLiccio. Yes. And Chair Boss. Yes. Motion passes. Thank you.

Thank you. And this action is appealable for 10 calendar days. Thank you again. We'll move now to the next item on our agenda. This is 3B 419 West Pueblo Street. Now it'll take a moment for folks to move around. But this proposed project includes demolition of the 19 space surface parking lot and 188 square foot storage structure and construction of a 6,847 square foot two-story child care center building. The new building would expand the existing child care center, which provides child care services exclusively for cottage hospital employees and increases parking. I think that bought enough time. So we do have Ms. Brodison here today. The floor is yours.

Good afternoon, Chair Baas and Commissioners. Kelly Brodison with Community Development. And I'm here to present a proposed project at 419 West Pueblo Street. This slide is to show, this slide shows a vicinity map of the neighborhood. It shows the project site is kind of northeast of the 101. And you can see the main cottage hospital to the upper left of the project site. This is the Pueblo parking structure right here. And then the project site is right to the bottom right of that yellow highlighted area. Let's see. Why is my things moving? There we go. So the project overall address is 419 West Pueblo. However, there are several buildings on the project site. And I wanted to point out that the area of work is this area that's highlighted in yellow. That's where the proposed project is going to be located. It is currently a 19-space surface parking lot that is used only for the employees of the child care center that's existing on the site. This slide shows what's called the SP-8H zone or specific plan zone, it's for the hospital campus area and it's located in the gray. So this area was created in 2005 to prepare for the Cottage Hospital campus. The project summary as commissioner or chair boss listed, they're proposing to demolish the existing 19 space surface parking lot and construct a two-story 6,800 square foot addition to the existing child care facility. It will contain a lobby, second floor offices, an outdoor play area which will be interior to the structure in a courtyard, covered walkway leading from the existing facility, and child care rooms. This slide shows the floor plan. So on the left here you can see the first floor plan, The street, Castillo Street is to the bottom and then you can see you walk in through the lobby and then there's the outdoor play area here. And then the second floor is on the right where the main administrative offices will be. It's significantly set back from the footprint of the first floor building, or first floor. The required discretionary approvals under the Planning Commission's review today is a conditional use permit to allow the new development in the SP8 H zone, a development plan to allow the construction of this new addition of non-residential floor area allocated from minor and small categories. I think that's a typo, excuse that. A secret determination, the project is categorically exempt from further environmental review under sections 15303. Just to give a little background of the hospital specific plan, it was created in 2005 when Cottage Hospital underwent a major reconstruction and redevelopment in that area. It was created to establish standards to support orderly development of the hospital campus, as we've seen through the years. Parking structures and childcare were anticipated and expected to be proposed eventually. And the planning commission, or sorry, the city council did designate this project as a community benefit in 2025, just last summer, I believe. And the proposed project is divided into three. The SP8H zone is divided into three areas. This proposed project is in area C, which I'll show you on this slide. So you can see area A is where the main cottage facility is. And then area B is the NAP structure. And then area C below here is where the project site is located. Child care facilities, they're specifically allowed in the area C of this zone. They require a play area per state law, and you can see on this slide it shows the play area in the center of the lot, the main play area. And there's a passenger loading zone to occur along Castillo Street, and they'll have a 15-minute green curve, which is going to be extended as part of this project for pickup and drop-off. The SP8H zone, which I would call the cottage hospital or the hospital-specific plan. It requires parking demand to be evaluated on a project-specific basis. Alternatively, most projects in the city, we do it by square footage, one space per 250, but in the cottage hospital zone, each project is evaluated individually. The zoning ordinance requires that a transportation engineer prepare a traffic study, which we have and has been submitted to you as part of your packet, The parking must be provided in the parking structures which are already in this campus. They must analyze peak and non-peak demands, employees, patients, and visitors. For this project, there are no, theoretically, patients or visitors because it's the children and the parents and the employees of the child care center. And this project will be for cottage hospital employees only, this child care center. The project requires a conditional use permit. So although the zone allows for child care facilities in the Area C of this zone, it still specifically says any new development requires a conditional use permit. And so they're applying today for a conditional use permit. And it must be found consistent with the general plan and the zoning ordinance, which is described in detail in the staff report. Also, for projects in the city that propose more than 3,000 square feet, a development plan is required, which is another application under your purview today. As I said, the project was deemed a community benefit project by city council, so it was not required to take square footage out of the various categories listed in the staff report, which Previously I had a typo in my PowerPoint, so I apologize for that. It must be found consistent with principles of sound community, which the staff report also discusses that this project is consistent with the zoning and principles of sound community by providing childcare facilities for employees. And it must be found compatible with the neighborhood and consistent with the traffic management strategy. The general plan also has several policies which this project complies with, the most valid right now being that childcare and local community needs. The general plan requires that the city encourage services for working families, encourage childcare as a necessary complement of employment. And as I said previously, only cottage employees are gonna be served by this proposed childcare facility. So it's providing a need for the employees that bring traffic to this area. Project staff also conducted a thorough environmental analysis of the project and found that it is exempt under further environmental review under CEQA section 15303, which allows for new constructions of up to four commercial buildings not exceeding 10,000 square feet. And based on that review, there would be no significant project-specific or cumulative impacts on the environment. The project did go to the design review board, and they found the architecture very supportable, and they found that it fits in with the eclectic neighborhood in the area and matches the other building on site that we saw at the site visit on Tuesday morning. So that concludes staff's presentation. The recommendation is to approve the project and make the findings in the staff report. subject to the conditions of approval. We do have the architect Brian Kernal here. We have representatives Scott Allen from the Cottage Hospital, Heidi Jones from Merakai Planning Services, and I believe we have a representative from ABR was going to be here. I don't see them yet, but that concludes my presentation. I'm available for questions, and we'll let the applicant make their presentation.

Thank you. All right, so as Ms. Brodison just noted, there are a number of folks from the applicant team. Is there a planned presentation? Great, thank you. Please introduce yourself.

Good afternoon, Heidi Jones, Meraki Land Use Consulting. We're grateful to be here today to walk through our team presentation for the project. We are joined by Nick Henderson, Ron Lafrican, and Scott Allen with Cottage Hospital. Brian Kernal and Laura Hudson-Bernard from Kernal Collective. Bob Cunningham from Arcadia is our landscape architect. Rob Schmidt from Flowers and Associates is our civil engineer. And Scott Schell is our transportation engineer. Scott and our architectural team, as well as our cottage team, is here today. Thank you staff for your excellent staff report and presentation. I don't necessarily need to go into all of the details of the permit request that Kelly just explained. One thing that we will review is through the project plans there is a removal of a coast live oak tree. The SP8 conditions of approval allow off-site mitigation within one mile and that is proposed as part of the project as well. Kelly also mentioned the specific plan area background and build out of the project and the child care center I believe that was completed in one of the first phases of construction. We've gone through City PRT pre-application community benefit designations and ABR to date. And then I'm going to pass it on to the Administrative Director of Human Resources Ron Lafrican who will talk a little bit more about the center's demand.

Thanks Heidi, good afternoon everybody. My name's Ron Lafrican, I'm the Director of Human Resources for the Children's Center. Just to give you a couple of high points about operations for the center. Right now we have a maximum capacity of 80 children. Our proposed maximum will be 160 children, imagine that. Children that will be served will be four months to three years of age. We have an existing preschool at the center and that will be phased out as the children graduate and go into kindergarten or pre-K. Children, as has been mentioned, this is really an employee benefit for the employees. Hours of operation are extended because we run 24-7 and we cater to the nursing and clinical schedules so we run from 6.30 in the morning to 5.30 p.m. Right now we have 28 staff members and at the end of the day we will have 50 if this is approved. There's a problem with childcare in this community. We have 300 people on our wait list to get into our center today. So there's definitely a supply and demand problem. Another statistic is there's Only one in 10 infants can get into licensed care in this county, which is really difficult as a new parent and a working parent to be able to find childcare. There's over 90 preschool programs in the community, but there's only 14 infant toddler programs. And primarily that's due to the ratios. The older the children are, you could have more children to teachers. With infants, the maximum is one to four. So the numbers from a value and being able to offer that is pretty significant for the average organization or company. As you know, this is important for our community. These are the future of who lives here and who takes care of us and moves on. And obviously early childhood education is important. I have a couple of pictures. So here's your future. This is the next generation right here. What I think is so special about the center is this isn't just a place to drop your kid off and go to work. This is a learning environment. We nurture them, we teach them skills, and it starts right from the beginning when they walk through the door. We had a video for you, and we've sent it to the secretary. If you'd like to see it, I'm sure she'll be happy to play it for you. But we just put up a couple of testimonials. Obviously, you'll see the teachers with the children inside, outside. I think what everybody, anecdotally, if I just summarize what's up here, they start building social skills from day one, even though they may not be able to talk or any of that stuff. the minute they enter the center, you can see that they're with other children, they're with the teachers, and they're interacting. And I think what most of the parents will tell you is that that has really become valuable as they've graduated and moved on through their academic career. So with that, I'll turn it back over to Brian.

Thank you, Brian Cornell. I will be brief. I have to say that in my 45 years of practicing architecture here in Santa Barbara, this project is probably the most meaningful to me. And it's wonderful to have seen it operate. I want to give a big shout out to Yukiko, who has been the center's director for 15 years. 16 years. It really is satisfying to see the work that they do here. And so they came to me and said, we need to increase the infant numbers. And so this new building then is really all about that. ABR loved it, which is also really nice. You can't complain about that. I'm not convinced about the color, by the way. Laura and I will. Laura Bernard, by the way, is our project architect and my partner. And we'll be debating the precise color. But the whole idea was, as you see from the existing center, that this be a colorful little complex little village of sorts. And being able to put the administrative function up on top is really important because that's a function now where they've really run out of space. And we will be converting that to... Is that a pointer? Kind of. The existing entrance is going to be converted to one of the infant care and each one of these little infant care rooms That area in yellow is obviously where the parking lot is and I do want to mention that that parking lot was there well before the cottage specific plan done in 2005 and it's it's been used for various things including the trailers for the construction and So this is the overall plan. The existing entrance will become a little infant care and we'll be doing some very minor remodeling in the existing facility. But you can see that each one of these classrooms is for eight infants, which is the maximum. And I should also mention that each one of those classrooms has its own little outdoor area. And specific to the issue of the tree removal, The tree there you see in the far left is where the oak is located, and unbeknownst to me, the little acorns, I showed those of you that attended the site visit, the little acorns from the oak are a real problem for these infants because, as you know, they pick up everything and put it in their mouth. So that is why we are removing that tree but feel there's going to be adequate places within the tree cottage campus to be able to mitigate for that one tree. And I think it's a Brisbane box that we're putting in that. And if you have any questions on the landscape plan, I will try to answer it. And so these are just some additional views. As you can see, obviously the idea was to be very compatible with the neighborhood. That's a portion of the existing building on the right. The elevations, so it's not very tall. You can see the overall height is less than 30 feet. And we have a little cupola at the top, which brings light into that second floor area. And I'll be happy to answer questions when I'm going to turn it over to Heidi to finish up for us. Thank you.

I wanted to briefly explain the pick-up and drop-off queuing operations that happen. So, you know, everyone that is attending this center is already going to their job at the hospital and parking there. There is some queuing that happens, so there's different modes that parents use when they're dropping off their children. They can park in the 15-minute zones and walk into the child care center, park in one of the structures, and walk, bike, etc., to the location, there is an existing green curb and since the two existing driveway aprons are going to be removed, we're extending that curb. There was an existing 90-minute parking sign that will be replaced and everything will be 15 minutes along that curb area. The employee shifts also vary. Some people might work three days a week at a 12-hour shift or 8-hour shift or 10-hour shift and those are changing so it's not always a huge influx, you know, your typical morning and evening TIME SHIFTS. THEY ANTICIPATE SWITCH OVER HERE, MY NOTES. USUALLY THE KIND OF PICKUP AND DROP OFF TIMES IS 7 TO 9 30 IN THE MORNING AND 3 30 TO 5 30 IN THE AFTERNOON. THE SPECIFIC PLAN ALSO REQUIRES COTTAGE TO HAVE A TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT COMES WITH INCENTIVES TO INCLUDE ALTERNATE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION, CAR POOLING, RIDE SHARE, BUSES, parking, et cetera, transit subsidies. So we are grateful to have gone through a complete and thorough planning process, appreciate the staff report and staff support for this project, and we believe the conditions of approval are acceptable and the findings can be made, and we're here for your questions.

Great. Thank you. That takes us to comments from members of the public pertaining to this specific item. Ms. Carmen, do we have any in-person or remote?

Thank you, Chair Boss. At this time, I don't have any speaker slips for in-person public comment, though if anyone in the room would like to speak, you can approach the podium at this time. But I'm not seeing any movement towards the podium. We do not have any participants online with us, but I will acknowledge that we received written correspondence from Paulina Kahn, Pat Seeley, and Caroline Wolfe. I'll give it back to you.

Thank you. I'll open up to my fellow commissioners for questions, and I have Commissioner Barnwell first.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I wonder if we could talk about the pick up and drop off. I speak with a minimum amount of authority as a father of five children, taking them all, dropping them off, and picking them up. And I know the smaller they are, the longer you stay. I went over there and sat for an hour. I read the book that I'm reading, and I parked at the curb, and I watched the parents come. And they're not particularly fast. They just walk in with their kid, and they just enjoy themselves inside and say hello to teachers, et cetera, and then come back out. I'm wondering if we are adequately meeting the demand. We are going to double the number of kids, and the kids that are in this section that we're building are going to be very small kids, which means the parents are not going to do and quick drop off. And so while I don't necessarily question the wisdom of the transportation study, which I've read cover to cover a couple of times, we keep using the word it's a drop off. But we're not using the curb color for a drop off, which I believe is white. And then I wonder if there is a curb along the cross street, which name I can't think of right now. What is that? Los Olivos. Is there green along there? I mean, this goes to every project that ever comes in front of us or you guys ever deal with. You really can't do too much parking. And I think we're going to really need that. And I wonder if you guys have addressed how to expand that. Or have you done a time study of how long each parent will actually be parked at the 15-minute area? Or are you worried about it? I guess that's the best. I could sum it up by saying, are you at all concerned about that?

Chair and Commissioner, I have Scott Schell here, our transportation engineer, who can get into those nitty-gritty details if you would like, and we also have city transportation staff. We worked really closely with the city in studying these pick-up and drop-off and queuing, and I think the most important thing is these parents are already at work. They're already parking. They could have parked somewhere else, so they may be walking over and dropping off. Yes, I'm a mom of two. I remember when my girls were little, life happens and you might be parked longer at the curb because of unknown reasons. But maybe Scott can come up and speak to the details on that.

Well, if I may add, while I sat there, none of the people were employees who dropped off the kids. They were the other parent.

That very well could be. Okay, so they're not.

And also, I don't know if the traffic study includes the NAP building.

It does. It includes the NAP structure, the Pueblo structure, and some surface parking lots.

Which is good for all the employees. There's no question about that. But As for parents who are going to drop kids off, I'd be very surprised if any of them are going to park in a nap structure, walk over and drop off the kid. So anyway, I'm not necessarily saying you should change anything, but I think that may be something to look at, to expand a little bit. I don't think there's enough drop off, particularly if you're doubling. Aren't you doubling the number of kids?

Close to, yes.

Yeah. You're going from, what did you say, 80 to 160?

I think it's 80 to 160. Yes, double.

Yeah. Anyway, that was my observation, that issue of parking. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Did the traffic engineer, are you completely satisfied that you've got this nailed and

These parents are going to... Good afternoon, Chair, members of the Commission. My name is Scott Schell with Associated Transportation Engineers. So we did look at, I mean, the first thing I want to kind of point out to everybody is that we're expanding the drop-off zone. We're getting rid of two driveways that are out there now. And there's red curb between the current driveway and the curb over at Los Olivos. So we're going from, I'm going to just ballpark it, from about 180 feet to, I think we now have 120 feet for the new environment. So while we're not doubling it, we're getting a bit more area. We're also picking up another parking space on Los Olivos where the driveway currently comes out. from the structure or for the parking lot we did do some surveys of the drop-off and pickups not as thorough as Mr. Barnwell who sat there drinking his mocha in his car checking it out gonna have to hire you but we did get a breakdown of the shift changes and like we've heard it's kind of varied so it's not like you're going to your standard daycare that starts at five and picks up at or starts at 8, picks up at 5, it's mattered out through the morning. So in what we looked at and the information we got based on the drop-off times, we feel that the expanded curve is going to be adequate.

Well, I appreciate the answer. To give my own experience a little bit of additional depth, when Peabody became in charge of school, I was the president of the governing council for the first three years. And the issue was... where are the parents supposed to drop off their kids, and how long are they supposed to stay and chit-chat with the teachers? So I just offer this as a cautionary tale about that, and anything you can squeeze out, maybe even including, and I don't know if this can be done, an area within the Pueblo parking structure that is dedicated, not just there because it's there, but dedicated. I know that the first set of parking spaces are typically the ADA parking spaces, but that might be another solution when you find it, because I think you're going to find a little bit of a traffic jam there, but otherwise I greatly appreciate it. Thank you very much for your explanation. Thank you.

Right. Commissioner Peterson.

Thank you. I have a few questions. Um, first off, thank you to the team who's brought this forward. I think that as you demonstrated and as is in our discourse is a great need here in the city and in our community, childcare is an expansion of that. So thank you. Um, We received correspondence that was skeptical on the reduction of parking. And I'm going to be turning my attention to staff. We mentioned in the staff report that the need for parking at Cottage has decreased in recent years. Do we know by how much it's decreased?

I'm going to have to defer to Scott Shell, please. Chair Boss and Commissioner Peterson. Or

Scott Shell, ATE. So a couple things we did for the parking study. The first thing is we went and did a new count of how many parking spaces were there. We compared it back to the time when the specific plan was adopted. So we actually counted what was in Pueblo and what was in Knapp and what was on the surface. And we came up with an increase of about 27 spaces from what was originally planned back in, we call it the CACU study from 2005. I don't know if anybody's here that long. So we have an increase in the parking supply. And then we actually went out for three days, starting at 8 in the morning until 5 at night, and counted all the cars that were parked at all the parking lots. And so we had... During the three days that we counted, we found that there were between 260 to 115 empty spaces, depending on which day it was time. And so I think that back in the day when they adopted the specific plan, that was back when Rob Dayton was in charge. And he kind of made a push to make sure we had enough parking. You know, in talking to cottage staff, they did indicate since COVID that, like everybody else, they've had more of a shift towards work at home or not work so much, you know, not so many days a week. So based on the information we got from cottage and our own surveys, we found that there was enough parking space. to accommodate the 19 lost spaces from the lot, as well as additional parking demands from the employees that would be new to the center. So we still have a surplus of about 100 spaces when we add all that stuff in, even on the highest peak hour of the peak day that we studied.

Thank you. So we have 160 to over 200 spaces empty each day. We might be losing 19 spaces if this is approved, but we're gaining 80 childcare slots. Not allowed to comment, but I think that's good. So my last question is, you also talked about there's 300 folks on the wait list right now for childcare slots. Do you have any intention, and this might not be in this project's purview, but if this building is approved, can that accommodate more than an additional 80 slots in the future?

So if I understand your question correctly, it's can we go higher than an additional 80? Yes. So we have ratios and licensing standards we have to abide by, so we have to be careful. The way this is being constructed, that's probably the max that we'll get to is 160. All right.

Are you thinking about more child care slots in the future?

Not right now. What we're hopeful of is that with this additional center, that will pretty much take care of 90% of the wait list. You have to realize they're not all infants and they're all going to change, right? They all grow as things go on. But we're expecting that it'll take care of about 90% of our wait list.

Okay. Thank you. That's all my questions.

Thank you. Commissioner Wiscom.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I actually just had one question, and it's about the oak tree replacement plan. It's on the conditions of approval on page 2 of 11C1, and it talks about the project includes the removal. It talks about the oak tree protection plan prepared by Bill Spivak, dated July 31st, 2025, shall be implemented. and then it says that the project is the removal of one oak, we understand why, and replacement with a 48-inch box, with 48-inch box island oaks planted at a proposed Santa Barbara Cottage workforce housing site, which is the rehab building now. So, I just, his recommendation was, well, he recommended He said, I would concur with the landscape plan and mitigate the one removed tree with four 36-inch box oaks at the De La Vena site. And then he says, and one in the parkway on Los Olivos. Well, we're not doing that one because of the acorns that fall from it. But I think that this needs to be clarified. If that's the recommendation we're using, that's, I think, what he did, what he said.

Thank you, Chair and Commissioner. The Cottage Hospital-specific plan, I have a slide up. The mitigation ratios are established per those set of conditions of approval, and it's based on the tree diameters, and then there's mitigation ratios from there. So this slide's probably a little bit of a small font. But our tree is about 20-inch oak, so that would require a five-to-one ratio, three 15-gallon and two 24-inch box. Alternatively, we studied originally replacing off-site location for 48-inch box oaks. They are very messy. So we chatted with staff and got approval for, what is the, Island Oak, thank you, the Island Oak off-site. So I do not believe there is a, Maybe that's just an error or because from the point in time we got the arborist report to the plan, it may just not coincide.

Can I interrupt? So how many oaks are you planting off-site? Four 48-inch box. Four 48-inch box. Correct. Okay, so we're not really following Bill Spivak's recommendation that he put in his study.

Right, and we are also over-mitigating the ratio that's required per the condition of approval, so it seemed like staff was acceptable of that approach.

Okay, so the language here needs to be changed, and we need to specify for 48-inch box, because that was totally confusing to me. And that, I think, is my only question. I thank all of you for being here. I think it's wonderful that you're all here and answering our questions.

which is great, so thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner DiLuccio.

Thank you. I also had, that was my question, too, because you didn't have the, you're missing four. You just need to add four to the condition, and that's okay, but it just reads like one when it should have four 48-inch, and the other thing is they have to do with the loading zone. It's not a loading zone. It's going to be the 15-minute parking, and which I understand a loading zone would make things maybe go a little faster, but I understand the 15, and that's fine. I'll accept that. But is that only – it reads Monday through Friday, but in the city, we enforce parking Monday through Saturday and not Sunday. Is that correct? Is that true?

We don't do the parking – Chair – Boss and Commissioner DiLuccio, yeah, there's no parking enforcement on Sundays.

Okay, so shouldn't maybe the greens, if you're going to put a new sign up, a new signage up, shouldn't it really read Monday through Saturday? What's happening? I understand 15 means 15, but if you're going to put a sign up and say the condition reads Monday through Friday, it's going to be confusing if Saturday you enforce the 15 minutes, but there's not a sign up. Does that make sense?

Can you hear me now? So when we were evaluating the loading area or the 15-minute parking, we discussed it with downtown parking team. And so if the operations are only Monday through Friday, so I believe that's allowing the extra additional parking stall for the residential neighborhood or any other use, any other person that wants to use that area.

On Saturday?

Yes.

but the sign makes no sense. I find it really confusing, Monday through Friday, 15 minute parking, and it's green, it's gonna be green, so I think it should maybe have Monday through Saturday, because if it's green, you cannot park there more than 15 minutes. And the other side of that is, it's meant for loading and unloading, however, what's to stop somebody else from parking there for 15 minutes?

And I can definitely note that and talk to downtown parking staff during building permit and public works permit to address that.

Then I have a question for the architect. I know this went before design review and it was very well received. I know they had some the color, the red got a little the color got a little mixed review but I think it was more in favor of the red and doing something with it. My other question was one of the Commission has brought up about being sensitive to the neighbors to the west. I guess when you did your presentation, it's kind of cool because the center has infants playing in the center. But then I understand on the west side around there, there's also going to be infants can go outside and play. And I think when it came before the design board, one of the commissioners says to be sensitive to the neighbors to the west. Maybe to do something with the plate height, or not plate, the infant's playing there to do something to, you know, so it's not a disturbance to the neighbors behind there, the residential neighbors.

Yeah. Commissioner DiLucchio, you know, first of all, we don't have really – oh, you had it right – We don't have any play area that is to the west of that infant area. You can see there's a walkway, but those play areas are off to the north and south.

Okay.

But also I think it's really important to note that this is overall actually a really good thing for the neighbors because right now the large yard that is up in the upper right-hand corner that you don't see on this slide is where all the preschool playground is. And I guarantee you they make a lot more noise than what the toddlers eventually will make. So I think it's going to be a net improvement of noise to those neighbors to the west.

Okay. Well, that's good to know because they did call out the west side at the board.

Obviously, we're aware that it is very sensitive to those neighbors. And we'll make sure, especially during construction, that we're being careful.

And I'm sure during operation you're aware of it also. You would address it. Thank you. Those are my questions.

Thank you. Commissioner Bauke.

Brian, come back.

You don't like the color?

Actually, that was the subject. There's two subjects I wanted to talk with you about is how do you come up with a style? I mean, it's an eclectic neighborhood. How did you pick this particular style? Just wanted to know your thought process.

I think in part because there was a second floor element, I kind of wanted to give it a little barn-like feel. I didn't want to match the buildings that were there necessarily. One of the existing buildings, the one that's in back of that play area I was just mentioning, is a little bit barn-like, but yeah.

I was just wondering if you were channeling the Little Red Schoolhouse theory, because the first time I saw this, I go, that's what it is, and then when you get to the Little Red Schoolhouse, then you get into the color conversation. And I think if you're going to do a... Little Red Schoolhouse themed type thing. Do the color that that tends to be, which is a red that's got a little dark tint to it, but you can just type it up on Google and you'll find 50 images that look and even have the little cupola or whatever you want to call it.

I did want to mention, too, we have a little flying...

Pig up on the top bigger or chicken or a rooster. I mean, so it's okay. It's a pig. Okay So anyway, I just say if you're gonna embrace it, just hang on to it. I definitely support that.

So, thank you Thank you any further questions? Okay, I'll open it up for Commissioner comments deliberations, which I think we've gotten into a bit Commissioner Westcom I Think you guys thought I'd be probably last everyone would jump in.

I very enthusiastically support this project. I think it's great. It's going to double the number of people and it takes care of hopefully a significant portion of the waiting list. And as Commissioner Peterson said, it's just a real big need in our community. So I commend you all. Great team. I think you did great work on the studies and the in the traffic, in the parking. The traffic study was compelling, I thought, to support the project. So look forward to seeing it built. I don't know what color it's going to be. Paint it. Paint it pink and blue or something. No, but it's going to be a great project. I do like the little red schoolhouse one, though. I think that was pretty good. So thank you very much for being here, and I can totally support it. Thank you, Commissioner Wardlow.

I want to echo the comments of my fellow commissioners. I am very excited about this project. I want to commend Cottage for the work that they do. I hear all the time from nurses and folks that work at Cottage the significant benefit that this child care center provides. I've had a few friends that have gotten their kids in, and I've had a few friends that haven't gotten their kids in, and so I'm really excited to see that you guys are doubling the amount of folks that are going to be able to attend this project. Again, I only hear very positive things, and I think this is a really vital service for our community. I wish we could get it a little bigger so that all the kids could get in. I know that your lottery system is highly sought after, so I really appreciate what you all are doing. And I do agree, you know, I think I'm a little concerned about the impact we'll have on parking, but this is much better and greater good, so I'm excited to see that. Obviously when you drive in this neighborhood, parking is a is an issue. But at the end of the day, this is a huge community benefit, and I really, really appreciate the work that you guys are doing. And I hope that in the future we can even grow it maybe even more, because I know that everybody wants to get into this vital service.

So thank you all.

Thank you. Commissioner Barnwell.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, well, me too. I just think you guys are the gold standard when it comes to how a company is run, how you watch out for your employees, how you provide housing like you did up at the old St. Francis Hospital. All of that sort of stuff is a model for other large companies to follow. And this is another example. The Red Barn, I mean, are you kidding me? Don't we have a purple building over there? Isn't one of those things purple? Lavender. Well, being a male of the species, that's all purple as far as I can tell. But so, yeah, and paint it red. I think I agree with Commissioner Bauke. It looks kind of like a schoolhouse, you know. I mean, if you're going to be one, be a big red one. So congratulations on all that. As I think about the parking, I think it may be, excuse me, the drop-off parking, it's probably a management issue. more than it is anything else. And that's going to be talking to the parents, you know, and making them understand how this thing works. But I would suggest keeping a close eye on it. Because they are small children, and you're not going to hurry up parents. You know, they have a very strong bond with when they pass their kid to the next person. But you'll figure it out. So anyway, excellent design, architecture, et cetera, et cetera. Fully supportive. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Commissioner Bauke.

For sake of time, I'll say ditto as to my fellow commissioner's comments. Definitely thank you for your efforts on this, and it's definitely such a benefit to the community. And I do agree with Commissioner Barnwell about the parking issue. As a grandparent that now has an infant that now goes to daycare, the time in which parents spend before they let go, especially the one-, two-, three-year-olds, it can be a long time. especially depending on the mood of the child that particular day, because sometimes they get very clingy. So I would definitely suggest you keep monitoring or maybe talk to As part of your orientation process, tell folks that, you know, it's moving a little slow this week, so can we pick it up a little bit? Just keep a management thought on that. And I commend Mr. Cornell with his design. It really does feel like a little red schoolhouse, and I'd like to see it stay that way. So definitely will be supporting the project. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner DiLuccio.

Yeah, I agree. That's more an operational issue as far as dealing with the parking and moving it along and just monitor it, and I'm sure you do that. I have to commend everyone, Cottage Hospital, for all you do, and in fact, I know you keep evolving, and you will be putting some more employee housing on the LaVena Street. As far as the design goes, I'm not commenting on the color. I think it's outstanding, and it's interesting how the design review spent so little time on it. They They were very pleased with it, but it didn't go on the hearing that long on it. So I don't know if that's good or bad, but you'll have to go back to them. So I just want to congratulate you guys and look forward to seeing this built because we obviously have the need for this for children's community care. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Peterson.

Yes, thank you again for all that you do here at this project and also echoing what my fellow commissioners have said about how you treat your employees and how you're thinking about housing. It's very good. We don't have an opportunity to vote on projects with this much impact usually, so the correct vote is yes, and I'm looking forward to doing that.

Thank you. And I'll add my ditto as well, especially for the parking demand study. That was the only question that I had after reading everything and there was the study. So you answered those questions. Also just want to point out that this is a community benefit project and it's a true community benefit project. I think we see some projects that call themselves community benefits that are not so much. So I just really want to appreciate that this is a true community benefit project and Cottage is a community benefit in itself and an anchor institution. So thank you for continuing to bring these types of projects to us. So with that, I'll ask staff if you can project the proposed actions. And I believe we're being asked to make findings outlined in the staff report, including environmental review, development plan, and conditional use permit. So I'll ask for a motion.

Thank you. Madam Chair, I would move that we approve the project, make the findings in the staff report, and it's all subject to the conditions of approval.

And I believe that I'll ask for an amendment to that to include the number 4 to the 48 box and 1C1.

Correct the tree count in that one point.

And also eliminate the part about per Bill Spiewak's recommendation. Since that's not his. Eliminate it, yes. Yeah. It has to be taken out. Eliminate the reference to it, yes. Right. Thank you.

So I have a motion. Do I have a second? Oh, yeah.

I'll second it.

Okay. And then I do have a comment from Ms. Arciniega.

If you could also include in your deliberations on that motion whether or not the commission intends to amend the condition about the short-term parking green curb to change it from Monday to Friday to Monday through Saturday. Okay. Just to clarify, as written the intention is that Monday through Friday it is time limited and allows residents to park in that location on the weekends unlimited to time. A change to Saturday would make that time restricted on Saturdays as well. So if you could clarify if that's part of your motion.

As the maker of the motion I'm familiar with that living in downtown and I think We need to leave it Monday through Friday so that the neighbors can park longer than 15 minutes on Saturday. So I don't think there's a necessity to make a change to that.

And all the seconders?

Even if it's painted green, they can park there more than 15 minutes on Saturday? Correct. Yes.

There will be signage stating that. You can. Yes.

I can too? OK. All right.

So we have an amended motion and several people who seconded it. So I'll assume that that's been accepted. Yes, are there any further comments on the motion, Commissioner Barnwell?

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to compliment the architects. There was a drawing up here like two seconds ago, and in the lower right-hand corner of the drawing, you have a little compass rose that says what we consider to be north. See in the lower right-hand corner there where it says Project North? Man, I compliment you. I think that's great. Boy, does that ever come up. So thank you for that.

All right. So we have a motion on the floor and a second. Any further discussion on the motion as amended? Ms. Carman, can we please have a roll call vote?

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'll begin with Commissioner Wardlow. Yes. Commissioner Barnwell? Yes. Commissioner Wiskin? Yes. Commissioner Bauke? Yes. Commissioner Peterson? Yes. Vice Chair DiLuccio? Yes. And Chair Boss? Yes. Commission passes. Thank you.

Thank you. And this action is appealable for 10 calendar days. We'll now close that item and move on to our administrative portion of our agenda, beginning with committee and liaison reports. Begin with the staff hearing officer liaison report. Commissioner DiLuccio.

I actually have one. There was a hearing officer yesterday, there was a hearing, and it was just a very short meeting. It had to do with 4446 Ocean View Avenue is to approve a modification for offsite parking and a coastal development permit.

4446 Ocean View Avenue? Yeah.

I don't know where it is exactly. It does say Ocean View Avenue on the project description.

Thank you.

Do we have any other committee or liaison reports?

I have a story. I should have actually done a site visit on that Ocean View Avenue next time. On January 28th, they did a concept review for 33 East Cannon Bedeo, the Librero Theater, for construction of a new three-story, 10,893-square-foot multi-use building addition behind the theater on Anacapa Street. And that's going to come before the Planning Commission for a development plan for the new non-residential floor area and findings for building height at 46 feet.

Thank you. Any other committee or liaison reports? We'll move on to the discussion on subcommittees and workshops. A reminder that the intent of this agenda item was to make space for discussion about active work products, such as programs and policies, not specific housing projects, under the purview of Planning Commission, which must be agendized. To that end, commissioners can request information for future items for discussion immediately prior to adjournment. So this would be that space if there are requests for information for future items. Commissioner Barnwell.

I think I understood what you just said.

Is this where... We can ask to agendize.

Okay. It would be nice if we could begin to assess the... city-owned land already owned by the city and the possibility of that land not being at its highest and best use and being a potential for some place to put up housing. And so that would, I guess, be an inventory of city parcels and a discussion surrounding that. I think that'd be a great thing for us to do. And I know that the city council, I think the city council would like to have that. I've talked to some council members and I THINK THEY'RE BEHIND THE PROGRAM ON IT.

THANK YOU. I BELIEVE THAT'S COMING WITH THE ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT IN APRIL. COMMISSIONER WISCOMB.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO THANK MS. ARCENIEGA FOR OUR LUNCH PRESENTATION TODAY. I THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY VALUABLE. I THINK YOU WORKED VERY HARD ON IT, AND IT WAS VERY HELPFUL. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? It is now 2.43 p.m. This concludes our February 5th Planning Commission hearing. Our next meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, February 19th, not the 12th. So we will see you in two weeks. Thank you.

Game changer for me.