Planning Commission, Cac & Pros - Regular Meeting

Good evening. How about that? Good evening and welcome to the regular planning commission meeting of the Sonoma Planning Commission. It's uh April 16th at six o'clock. And if uh we could get a roll call, please. Yes. Commissioner Willers here. Commissioner Barnett here. Commissioner Gorman Jenkins here. Commissioner Donbach here. Vice Chair Nent here. Chair Hyrick here. Thank you. I'd like to point out that Commissioner O'Neal is absent from tonight's meeting and we wish her good luck on our race this weekend. Thank you. So joined. Okay. Okay. At this time, is there a motion to approve the agenda?

So moved. Second. Um, thank you. Roll call, please. Commissioner Wellers, yes. Commissioner Barnett, I. Commissioner Gorman Jenkins, I. Commissioner Donbach, yes. Vice Chair Nent, I. Chair Rick, I. Thank you. The motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. At this time, we'll rise for the pledge. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the stands nation.

All right. At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on tonight's agenda. It's recommended that members of the public keep their comments to three minutes or less. For items appearing on the agenda, the public will be invited to make comments at the time the item comes up for commission consideration. Upon being acknowledged by the chair, please step to the podium and speak into the microphone. Begin by stating and spelling your name. At this time, does anybody have public comment? Thank you. Please step forward, sir. State your name. Hello, my name is Marvin Brookke. Am I on the clock? Yes, sir.

I'm on the clock. Okay. I am a a resident at 487 Angler. Uh I'm coming here to discuss Vineyard Crossing project by City Ventures. Uh I want to I sent each member I didn't send each member. I sent the city council and the planning commission emails this afternoon reflecting uh a meeting that occurred today between Michael Brewer and Kelsey Barnett of City Ventures with uh Doug Michael who's a resident in the area. Doug does not represent anybody and neither do I. I'm a concerned citizen. I felt it was important at this time to discuss some issues related to the project. It is my understanding at this point they have not submitted a formal application yet and I've been in discussions with Jacob Dunn who's kept me informed on the project. I wanted to highlight some of the things from this email and you could comment on them and take them in. Uh again I don't I can't verify it. This is the message he sent out. I'm going to cherrypick some of the key paragraphs. You could read the whole thing. This is one of the paragraphs. This is City Ventures. Again, they haven't applied yet. It turns out City Ventures is being pushed by the city to make this development as high a density as possible. Apparently, some city council members and the city planner, not sure who that might be, are pushing the this parcel remain designated mixuse, which it is use with a divi revised density of 15 minimum to 25 max per acre, 25 denser than the current units, 0 to 20 per acre. It's my understanding that the city council does not have that arbitrary power to just change that. So that's again Doug Michael's interpretation of what he heard. Another area that I will read directly, it says,

"It turns out that City Ventures has been pushing back against the density that the city is mandating." In other words, it sounds like there's been a communication between the city and city ventures about this project that the application has been was needed to be revised, hasn't been resubmitted yet. And it talks like city ventures might be looking to reduce the density. They're implying that the city council and somebody on the planning commission is pushing pushing for higher density. Names aren't named. Okay. So Doug is responding as if we in the community have to push harder. Uh another part is they also believe that they will not have to go through a squa EIR given the emergency evacuation route assessment report which established that that property is in a choke point. I hope that the uh city council will incorporate that in their general plan. But most certainly I hope that that safety issue is incorporated in any EIR. Again, another quote. Uh, this is city ventures would like to meet anyone interested to discuss the plan. I would like to see it downsized. This is Doug. But apparently the city planner has reluctantly agreed to support the 40unit plan. I'm stunned to hear that there's how can you support a plan that hasn't even been submitted yet? Uh, basically I'm very concerned about the fact that these discussions may have occurred. Uh, I can't say for sure that Doug interpreted his meeting with Kelso Barnett and Michael Brewer properly, but I've sent all of you the emails. There's a stream of conversations between Michael Brewer and Doug about meeting. Uh, I totally object to the whole project. Our neighbors object. Our neighbor who lives right next to it, who has a huge property, objects. So, I just

wanted to get this out there for for everybody to understand. Now, I don't know if you could respond to it at the time, but again, bottom line, they're saying conversations have gone on between the city and city ventures. Names weren't named, uh, but it says a city planner. I don't know if they're referring to you, Jennifer, or what, but we as a public think we have a right to know if there are discussions going on about a project where the application has even gone forth. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. And to your point, sir, we are unable to respond to Okay. Thank you.

I have sent the full stream of emails to the city planning email and to the planning. Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate your comments. Are any other members of the public here to address the commission tonight on items not appearing on the agenda? Okay. And with that, we will close public comment. Moving on down to item 5.1, consideration.

I'm missing a page. No, you miss Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, you got me. You got me. You did good. Ah. Okay. Moving on to the public hearing. Item 4.1. Oh, excuse me. We'll move on to the consent calendar. Item 3.1, receive the minutes from the regular planning commission meeting on March 19th. Do motion to approve.

Did I unless anybody would like to pull anything. I can I entertain a motion. So move. Second. Roll call, please. Commissioner Willers, I'm going to abstain. I wasn't here. Commissioner Barnett, I. Commissioner Orman Ogor Jenkins. I. Commissioner Donbach. Yes. Vice Chair Nent. I. And Chair Wyrick. I. Thank you. The motion passes.

Okay. Uh, at this point I'll close the consent calendar and now we'll move on to the public hearing. Item 4.1, discussion, consideration, and possible action to approve a use permit for the use of three suites on the first floor for a meeting hall and offices on a mixeduse property at 430 West Napa Street. Is there a staff report?

Yeah, evening commissioners. Jacob Dunn, associate planner. And as stated, I will be talking about the item for a use permit for a meeting hall and offices at 430 West Nap Street. The property is located in the West Napas Noma Corridor. It's on a 13,000 square foot property and zone mixeduse. It's also surrounded by residential and mixeduse properties. Uh the project proposes an interior remodel of the first floor which will include the removal of some shared walls within the suite E. Give a second. Okay, we're good. Okay. Uh, so there's going to be some removal of some shared walls within suite E so that they can expand the space to be used for a meeting hall which will be utilized by Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. Uh a new shared entryway will be constructed between suite F and the proposed suite G on the other side of the uh first floor which will be operated by the same tenant which is uh a line recovery centers and that's going to include specialized health um wellness and behavioral health uh work. And then there's also going to be a new entry constructed at the rear of sweet G. So this gives you the elevations for the uh southside which is on the west Napa street. That's

4:30 4:30 West. I can when I here, let me go back to this one here, which is next to Fourth Street West. It's on the corner there.

Yeah. So, uh, that front that front face will remain the same. Uh, and then here's the north elevation that's on the faces of the parking lot. And there will be a new doorway constructed at the spot that has the red uh square there. So these floor plans uh show you the removal of those walls um marked in yellow which will open up that suite E for the meeting hall and then the shared doorways where they'll be constructed as in red uh for suite F and then proposed suite G and then you can see the red doorway at the back for the suite G as well. So I wanted to bring it up as a point of discussion. Uh the site currently lacks alternative transportation uh facilities for the first floor units as well as the second floor units which are residential. Uh I wanted to bring this forward for discussion just to consider how the standard should be applied either to this project if the applicant feels um that they're capable or on future projects because the code doesn't specify when this should be applied. Uh instead it just states that um it states that a new use um bic bicycle parking standards sorry state that each land use shall provide park bicycle parking. It doesn't say new it just says each um it doesn't specify when um when it should be applied. So I thought with the intro in introduction of this new use of like a meeting hall that it might be for consideration. Um, and then based on the proposed land uses there, uh, with the offices and meeting hall, they would require two long-term and two short-term spaces. Um, that's not including the residential land use given that that's already existing. It's not changing at the moment. Uh, so I didn't include the number of spaces that would be required for that. Um, but in accordance with the findings, the proposed project encourages residential and pedestrian presence through these mixed uses. Uh, the use is consistent with the zoning district and complies with all of the development standards. It's also compatible with the previous uses which were offices um and the

neighboring uses in the vicinity and then the project also involves um minor changes to the structure that don't aren't expected to impair the character of the surrounding area. Uh so staff is recommending planning commission approval of the use permit for the meeting hall and offices at 430 West Napa Street. We are available for questions and I believe the applicant is available as well. Thanks. Uh thank you Jacob for your staff report. Uh questions by the commission. Sure. Don't the order doesn't um bother me either way. Is the applicant present wishing to address the commission? Come forward, sir. Thank you.

Hello everyone. I'm Hello everyone. I'm Michael O'Hayen, spelled O H A Y O N, and I'm the chief operating officer at Align Recovery Centers and one of the managing members of the new entity that recently purchased the building. Thank you for being here.

My pleasure. Um, I think in general this uh this is an opportunity to really offer uh benefits to the the community and to the city of Sonoma. Um there are a number of residents that are being displaced from the community center and the AA meeting now. Um they don't have a home to go to and they've got the clock is ticking. I think they have six weeks to be out of the community center. So um this approval uh will allow them to uh occupy that space. They're going to be coming with some building permits I think very quickly here um to ask permission to demise the interior walls um and and uh be able to set up shop. They've been in the community center for 40 years. Um so this, you know, this is a good move for them. It's also all in all um a wonderful opportunity with us put bringing in an outpatient program uh which is sorely lacking. The closest ones are um I believe in Valleo and in Santa Rosa. So, this would allow people um the part of that is also we're looking at bringing in a DUI program so that um residents who unfortunately suffer DUI can uh a DUI conviction can can take their classes locally as opposed to having to drive out of town, which of course is doubly difficult when you don't have a driver's license. So, um so the hope is that uh you permit us to come in and do the good work that we're hoping to do.

Great. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. While you're standing, before you sit down, we'll take questions from the commission and some may be addressed to you if that's okay. Commissioner Barnett,

what are the proposed hours of operation? So, um, for both, uh, AA and the IOP offices, um, I think AA starts classes around 7:30 or their first meeting, I think it's at 7:30 a.m. Uh, and the last one is typically 7:30 p.m. They do around the holidays run what they call the Alcathon, uh, which is an overnight thing, um, that very few people really attend, particularly overnight, but they're there to help support. Other than those you know, I think three days a year. Um, it would typically be 7:30 a.m. to about 8:30 p.m.

8:30. And, um, has, uh, how do the residents upstairs feel about this use and the potential for activity there into the, you know, 8:30, 9:00 range? because it'll break up at 8:30 and then people will talk and walk out into the parking lot and get in the cars and all the rest of it. Sure. So, how did the residents feel about it? Um, well, we've not obviously there was a notice on the door and notifying all of them and we did um I'm not sure if the city did. I would assume you sent letters, but uh I also did notify them of tonight's hearing. Mhm.

Um there's been no comment. Uh ultimately, um right now there are only two residents, uh two sets of residents upstairs. Two of them are vacant. Um one of them is being taken by my wife and I shortly and the other will be taken by one of our employees. So I think we're probably okay on that front, particularly if we're on that side of the building. That's correct, sir. Thank you. Any other commissioner questions? Uh Commissioner or Vice Chair N, please. What is the status of the building? Um it it was a um Matson owned property and did it um and it was in the bank bankruptcy pool. Has it has it been sold?

We just closed escrow this past Friday now. Fabulous. Congratulations.

Um that's great news. And then it looks as though um and maybe this was pre you guys coming in there, but it looks like there's a there's been a lot of demolition going on in that building. Um yes. Uh what's happened is a u a prior tenant in the commercial space that we're looking to occupy and do some work at um apparently thought it would be a wonderful idea when they removed the refrigerator to take that water supply line and instead of capping it or turning off the valve, they folded it in half and put a rubber band on it and stuck it in a garbage can. And they thought that would probably work pretty well. Uh I'm not sure how long that was the case. It appears that somewhere around the first of the year um that rubber band broke and it flooded the suite. And so the prior owners um hired remediation company. They opened the walls. They had to open up all the walls in that suite. Thankfully, it didn't get outside of that suite. Um but they had to open up all the walls like anywhere from two to four feet up. bring in um specialists to test the air, make sure mold remediation and everything else took place. So, that's all been done. And so, it kind of looks like a jacko'lantern now at night when when the lights are on. So,

and is it your company that is the purchaser of the Uh, yes. I'm one of the one of the partners. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Any other questions? Do we know what the use was prior to your acquisition? uh offices. I think one one was a doctor's office or a dental office at one point. Um I think prior to that it was a hospital um way back when and then uh well way back to 91. Um and then uh and I believe Matson kept a property management office there as well, I'm told, but I don't I don't know for sure. To answer your question, it was um it was formerly the um health center,

right? Okay, great. Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Any questions of city staff? No. No, but I'll make a motion. Okay. Oh, public comment. You You were making a motion for public comment, right? Okay. Well, motion approved. We'll have public comment. So, at this point, I'd open public comment for this item. Any member of the public in attendance wishing to address the commission on this item can do so now. Okay. Seeing none close public comment and I'll bring it back to the commission for discussion or a motion. Commissioner Barnett,

I will make a motion. I actually I'm sorry I missed you.

Yeah. Before we make a motion, I I wanted to address the bicycle situation and you know given First of all, I appreciate what you're doing. Thank you. But I'm thinking about the clientele as you just mentioned and it it probably there are people who will arrive on a bicycle. So I would like to suggest uh a motion to include the the suggested amount of bicycle parking um for this uh before we make the the motion. And the motion would be to approve with the addition of the suggested number of bicycle parking expansions.

Yes. Um so the the um so there's two parts of this. So the first is the um it's two basically two regular spaces and then the two of the enclosed spaces. So do we want to just do four open and make them okay? Yeah. And then is that okay if I would welcome Yeah. I would welcome the applicant back and give you the floor. Do you have any intentions of installing bike parking regardless or

Well, it was news to me. Okay. Um, having said that, I'm okay with four open spaces. Uh, the the enclosed ones can be rather expensive and we're not um, you know, it's not a real estate or a legal office or anything. We we run on a budget. So, Okay. I have a question for staff. How how has the bicycle parking uh component been applied in the past? Do we have any historical precedent for how we've applied that? I I understand your representation that it was applied to uses. Um but how has how has that condition been applied in the past?

We've been um applying it to new developments as they come in.

Okay. So the question is change of use um could trigger that if that's the intent when with our developments that currently exist today and it would allow for the ability to put some bike parking in certain spaces. Um if that is the intent or a policy direction that we want to do. Also, another thing is with the long-term spaces, it's it does state in the code. It's just that they need to be covered. It doesn't necessarily state that they need to be locked in. So, that was just another when I um included that. I think having just four standard is pretty consistent still even with long-term because long-term is just really for weather protectant protection. So,

okay. Do any other members of the commission have opinions on whether or not to condition the approval upon the installation of bicycle parking? Commissioner Willers?

Well, I I certainly um I I think the open open bike an open bike rack that contains four is the proper solution here. The site plan's really constrained. Um going to be difficult to find even a room for a rack um other than in the front of the building. So long-term boxes are kind of in my mind kind of not a good thing to require of this project. Um all the changes of use at this building over the period of time since it's been built have never had that requirement brought upon it. Basically a new requirement. Any other thoughts? Yeah, I'll just say that given the precedent of applying the bicycle parking standard to new development, I I don't know that I'd be comfortable conditioning the approval of this use permit based on the inst, you know, the installation of bike parking. I accept the applicant's um representation that he intends to do it anyway. Um I I don't think I'd support conditioning the approval on his installation of bike parking. Um, but we have a motion on the floor.

Is there a second for the motion? Uh, I'll second it. But I'm sorry. Right. I withdraw my second. Okay. I'm sorry. Is um Commissioner Donbach, do you have an alternate motion or is there any other alternate motion presented at this point? Well, I was going to move to approve the project with the incorporation of four exterior um non long-term bicycle parking spaces or a rack. I believe that was Commissioner Donbach's motion.

Oh, condition conditioning the approval of the installation of four bike racks. I'm doing great tonight. Well, so am I. We're on the same page. Verbally referred. The applicant is going to Yes. So fine. I will again second the motion if it's still viable. That's been rejected. Yes. We have to start over. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, it hasn't been rejected technically um because you haven't voted. So, we had a first a motion and a second because the second was pretty much the first. So, we're going to go with that as a second.

So, there can be an alternate motion on the floor and then that one will be voted on first. If there's no alternate motion, we can call you can ask for the vote to be called. Okay. Is there an alternate motion? I will make a motion to approve the use permit as it's proposed. Second. So then the second motion is now the one that's on the floor and called for the vote. Okay, we have a the last motion. There's a second to my motion. Can I get a roll call, please? Yes. Commissioner Willers? No.

Commissioner Barnett? Yes. Commissioner Gorman Jenkins. I. Commissioner Donbach. No. Vice Chair Nent. I. And Chair Wick. All right. The motion does not carry. Oh, yeah. Okay. I'm sorry. The motion carries. I I feel like I should have brushed up on Robert's rules of Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. The motion carries. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It did. Yes. Correct.

I swear your city government is sometimes competent. I I'm I'm quite sure I've been happy with staff. Okay. For everyone. Your your use permit has been approved. Thank you. Thank you all very much. Have a great night. Okay. with those gymnastics. We will we will move right.

We will move along to item 4.2 discussion, consideration, and possible action to approve a variance for reduced garage setbacks in a larger driveway at 863 Hayes Street if there's a staff report.

Absolutely. So, as you stated, this is for a variance for reduced garage setback and a wider driveway. 863 Haze properties located in the central west planning area. It's about 8,700 square feet and zoned residential low density. It's also surrounded by residential properties. The applicant will be constructing a single family home in an accessory dwelling unit on a vacant parcel. They're requesting a variance for a twocar garage that would be placed at the front of the residence that would extend out 24 ft. Uh the standard for garages in the zoning district is a 5 foot setback from the front of the residence. Uh so the variance is also necessary uh for the width of the driveway as well which is proposed at 20 ft and the standard is 14. This site plan here provides some of that perspective of the property that helps you identify its constraints. At the rear end of the property you're going to see this 15t easement. This is the line here which requires a further setback for that ADU which is right here. This reduces the rear yard space available. So placing the garage 5 ft from the front front of the residence would require a reconfiguration of the structures on the parcel and reduce the front and rear yard. The applicant's requesting a variance to place that garage um as shown here to preserve that front and rear yard space. And the applicant would also like to have a wider driveway uh to make it better for access and uh more space for accessibility. So here's an image of the street facing north from the vacant parcel. You can see that on this street there's uh all these houses have garages at the front. Uh the one on the furthest left with the windows. It does have a garage entry on the uh north side. You just can't see it from this angle. Here's looking south. The vacant parcels at the farthest left. Uh and these are those same houses, just a different perspective of them. And this is across the street. So there was a housing development there that has garages that were all built in the rear. Uh none of these houses have garages accessible from the front. Uh but just giving you a full view of the full street.

Let me go back for you. So we got we got uh West MacArthur Street and then there's uh Fifth Street West on the furthest to the uh west as well. County. That is correct. Good.

Cool. Okay. So, here's uh just some views of the the this isn't for design review, but just to show you the east and west elevation. That's the front on the top, the rear on the back, or sorry, the front on top, the back, the rear on the bottom. Sorry, that was so weird. Uh, north and south elevation. So, each side of the home was mixing that up. Uh, and so in accordance with the findings, uh, the adjustments consistent with the general plan and preserves uh, the tree on the property as well as eliminates a gap in the sidewalk because of front uh, frontage improvements on that street as well. the property faces uh special circumstances that limit the available space for development and granting the variance would allow better use of the overall space. Uh the adjustment wouldn't grant any special privileges that the neighbors aren't already priv entitled to and the variance wouldn't negatively impact the public health safety or welfare. So staff recommends planning commission approval of the variance for reduced setback uh driveway setback and a larger driveway at 863 Haiti Street. And we're available available for any questions. I believe the applicant is also here to answer any questions as well.

Great. Thank you very much, Jacob. Do any members of the commission need to disclose any exparte communication with the applicant? Seeing none. Okay. Uh does anyone have questions for Jacob based on his presentation? Seeing none, uh I believe the applicants in the audience. Would you are you interested in addressing the commission on on anything or there's no requirement? Seems pretty straightforward. Yeah. Well, come on up. If you just state your name, sir, and talk into the microphone, I'd appreciate.

Yeah. Andrew Lanter. Ler. Um 63 is the lot I bought with intent to build. My son lives next door at 855 Hay Street and basically I wanted to live there because of the two granddaughters. I just lost my wife December 7th 24. Very sorry. And u and I have a cold. My um I just really want to build it. And given all the other houses I've seen on that street, the garages are pretty straightforward and except for across the street with the new smaller I don't know what they call them, condominiums or town houses. So, um I know it's all give and take. Um I believe all the other houses have a 12oot variance and we're required to have a 15oot variance. um set back where yeah sorry um easement easement so I don't truly understand all the reasoning for that but uh I do want to build

great thank you very much I appreciate it thank you guys do any members of the commission have any questions for the applicant no okay thank you sir I appreciate it thanks uh do Any members of the public want to come forth and address the commission on this topic? You come up and state your name, please.

My name is David Lanter. L T E R. Um, do you want to pull up the picture of that sycamore tree? So, that tree uh it's on the southeast corner. It's the only tree on the lot. Um, the way we uh designed the building and everything was to stay away from that tree so we don't got to cut into the roots. Also, you know, with insurance companies having the tree hang over your house and everything. So, we'd like to keep the tree and the variance would help us uh do that. Great. That's it. Thank you. I appreciate it.

Okay. Seeing no other members of the public in attendance, I will bring this back to the I will close public comment. Bring this back to the commission. Um, any members of the commission have any comments? Okay. Is there a motion? I'll make a motion to approve the variance um as submitted with the findings in the staff report. Okay. Is there a second? I'll second. Roll call, please. Commissioner Willers, yes. Commissioner Barnett, I. Commissioner Oberman Jenkins. Hi. Commissioner Donbach. Yes. Vice Chair Nent. I. Chair Wyrick. I. Thank you. The motion passes unanimously. Congratulations.

When do you break around? Tomorrow.

Okay. Great. That concludes tonight's Thank you. That concludes tonight's public hearing. We will move on to item 5.1, consideration and direction on the 2026 planning commission annual work plan. Director Gates,

good evening and commissioners. Um, let's disconnect. So, this was a continuation from our last meeting. Um, and it's our annual work plan. Um, All right. So, what we're looking to do is to update our work plan from the last moved it. my HDMI connection is very sensitive. Um so the first item on the uh work plan from last year that would continue into this year for my which is my recommendation would be the general plan update because we're still in process though all elements have been reviewed and submitted back um to the consultants. There will be another round of review as well as the environmental document coming forth and when that does um we'll do that as part of this group.

um for this ad hoc which I forgot to add Sheila so sorry about that. Um we also um will start the related code update. So that's what we're going to focus on quickly here is more on that side of things as we wait for the other documents to come forward. Um it is funded, it is consistent with our council priorities and again hopefully completed this fall. Um, the next item is and a really important one and I really need to spend more time on it, not going to lie. Um, is the housing element implementation. We did some of that this past year with some the adoption of some of the ordinances that we did at the end of the calendar year and we have some more to do. We've talked about um one of the items being that we hired uh somebody to assist us with the um inclusionary feasibility analysis as well as an update to our um affordable housing fee. Um so that is has been underway for about a year and a half. However, we are doing a comprehensive fee update and that fee will affect the actual impact. So, I need to get those fees kind of settled. Um, which I'm hoping to have a better understanding actually next week. Um, the finance committee is going to be meeting and we're going to be talking about fees again. Um, so I don't know if you saw it, but we did put out an announcement about the fees and published them. Um, so all of our proposed fees are available for review for all departments um or service areas. Um so once we get that we'll have that underway. So hopefully again this fall um we'll have an update for that

inclusionary ordinance and um as well as fees. The other items are some stuff that we need to do as far as updating our website. Um and then also there's additional code changes that need to be made. Outside of that for the afford the housing element implementation we have um community involvement activities and um I am working with the um district supervisor on creating something for the valley um around affordable housing and access um different needs that individuals may have in like a housing fair. Um so um hopefully again this that that will happen. Um it was going to happen earlier in the year, but I think with everything going on at at the county, it's put on hold a little bit. So, we'll see how that goes. Um and you will see the ADU ordinance this year for sure. Um the next item is affordable housing um in regards to the funding and that is all on me. That was my fault. I did not ever hold that meeting. I apologize. Um, and so I won't make you disband and I will I will put you back to work, promise this year, now that I'm not writing a report. Um, and then the other item is the um sign. Um, we should have actually we talked about it uh next month. You'll have one more study session with just the last bit of questions and then we're thinking that we'll have it all ready for you um for adoption in June.

That one's almost done. And then the last one which was added last year was the vacant structures and demolition by neglect. Um so again on me for not putting that one forward and getting that ad hoc going. Um but um we should be able to get that going this year. Um if that is still um something that we want to focus on. I did not add anything new at this point. I don't know if anything So this is where I open it up to you all. Um we did have on our kind of waiting list. Um, something that we need to do at staff is update our wireless to be compliant with federal laws. One that another one we talked about with fences and hedges. Um, the update to the tree removal ordinance. I am currently working with um Dave Jams, our parks director, to determine whether or not we're going to do an urban forestry management plan at all or this year. So, those are my questions. So, we're working through that. Um, we are right now also working on the budget um for the next fiscal year and so that will kind of help determine whether or not we actually undertake um that plan. And then the last thing was the night sky ordinance. This is the one that I would actually recommend that we bump up um because it's really coming apparent with some of these new projects um that we need to rewrite our lighting code

developments or properties and neighborhoods that are kind of

it would be it would be development um new development. So um it wouldn't be just the entitlement side of things but also the building code where we would enforce enforce any kind of lighting compliance. And so we wouldn't go around and impact people for their lighting that they've installed today, but if they were to replace it with new fixtures, then we need to make sure that they comply. So that would also have to comply with um the building code as well for energy standards. So that's when we would actually apply it for any existing structures. So for new structures though, this night sky ordinance I think is needed. I'm seeing requests for um though we do have it saying no uplighting. Um we're seeing more of that idea of uplighting and then also lighting everything versus what's needed to be lit question. So, in that vein, um, and and maybe it's just me, but I seem to think, um, I seem to see a lot of, um, kind of random lighting of trees and like all year long, not just Christmas lights up in your pine tree, um, but various and, uh, some of them are just downright like Right. Yeah. And then then they're, you know, what does the neighbor see as they're, you know, falling off to sleep and that kind

I can tell it. So So does this does that, does that fall under this like do we I mean,

right. So that's where we So we could enforce like the landscaping lighting and things like that um as well. Um so this is where we can get specific like we don't want you to light your landscaping. We want you to light because of security and for safety purposes and focus on that aspect of lighting. Um, architectural features you see lit palm trees like they get the ring around it and they light up in ours is lit year round. The other thing about it though is about timing, right? And so one of the rules about even our light, our lit tree is that it's supposed to turn off at night. Um I'm just gonna go on my little soap box.

Yeah, because what it is is all the lights do impact bird migration um at night. That's when they actually are doing a lot of that. And so um that's re one of the reasons why we want to make sure that lights are getting turned off or dimmed. That was something that um we've talked about with some of the lights like in the plaza area of just dimming them because we have businesses still open and we want some safety and security aspects. Um but those are the types of things that would be discussed in that ordinance. Um and what where we want to fall um goodness it's yellow at night like it has this yellow glow. Um and that's a temperature light temperature. So, we could have a whole lesson on lighting and discuss kind of what that looks like.

Okay, Commissioner Bernett, how's it going? I want to go back to this vacant structures that's on previous page. I think um I I would like to first of all know how we're defining a vacant structure. I think that's what we have to do. Okay. So, we haven't even haven't even scratched the surface on this. No. Okay.

This is one of those that have come up because we have underutilized structures and then we have structures that are boarded up and um and what are those differences and what are we looking to do? And um because we can't make somebody use their building or rent their building. No. What we can do obviously is um embark on a survey or study that reports back on the number and condition of quote unquote vacant or unutilized structures. In my excuse me

seems to me that that's going to be step one. I don't know if we have a small problem or a big problem. And part of the problem might end up being a definition of location like the Eer house on uh East Napa Street which has been boarded up now for well more than a decade. Um you know it's in a um it's in a key location. I mean it's it's visible. It's um it's not like it's on a side street up north of uh Napa Road, Napa Street and tucked away in a nonvisible location. So, is there going to be a lot to talk about in terms of standards and how we apply them? So, okay. Thank you.

Agreed. And I think I think that inventory might be a good first step to the extent that we could do that. To your point, the idler house now has a broken window which those of us who study criminal justice know that that has downstream impacts. Commissioner Nent, excuse me, Gorman. Well, that's no problem. I'm sure you're flattered. I am very much so. Very. We're just all doing really good.

I know. We're doing great tonight. Um, no, I I I just wanted to comment. Um, this this has come up. Um this has been brought to my attention by a number of residents. Um that particular structure um on West Napa is particularly upsetting to a lot of the residents. We also have I believe a craftsman stucco structure on Spain Street. Yep. And so I I would definitely like to see this prioritized. I believe you raised it um last year. Uh so strongly support this remaining on the priority list. and it looks like you've got a pretty um sizable ad hoc, but would be happy to be part of the development with this if it starts as a survey. Um but it from my prior reading, it it sounds like we need to ultimately develop an ordinance, but I would definitely like to see this um as as a priority for our work plan this year.

Thanks. Great. Uh Commissioner Dela.

Yeah, I'll go to the next page and I just want to offer support um I think for the night sky ordinance. I think that's incredibly important um for um maintaining our sense of place right now. Uh and also for the implications on on wildlife. So I I would be willing to be on that if it is an ad hoc or just to put it forward um to help flesh out that ordinance. Um, and then with regard to the tree removal, um, I what I'd love to propose is that once we do get the the tree inventory, once that's completed and you have a sense of where what the budget looks like, I think it just goes hand inand with ensuring that we kind of contain maintain that momentum around um our our tree health in in the city.

Great. I have a question. What uh Director Gates, do you do you think the bandwidth is for staff to be able, you know, or what is feasible in terms of escalating the as time permits items into um into the green that I think that we still have some some uh items remaining in there that need attention as well. Um I would say one.

Okay. And the reason why I say one is because we should be finishing up um the uh signs, excuse me. Um really soon. And then we're I mean it's going to take a lot of bandwidth to do the code update and that's going to be like a multi-year thing. We need to do what we have to do immediately. Um and then we can work on some of the things as we go. Um, one of the big things is like getting rid of planning areas potentially.

Um, so that's going to be part of that conversation. That's why I'm saying one. The other there's on our list that's not on this list that we are we are working on that Jacob's going to work on more quickly is we we have pieces of an urban a ordinance, but it needs to be together and cohesive. So, we have a section of our code that talk about beekeeping and chickens and things. Um, but it's not referenced in our development code. I just found it the other day because we had a code enforcement on chickens. Um, and so like I was like, "Oh, oh, look,

we got all this stuff." Like where did that come from? And so we need to just put it together nicely and then create it so that we can do more of that. what we when um when the planning commissioner approved the horiculture, you know, on a single family home, providing more opportunities for that to look correct um because we had to basically ignore one section of the code because it wasn't really applicable to a small small single family lot. So, how do we do that? So, that's where he's going to kind of comp compile all that, which should not take long um at all. So, but we wanted to get that one going, too. Okay. I just in light of everything going on in your department, I just want to be cognizant of

Yeah. And if there's other ideas, I'm fine to put them on the waiting list. Right.

Commissioner Miller. Well, I think, you know, I I think the lighting um one is an important one from a community level standpoint as well as an environmental standpoint. And I also think it's one of those ones that is relatively easy to adjust and get out of the way. So if you pick one and you can get it done quickly, you've achieved something. Um and it'll have I think it'll have substantial impact moving forward. It it definitely needs to be addressed. Um you know, in my neighborhood, um landscape lighting has become security lighting. In other words, it's on all night long and it's trees primarily, which means that it's uplighting ceilings in adjacent houses and it's not good. So anyway, I' I'd vote for that one being moved up to green. Okay. Thank you. Any other thoughts from the commission on escalating the night sky ordinance into the current goals? I I would be supportive as well for the reasons that my uh colleagues have mentioned. Are there there any other as time permit classified items uh that we haven't discussed that um there may be interest in escalating as well or we satisfied with? Okay. Director Gates, do you feel like you have a consensus on that?

Yep. So, I'll move night sky ordinance up and that'll be our new work plan and I will send emails out by May to every ad hoc committee. um is I saw two hands when we started talking about night sky that for an ad hoc but I don't um and those are the same too as the general plan. So and that code those code updates so I could just make it the same one unless there's somebody else here tonight that wants to to do that work on the night sky stuff. Is there any interest in uh sitting on a night sky ordinance at hawk?

Well, well, I I have I have no objection to naming commissioners Willers and Donach to the night sky ordinance ad hoc. Sounds good. All right, I'll lump it into the already standing ad hoc then. All right, that I have what I need. Thank you. Okay. Might might the priority uh of the vacant structures and demolition by neglect match that of the night sky ordinance or I I don't want to get too technical and ascribing uh priority levels to

No, I won't do I won't say one's more of a priority or another. That's why I say everybody will get the email from your for your individual ad hocs at the same time. Okay. And then it's up to us as ad like you guys as ad hocs and us as staff helping you through that. Great. Thank you. All right. Director comments and announcements.

Um so I just wanted to respond to the public comment tonight. I did send all of you guys the email. Um, it did go into our planning inbox, not to planning commission. Um, so I have forwarded that all to you guys so you can see what was said. Um, I I probably am the city planner that was stated in that comment. Um, so just as a reminder, our planning department, our our goal is always to bring you a project that um meets the code and that is approvable. Um, and that you know, as we get to know you all better and know how you comment on projects and things, we try to guide our applicants with that understanding. Um, as to the, you know, when projects come in, sometimes they the applicants change their mind and they go back to the table and when they do, we'll do and if it's a bigger like a big development, we'll do another study session on that project with whatever that revision looks like and be able to um give planning commission another opportunity to talk to um that new revised Um the the districts the zoning districts obviously set our density requirements and some some requirements don't have minimum densities but under the general plan process that we've undertaken. We've identified goals for our minimum density. So um that's how we're proceeding as we work with applicants as well as to inform them. That may not be the case right now, but that is something that uh planning commission and city council have identified to move forward as their minimum density. So, just wanted to give you guys an update.

Great. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Do you have any other comments or announcements?

Next Wednesday is the community meeting to talk about um historic resources in our community. So, this will um everybody's invited to come. It starts at 6. It's at the Vintage House. Um our consultant that's preparing the citywide historic survey um is going to present um what the project is, how does it work, um and then collect information from the community on um themes, historic themes that they know of. people, you know, basically this is the opportunity for everybody to talk about our history and um educate our consultants on what is Sonoma. So, it's going to be very exciting. I'm looking forward to it. Um and um we should be a two hour. They they've booked the whole two hours. They planned the whole thing out. So, um 6:00 to 8 um going to start pretty much on time. So, 22nd at Vintage six o'clock vintage house on Wednesday night. Um, I can ask Bob. I'll see um if he can um record it YouTube um at least the beginning part of the um because I don't know I don't know the format. The other part of the format is going to be um group work at tables and also on um boards around the room.

Great. That's exciting. Um, anything else, Director Gates? I don't think so. Um, so the consultant for the historic resources survey is um, Paige and Turble. Um, so they're the ones that also did our um, design guidelines for the city and they've done other um, district updates um, for us in the past few years. Um, and then we're also undertaking a historic landscape survey of the plaza park. Um, and that actually will be done in a couple of months.

Great. Exciting times for history. Okay. Commissioner reports and comments. Commissioner D, I just have a comment. Um, I appreciate that now you're putting the recommendations in the agenda and I just wanted to thank you all for holding down the fort under the circumstances that have just been, you know, we're going through with a change in our leadership. I will echo those sentiments. Any other commissioner comments?

I have a comment. Um, and just a um just a comment positive for you all. I've had the occasion of just recently in um people I know that have put forth projects and that they have just gone to the counter and have been treated very well and it had gone smoothly and they were so our streamlining I think is maybe starting to take effect and I'm hearing about it. So that's really nice. You patting yourself on the back? No, I'm I'm giving them the congratulations that they I mean you're clearly um you know

I've heard the same thing in the community. Yeah. Any other comments? Okay. I have a an announcement I suppose. Um I uh came across a communication from the Soma Valley Collaborative um that is advertising their Sonoma Valley housing affordability roadmap initiative. And tomorrow, April 17th, via webinar from 10 to 11:00 a.m., they are announcing their launch of their housing affordability roadmap. Um, and there's a there's like an overarching name for this.

Sonoma Valley Commons. Sonoma Valley Commons. Right. Can I make a comment on that? That's not the road map. As part of the road map, um, they have decided to create a uh nonprofit community development corporation that is focusing in the valley and that's the name of it. So very exciting. Okay. I just wanted to make everyone aware in case they were uh wanting to attend the webinar tomorrow that is all I have. Anything else? All right. A motion to adjourn. Motion to adjurnn.

Oh well. Let's keep it. Should we bring some stuff up? All right. No second needed.