Planning Commission, Cac & Pros - Regular Meeting

the planning commission meeting for October 16th at 6:00 pm. Uh, may we have the roll call, please? Yes. Uh, Commissioner Barnett, did you call Did you call my name? Yes, I did. I am present. Thank you. Sort of. Commissioner Nent, I'm a little spacey. Commissioner Orman Jenkins here. Commissioner O'Neal here. Commissioner Willers here. Chair Donbach here. Thank you. I would like to point out that Vice Chair Hyrick and youth member Patterson and alternate Latimer are all absent from this evening's meeting.

All right. Miss Carrie, would you like to help us lead the pledge of allegiance? I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States. Thank you. That was wonderful. Uh at this time, we will take uh comments from the public uh that uh are items that are not on the agenda tonight. Um and when you come to the podium, I would ask that you state your name and spell if necessary. Any comments from the public? Come on up. I think the temperature in here is perfect and you should leave it. Um, so I'm Carrie Gerster, Sonoma resident. Uh, you've all heard the concerns many times about the Sebastian land use thing. I won't re go through them. Um, I had a a few new points I'd like to make and then a couple of questions that, um, I'm hoping can get answered. I'll be here the whole time. I won't leave because I know that's bad. Um my my first new point is um that the proposed land use proposal um does seem to conflict with some of the key elements of the draft general plan. I submitted this feedback to the general plan alias uh specifically around maintaining and promoting Sonoma's historic character and attracting businesses consistent with its agricultural and cultural identity. Uh also conserving agricultural resources and minimizing conflicts etc. and also maintaining a safe and coordinated evacuation route. So I I don't really think the super dense proposal jives with that. Um, the second new point I'd like to make is that, um, from the

research I've done as an average citizen, uh, there seem to be plenty of alternatives and precedents that we can look into that have been successful in other places in the state of California as well as other states, um, that preserve existing agricultural land andor allow adaptive reuse of existing buildings. So, uh, for local serving purposes. So to name a few I'm familiar with um Farmstead in St. Helena. It's awesome. Um existing farmland. Um another one is the Barlo and Sebastapole. That place is also awesome. Um that is a good example of um reuse of industrial buildings. And obviously none of those have housings, so they're not, you know, perfect comparables, but it shows that um different things can be done here rather than just repave the whole thing with a bunch of dense housing. Um, the third point I'd like to make is that Oh, there's no clock. That's great. I can talk as long as I want. Um, I'm kidding. I'll keep it short. Um, so you uh you all seem to be very reasonable people. I've been coming to these meetings for nine months and I think everyone here has the community's best interests at heart. Um, but this land use decision really worries me because we're going to be stuck with that for the next 20 to 30 years. Uh, and I assume you all have all moved on in that period of time and I will still be here kind of grappling with the land use. So, um, I don't see why we would do this to our future selves when it seems like there are more reasonable alternatives out there. And then my my three questions, again, I'll be here the whole time. Uh, are first of all, these are probably for you, Jennifer. I see your pen. Um is there is there any reason we need to have a broad designation of density across the entire 20 acre site in the land use definition? Um could we instead say something like a certain percent of the land should be preserved for agriculture or open space and then the remaining percent uh can

have you know certain level of development or density on it. Um I believe other places have done this. Um but again I'm not an expert. Um my second question is um does a minimum number of housing units mean that every single acre has to have that minimum number of houses on it? Uh so we're currently at seven units an acre. So does that mean every single acre of the site has to have seven units of housing on it or is it looked at more in aggregate? And then finally is there um any timeline for revised or updated language um on the Soma mixeduse definition? Um, my understanding is that it is maybe being edited. I don't exactly know. So, I just wanted to get that clarified if I could.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Any other comments in the audience?

Nope. Okay. So, with that, we will move on to the consent calendar. Um the consent calendar consists of no minutes from our August and September meeting. So I would ask if anyone has any comments or changes to the consent calendar. Seeing no activity, I will assume that everything is okay with the consent calendar. Therefore, we'll move on to the public hearing item 4.1. Oh, I'm sorry. You're absolutely right. I'm just trying to Thank you. So, uh, Natalie,

Commissioner Barnett, is there a motion on the floor? Oh, I don't know. We did not do that. You are correct. So, I will I will move that we approve the consent calendar. Second. Now, roll call. Thank you. Commissioner Barnett. I. Commissioner um Nent, sorry. I Commissioner Ogorman Jenkins. Hi. Commissioner O'Neal. Yes. Commissioner Willers. Yes. Chair Donbach. Yes. The motion passes unanimously.

All right. Thank you colleagues for slowing me down. So public hearing item 4.1 is a discussion, consideration, and possible action to approve a use permit and design review for the permanent placement of an MRI trailer alterations uh to available parking at 347 Andrew Street and that is including action to approve a categorical exemption pursuant to section 15303 and 15311 of the state SQA guidelines. Madam Chair, one one point. I I actually have a conflict tonight, so I'll be recusing myself from this item, so I will step out. I live across the street from the house. All right. Thank you.

And I'll turn it over to staff once uh Commissioner Oman has exited the room. All right. Well, good evening, commissioners. I'm Jacob Dunn and I'll be talking about the use permit design review for the permanent MRI trailer at 347 uh Andrew Street. So, the trailer is located on Andrew Street on the north side of Sonoma Valley Hospital in the red box you see on the map there. The general plan use and zoning are dedicated as public and the property is not within any overlays. The hospital is within the central west planning area and sits on three and a half acres of land. This project proposes dedicating an MRI trailer as a permanent structure, which was previously approved as a temporary structure, and reopening two parking spaces on the Andrew lot. So, the site plan here shows that northern lot on Andrew Street with the trailer's dimensions in relation to the parking spaces there. And then you can also see the two parking spaces that they're proposing for reopening. The public land use doesn't have any specific development standards, but the general plan does include standards for site coverage and structure height. And the proposal wouldn't increase the site coverage on the lot or the heights of the property. So it wouldn't expand any non-conformities that exist for height. Um so this project could use some discussion regarding its design review which is required for improvements to non-residential properties visible from the public rideway. Uh, Sonoma Valley Hospital was previously or previously requested a permanent location for MRI facilities on Andrew Street and received a design review permit for the work in 2023. Uh, you'll see that the proposed construction of the new MRI building was located in that empty space on that first image there. And then the location was also ideal because of its connection to the hospital's uh, radiology department as well as a connecting path that already exists inside the hospital.

And then the street would have been provided uh pedestrian friendly facilities and uh paths of travel. And then the new building would have also provided ADA accessibility. So the new structure um also would have had added landscaping in front of the MRI edition and then made continued use of that drive-thru that's currently there where the emergency drop off was. Um although they never proceeded with this work and the emergency loading zone is left has been left untouched as it as it is now. Uh the area is now blocked as you can see in the second image where the cones are. It blocks off access for vehicles. Um and it's been unutilized for a few years. So staff is kind of requesting um some direction in regard to the possible improvements in that area that's in front of the temporary what would now be permanent MRI structure. And then um this might include in screening or buffering for the noise on site. And then we've also added a condition for repainting the trailer to be consistent with the design of the hospital and then the surrounding properties. Another topic for discussion is the uh available parking for the hospital. So as it is now there's an excess of available parking. You can see that in the in the site plan there with the satellite lots. There's four of them. the applicant has already met the required parking standards uh which is 109 spaces and they're providing a total of 175 spaces with these lots. Um and then there's also additional on street parking. So staff believes that the removal of the two spaces on Andrew Street uh if those were to no longer be utilized um that it wouldn't be very impactful. And if planning commission decides to remove those two spaces or make it so that Andrew Law isn't used, staff is requesting closure of that driveway access by either permanent removal or with some kind of semi-permanent landscape improvements like u planter boxes or something to

block off the entry um to to block off that access to vehicles there

which is currently cones. Um so in accordance with the permit findings, the use is consistent with the general plan by promoting infill development and that also supports the efforts of Sonoma Valley Hospital to respond to community needs. The MRI trailer is allowed on public properties with the approval of planning commission and complies with the applicable standards without the need for variances or exceptions. And the MRI trailer is compatible with the current use of the site as a hospital and then would further support their operations without negatively impacting uh the land uses surrounding it. And the hospital is also located between residentially zoned districts, but it serves the local community and aims to maintain a similar character to the surrounding area. So for uh accordance with the design review findings, the proposal is compliant with the applicable policies uh and regulations in the zoning district. The property doesn't expand on the previously approved temporary permit. Um but additional screening and buffering could improve the buff the noise on the site. Uh the project will not further impact the design of the property as the trailer is already located in a parking lot that's in a recessed area and conditions have also been added to for the repainting of the structure which we mentioned earlier um to be more adequate for design purposes and then the proposal is not going to cause any negative impact to public health, safety or welfare um and instead will increase opportunities for the hospital to serve the community. Uh staff is recommending approval of these permanent design review with the suggested conditions for the permanent placement of an MRI trailer and alterations to parking in accordance with uh state SQL guidelines sections 15303 and 15311. And then we have someone here that's with the hospital um that may be able to answer a few questions, maybe not all of them. Um but staff is also available for questions. Thanks.

Thank you. Um, and I'll just according to protocol just ask if there are any exparte conversations with anyone at the hospital or I didn't think so. Okay, thank you. So now we'll open it up for questions from the commission. Uh, Commissioner Barnett, thank you. I um, pardon me for either being dense or uninformed. Um, I don't recall the uh issue of the MIR approval placement previously on an agenda. When did that come before the commission? Are you talking in regards to the temporary one? Yeah. Uh, review.

Well, there was a design review in 2023 for a separate that is close to where this one is. It's on the other side of that uh driveway. Yes. Um and that was going to be for a permanent structure on built on but it never came before this commission before. Right. It went to the design review. Okay. Yeah. All right. So I haven't lost my mind. Um secondly, when this MRI is located in this if it is located in this location, is that going to mean the removal of the current MRI unit that's near the entrance of the hospital? No. So those MRI you're talking about the facilities on the west side of the property.

Well, it's it's on the Yes. It's near the a Those will So we'll have two MRIs. Yes. Units. So currently there already is two. There's the one in the northern lot on Andrew Street and then there's the one on the west end. Um and there the this proposal is to make that northern MRI trailer permanent. So they'll rem the the one on the west end will also remain but this one will also I was always under the impression that that that was an older machine and was going to be replaced by the newer technology but if you're speaking to the old MRI trailer that's been there for quite some time near the main entrance. There is currently no plan for that to be removed. I don't think but the unit that's in it is going to remain there.

I believe that that MRI is going to remain there. Yes. And what's the purpose of that since it's not since I assume the newer the newer unit's going to be improved? Um I couldn't I couldn't speak to that. Uh I just know that I haven't heard of any plan to get rid of that.

Okay. Um secondly, I want to address or get some more information about the noise issue. um having been subjected to an MRI from the inside um inside the MRI machine, it's a very noisy experience. To what extent does that what I'll refer to as hideous banging um uh how to what extent is that heard outside of a trailer or a container of the unit? Um, so I would have to direct um any questions along that manner to our architect who's calling in via Zoom. Uh, would it be possible to have him uh speak?

He actually hasn't joined, so unfortunately we can't have him answer at this time, but if he does join, I'll let you know.

No worries. And I'll also say just from being on site, um, I didn't get a chance to figure out what the sound was like during uh, testing when they were using it. Um, but there is some kind of like generator on the outside that does make continuous noise. Um, I didn't we don't I don't have the capability of checking the decibb when I was out there. But I would say in terms of screening and buffering, just anything could help. Um, that's why we kind of brought it to your attention of considering whether that should be added as condition or um, some kind of added buffering could potentially help in that situation. But um at least in regard to the outside portion, I I would say some tor some side some type of screening or buffering could assist in the the noise issue.

Okay. Um and uh the um parking spaces that are proposed for removal are basically in that space on the northern lot. They're actually proposed. Are they being used at all now? So, they're not being used now. They're actually proposing to reopen it. And that's part of staff's suggestion is that maybe we shouldn't reopen those, that we should consider um having more improvements to that portion of the lot. And why did why do you know why they want to reopen those two parking spaces? That I do not know. I haven't been given any reason for that. Okay. Well,

they meet the parking standards though. So, as as it is with questions and few answers. Thank you, Commissioner Wers. So, Jacob, um, how how is this unit accessed? How do you get into the MRI? Is it from the exterior or is it from from the inside where the lab is? I can answer that. It's from our main corridor. We have our egress from um when you you walk in the main entrance of the hospital, there is a corridor that you walk along to as you're going back to radiology. Yes, exactly. And then um we just go out through a door there by our central wing. So you're not planning to access this unit from those parking spaces.

No. So in the future um as part of this project um one thing that is going to be a big piece of it is our architect is designing um some kind of coverage be it like an awning or something like that so that in more inclement weather that since we're planning to have this be somewhat of a permanent structure with approval of course that uh patients will no longer have to go outside in inclement weather. will go straight from the the door in by that radiology in that central wing uh through your now new awnings that we hope to install as part of that project. So to kind of make it more of a permanent and comfortable thing. Okay. For our patients. Thank you.

Um clarification on the parking spaces. Did I hear there's a they required 109 and they've got 175? That is correct. So what are those? I'm I'm just curious what's the um are those excess parking spaces utilized or are there plans to you where where is that where are those parking spaces? So as Mr. Dunn has stated we have quite a few satellite parking lots around the hospital and uh they get they get utilized half-hazardly just kind of you know whatever is available. Um but I don't think there's any special reason for it just that we happen to have the available real estate and the you know available place to have that parking. So, uh, more is better.

Any discussion about what to do with that excess real estate parking? To my understanding, the plan is just to keep it as parking for now. That'd be something to consider. Yeah. Well, in the future, absolutely. and uh with um 2030 if you're not utilizing it and it doesn't seem to be that there's a need for it.

So uh just to give some clarity to that uh as part of their previous approval for the MRI trailer that's on the west end um and the redevelopment that they did with the landscaping and things with that parking lot that's on that west side. One of the requirements was to um increase the parking availability and create a parking plan which is where this uh the site plan for parking here came from. Um this was created in response to that project and they had initially this lot down here was not part um was not available for the hospital. Um and with that pre previous project they were able to gain access to that lot and since then that's when that lot has been opened.

Okay. I just think you know real it's um prime real estate. Uh, one more question on the actual um design and color and aesthetic of the of the unit. Um, are there plans to um incorporate I mean it's it's not very attractive right now in my estimation with the yellow and um and it's it's nor is the structure itself aesthetically pleasing. um plans to um shield it, paint it, any you know, is that all part of of your plans?

Uh yeah, absolutely. So, um one thing that we're looking at as part of uh making it more of a, you know, comfortable permanent structure would be to beautify the area in some way. So, we think, uh maybe the awnings and things like that will go, you know, some way to making it look like it belongs there. But uh as was mentioned during your review uh Mr. Dunn of um kind of how we got here, it was mentioned that the the hospitals requested to paint it like the color of the building at some point. And uh I believe that is a reasonable request and something that I can get with our architects and project team and you know make that part of it as well. Thank you.

I want to ask a few questions. Oh, go ahead. Is the generator permanent or is there plans to upgrade the power so the generator noise could go away? Um I wouldn't have any information on that one. Sorry. Um, a lot of uh a lot of this would be stuff that I would have to direct to our architect as they he's kind of the one that's uh driving the plans for this and I I thought he would be here tonight. But what I can do is I can commit to um bringing a lot of these concerns home especially about the decibb of the bar itself and uh working with our you know our project team and our architects to uh raise these concerns and then you know have some answers for you guys next time.

Commissioner Barnett. Yeah, just one further set of questions about the nature of the structure. So, this photograph we're looking at, um, is that existing there now? Yes, sir. Okay. And how long has that been there? I actually don't know. Mr. Dunn, would you happen to know this? The temporary MRI trailer, the yellow building that you see there, was installed um last year. Okay. When you say temporary, it was considered to be temporary. So you see on the left side. Yes.

So what used to be there was you can see kind of like a paint color differentiation on the wall. One's light and then dark. So there used to be a build a structure there. And in that area I think was the trash incinerator or something to that effect. And that's where the permanent MRI facility was going to go. And um however, that project has since been pulled. Um and they're asking to use this temporary facility now as a permanent facility. So the trailer would then remain as a permanent facility.

Okay. So the the other questions I would like you to direct to your architect to get us some answers because it doesn't sound like we're going to be able to complete this discussion tonight with a with an approval. at least it in so far as the absence of information um is what distinguishes the character of a temporary structure. And for example, its ability to abate noise generated internally from a permanent structure which would be designed um you know perhaps out of uh some cementitious material or concrete or something that would you know much more effectively um uh buffer the sound. This building and I can't tell from this photograph. It looks to me like to be a metal building. Is it metal?

That's correct. Yeah, it's like a containerized

like a container. So, so I I have very strong doubts that this temporary structure is going to provide um very much in the way of of noise attenuation. But we need to get the figures and we need to uh you know consider this item in the light of some some real facts and figures. So, um uh the fact that it looks like a container um to me is unfortunately sends the message that it is a temporary structure. And um I think that while I may understand the the utility of using it now that it's there and in place and to replace it with something of more considerable solidity and construction would be an expense. Um, I think that the message that it sends, unfortunately, is kind of uh cheesy, if I may use that word. And um I think after all the work that's gone into the hospital to upgrade it over the years successfully and and much to my pleasure to revert to a a somewhat cheesy solution at this point either because of convenience or cost just seems to me uh pennies wise and pounds foolish. So I'm a little concerned about that.

All right. We were in the question phase, not the comment phase. But um I I have a a question about um about the decibb because you said that that doesn't impact health of people around it, but I think that I would really need to understand um what the sound is. Um I was just there today, so I experienced the entire thing. I don't know how much you can hear of the actual MRI, but I do think it's a valid question for us to understand. But the generator cannot go away because the generator is what drives the MRI. And so that generator, you can't add in another power source.

No, you need a particular kind of generator to run an MRI. And they are quite large. Um and so I think that that for me is a very important question to understand what is the decibel you know and we don't have we have general noise requirements and and I would say that um I think that that's for me the most important is to somehow buffer that sound because it's necessary for the MRI. Um, I also was wondering around the the throughways, how you're not using it. So, I'm just curious, is there a need for a maintenance vehicle for the MRI to come in there at any point in time?

Um, I wouldn't know. Um, sorry about that. Well, again, this is, you know, these are questions that I think are important for us to really answer. um that so that we can understand um if that driveway is absolutely necessary or not. Okay. Um I mean I appreciate that from from the parking requirement it is not.

Um and I understand from going there today that certainly um someone in a wheelchair can access that from the from the established hospital. Um but I think those are some of the things that that I would like to understand. And the the third thing is um have has the hospital had any comments from the the neighbors on that side of the street? I'm not aware of any comments that have been made by uh any adjacent neighbors or anything like that in the public. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions that maybe

um the the current one on the west side that the older one is it not also a trailer? It is. And uh but it's not a it doesn't look like a container. It looks more like a traditional trailer like a two-wheeler looking thing. Yeah, exactly. Um, just a thought that when you when you look at it, it's not it it doesn't it doesn't it's not as unesthetically pleasing as looking at a container, which to um Commissioner Barnett's point is has a temporary look to it. Yeah,

absolutely. I I think uh the council, you all raised very valid concerns. So I think my commitment is uh we'll we'll come up with a plan to beautify that area. We will maybe do a more formal review of the the decibb related in that area with you know associated with the MRI and then we can come back with uh some of these concerns hopefully ellayed a little bit uh once we have that. All right another question not comment. Okay thank you. Any other questions from the commission? All right, I'd like to open it up to the public if you have any comments. I'm seeing no comments from the public. You're welcome to sit down. Thank you. Thank you.

All right, now we will move to the comment phase. Come Barnett.

Um, you know, when um, uh, MacArthur Place wanted to put in some generators. uh we went through a rather extensive process to ensure that there was sufficient noise attenuation of those units and I I absolutely feel that that has to happen. The circumstances are similar to the extent that uh the generator that was placed at MacArthur and there are a couple of them um have potential impact on the residences that are nearby and so too uh this uh generator is going to have an impact on the residences uh on on the street across across the street. And so it's to me it's not a matter of some buffering. I I think that the example of MacArthur Place and you may want to go over and talk to them or the architect who did it. Uh they constructed they constructed containers for those generators specifically intended to reduce the noise generation. And I think that's what has to happen here.

Commissioner Willers. Um I agree and I and I think that's the responsibility quite honestly of the hospital to produce a study of the sound of the generator and what it will take in the form of a structure to attenuate that sound. Um you know we have sound standards in residential areas generator is going to impact those sound standards and um in my opinion this should not become a nuisance for the neighbors across the street. Um, I understand the use and I understand the the cost benefits of doing these portable mobile units essentially. Um, but but that should not be an impact on the neighborhood. Um, simply because it's a way of saving money for the hospital. Um, I'm in favor. I I'm what I'm trying to do is outline what I think an application should be to come back to the planning commission because we don't have an application in front of us. Quite honestly, it doesn't feel that way. Um and um so I I'm um I'm in favor of removing as much of the asphalt from this site as possible, including the parking spaces. Is why I asked the question about how you would access this unit. Um, and as much as this object can be shielded from the neighborhood, the better. Um, if that area needs to be maintained in some form to be able to access this unit for maintenance, I don't think that it needs the amount of asphalt that's there. Um, so I would like a complete design review package. In other words, the paint color that they're going to paint it. See how it's going to look that way. How they're going to shield the sound of the generator. How they're going to shield the look of the trailer or the

container. Um, and what their plan is for um landscaping or improving the existing asphalt area um around around the fuse. Um that to me would be and I and I believe it needs to be a a sound study. It needs to be a real um sound study decibel understanding of the decibel limits of the generator or the sound that it produces and how to attenuate that. We do that for residential projects from adjacent residential project. In other words, the sound of air conditioning units can't be heard at a certain level beyond the the um the property limits and that should be the case for this generator as well.

Any other comments? Uh

um I'm going to echo the comments of Commissioner Willers. um that asphalt area rather than opening it up and adding in any additional parking spaces. I'd like to see that closed and make that a public space so that it's a little bit more of a healing environment and uh get rid of the asphalt, put in some landscaping, put in some public areas where somebody who is there for an MRI or who's there for any other reason going to the skilled nursing or going to visit people has an outdoor area to enjoy. Um, and I do think the sound of the generator is my biggest concern. Um, so I'd like to have a better understanding of what that is. And I didn't realize that MRIs had to be permanently uh hooked up to a generator. So I'd like to understand that better and um what the solution is going to be to make sure that that sound doesn't emanate um not only across the street to the neighbors across the street, but also to the people who are in the hospital rooms up above it. Any other comments? All right. I'll end by saying that um you know I'm generally in agreement with Commissioner Willers. I I do appreciate a few things. First of all, we need hospitals. We need this type of equipment. Um and realize that financially it is a very difficult time for hospitals considering what's happening at the federal level. So, um, whatever we can do to come to a solution that's appropriate, I think we would be willing to support. Um, and I too, you know, it's a container building. I think if if there's a way to minim to kind of screen it or something like that. I mean, the trailer doesn't look that good either. Um, but I understand that that those are reasonable things to put an MRA into. Um so I'll just say that I concur um with the outline of um what is

needed to move forward um and hope that we can do it in a way that is um cost able for the hospital under these circumstances. So with that I I'm going to look to Commissioner Willers if you want to construct uh you know a a recommendation I would do a date uncertain to a date uncertain. Okay. Um, you made a list. Okay.

So, um, based on my comments earlier, I would make a motion to continue this item to a date uncertain. Um, and that's it. Do I hear a second? Second. All right. Thank you. Thank you for the conversation. And we'll take roll call now. Commissioner Barnett, I. Commissioner Nent, I. Commissioner O'Neal, yes. Commissioner Willers, yes. Thank you. The motion passes 5002. I also agree. Oh, I'm so sorry. Chair Dop. I'm so sorry. It still passes 5002.

Again, thank you for coming in and we look forward to the more information. Thank you so much. She was watching Thank you.

All right, that closes the public hearing. Um, now we'll move on to items for discussion. Uh the first item 5.1 is to continue our discussion of the general plan ad hoc committee comments on the available draft uh plan elements and uh that we'll start with the circulation element. Take it away.

All right. Thank you very much, General Yates, community development director. And so um we were too tired to finish last time, so we're going to go ahead and start with circulation element. Um, and with that, same kind of process that we've done in the past. Um, if you guys have comments, I'll kind of chunk it up and then if you guys have comments, then you can provide those comments at that time. Um, these comments that are included um are um our um smaller ad hoc uh that has now grown to add Commissioner O'Neal, but with Commissioner Donbox and Commissioner Willer's uh comments on it. So with that here um is the introduction to the circulation element. This is a required element of the general plan and um really focuses on mobility obviously with circulation makes reference to our active transportation plan that we adopted earlier this year. Um and keep moving Um so some some of the comments um were you know to see other elements or other examples um as well um and those are more direction to me. So, first any comments around the summaries of the goals? Remember, summaries will update um as we make changes to the goals themselves, but if there's any comments and if I'm going too fast, let me know.

Yes. I I'm not sure what the word integrate effectively integrate the city's circulation system with surrounding regional networks and evacuation routes. What what does that even mean?

Um so making sure that our routes are tied into the greater regions routes. So like access to um you know Soma Highway being one of those routes. Um we need you know any kind of evacuation routes that are designated making sure that we are um uh part of that process. Um our regional networks again are going to be more like Soma Highway or how we connect to Arnold um Napa Road. But okay. No, I mean we we I think we all know what we're in the middle of it.

What roots we've got that would be normally used for an evacuation. My question is does effectively integrating our circulation system into that mean? What what does it actually mean? Does it mean uh uh directing traffic? Does it mean um blocking access uh to or from certain roadways to make sure that uh that automobile and truck traffic um gets directed to a specific path? Uh, does it include uh providing a I guess I would refer to it as a a city evacuation plan and making that available to its residents in advance of any critical emergency which would require an evacuation. I mean, I'm just where where do we or maybe and maybe that's detailed later in the implementation measures. Are there a set of implementation measures associated with this goal? there's some actions associated policies and actions where we're going to talk about you know participation with SCTCA which is our regional planning transportation planning agency right

um it's more about making sure that we are participating in the the region because we are obviously affected by what's going on around us being in the center of our northeast slash east side north southoutheast side uh roots um within the county making sure that we are participating with CALR. Are they going to do any lane changes and expansions? How do they how are they looking at Sonoma Highway into the future? Making sure that aligns with how we want to um adapt or need to adapt our roads in the future. I mean, there's been talk also about how do we want to use Fifth Street West um you know, or Fifth Street East moving into the future. or what is that use of those roads for locally? Um, but it's also what you were talking about with like our um freight routes that go along Soma Highway, you know, is there an option to kind of push that um those trucks to another route. So, continuing to participate

and um excuse my ignorance, but

it's not been my impression that the county at this point has what I would call a particularly well structured uh evacuation plan of any kind. So I think in my understanding of evacuation planning now is we do the zone process. Um and in the previous um I would say a while ago when I was uh looking at evacuation plans, they used to tell us, okay, this is going to be your your area and you're going to go down this road. And now they're not doing that as much and they're really focusing on zoning the actual zones and making sure that people are getting out and identifying at that time based on what the actual emergency is and what the impacts to the roads because sometimes the roads that we are directed to be told to go are not the road they may be an impacted road and so that's not actually going to be that route. Um that's my understanding of how that's moving forward. I just saw a presentation for um the S I'm going to get it wrong too.

SVCAC. Um I encourage you all to watch the video. So the Cal Fire um and our fire district uh Sonoma County Emergency, they all presented on evacuation and just in general emergency planning. Um and and the sheriff's department also participated in that. Um so it's it's really interesting to see how they've changed everything um after the last set of fires on how we move forward. Well, that's encouraging to hear. So do you feel that at this point there's more and better planning going on surrounding evacuation?

Okay. and and so clearly determining what implications there are to of those plans and how we fit into them would be part of that integration process. And so um I'm I'm glad that you were able to see these presentations. Are they going to put together some kind of formal document or formal evacuation plan presentation to the valley community as a whole or or is what they've done at the SVCAC going to constitute it?

I can make a comment. Um I I uh that was not a question that was asked, but there is an evacuate there's an actual website that contains most of this information. Um the um again the information is readily available by watching the video and we did encourage them to do as much public outreach um using the methods that they used at the SVCAC because we thought they were very useful.

There will be a community meeting on the Soma County hazard mitigation plan soon uh when the draft's available. I don't have that date yet. I just actually talked to um Sarah Tracy, our PIO, about um that coming up. Um she's been working closely um with them. And also um when we have the safety element, part of the safety element requirements is to do a traffic study around evacuations um and have different kinds of scenarios planned. And so we'll have a discussion around that specifically too moving forward. Okay. Thank you.

You're welcome. Okay. Next goal number one, moving people in goods. So again, just maintaining our circulation system um to be convenient and efficient throughout our city. Uh complete streets is a um a term that is used in circulation where you include all aspects from cars, trucks to pedestrians and bicycles. Um also individuals with disabilities, seniors. Um so there are lots of different looks to a complete street, but the idea being that the street takes into consideration all of these users. um that is a requirement of um our general plan is to take that into consideration. This iteration does not have um the actual map where it designates each street yet, but it'll be in the next um iteration. I'm I'm not sure what 1.5 means. What does it mean to expand intersection footprints? So, transportation systems management is more about like light signal light signaling. So, you can manage um timing of lights like on Sonoma Highway um versus widening the street. So that's or the intersection expanding that intersection. So getting pe basically the idea is how do we get move people through uh more efficiently than making wider uh intersections. So having more lanes. So it's an inloo. So using more of the management styles of transportation

versus just adding more lanes or expanding your intersection.

Okay. Thank you. So if you remember um level of service is no longer a requirement of SE and it does not it is not required to be within our general plan either. Um we are proposing to keep it. This is consistent with what we had in the general plan previously. Um, so that is our current proposal if um you do want to give it. So just that's why it's there.

But that doesn't mean that VMT goes away either. It's just an additional top, right? It's just an additional criteria. Correct. So VMT is actually a criteria. Um, and you'll see VMT listed here in in a little bit, but it'll be um it isn't analyzed during our environmental impacts while level of service used to be um what was analyzed under the environmental impacts. Well, I'm I know during the question, but I'm supportive of keeping LOS. I think it has a utility uh with regard to traffic flow

as a local. Yeah. Okay. So these are the actions to support that. Um you're going to see more related to active transportation planning. Um looking for funding Some of these are left over from the prior general plan um as well, but we haven't implemented them, so they're carried over. And Jennifer, I know you weren't here for at that time, but um do you think

the carryover is because there weren't opportunities for funding or I mean how do how do we think that we'll prioritize these over what happened in the last general plan?

It's so some of these are more in regards to um we don't have a lot of control. It's a CALR, right? And so we know that getting on the CALR calendar of things is a very long process. Um and so if it's still important to us, we want to, you know, maintain that on our list of things. And when the opportunity arises, then we have the a policy already in place to move forward with something um or to advocate um that CALR does something specifically that we are looking for.

Thank you. Um but most of the times when it comes to circulation it's going to be a funding And this one down here was an added um one.

Um, Jennifer, I have a comment question. Sure. Related to that, um, I was told that there was a planning commission meeting at the county level today that was going to be addressing bike path and

cancelled. I it it did get cancelled. But my question is um they were going to be uh having a discussion about tier one, tier two, tier three for bike path and it involved uh property or areas right around us like Denmark Street and Ath Street. Um do we have involvement on that discussion at the county level? So when we did that, we were participating in the active transportation plan. We weighed in on what we wanted to see on all the streets around us. Um and we had proposed at that time um maintaining like the eight street to be a separated um you know bike and pedestrian buffered lane. um I think it's a buffered or you know a full um space on eight street and some of these other streets to connect. So that's where we're talking like it's not in this goal but the the goal for integration that's where we want to make sure that they're connecting to our system as well. So as we that's why we wanted to participate as a region um for that regional plan. I think Sonoma County the county itself has changed a little bit of what they wanted to do. I haven't seen what they're proposing, but I know that they didn't adopt when we adopted. So, that may be what this is about.

Push back on that because it seems like we were I remember when we had the the input and the discussions and now it seems like whatever we said just kind of got tossed out the window. I can reach out and see. They didn't reach out to us. I didn't know it was coming up. Yeah. Yeah. It was on the agenda for today, but it did get cancelled and it will be rescheduled at some later date. And it would be great for us to have some participation in that. Okay. Was it um the whole meeting canceled or just that item? Um the whole meeting was canceled? Yeah.

Okay. Any other comments on this goal? Okay. All right. The next goal is around safe and healthy mobility. Um, and again promoting all users um for our spaces. Um, I don't know about you, but I'm seeing more people on um electric wheelchairs lately um on our sidewalks um that too. Um and we've had some conversations about education around the ebikes, especially for the children. Um and understanding what those different types are um and um so Continuing along that vein, I am going to I was going to look at um a community that I

used to live adjacent to that was actually a senior community that had um lanes for um basically golf carts because golf carts aren't allowed on streets. Um, so it was it was an interesting uh but yeah, Jennifer, um, regarding uh CIRC 2.5 roundabouts,

I want to bring up something that I read with regard to some assessments I think around Third Street in Spain, Third Street West, um, that the traffic u safety commission um had discussed putting in roundabouts, but it was not feasible. But when I read about the feasibility, it seemed as though they were basing it on what was done at Arnold, the Arnold roundabout. I mean, pardon me, the the 121 um and Arnold roundabout, which is very overengineered. And there are things called micro roundabouts. And I'm just curious, you might not have the answer, but um are we really doing our due diligence around assessing micro roundabouts and the full range? Um as an example, in the Prescidio in San Francisco, they put a micro roundabout on Lincoln and they didn't change the scope of the street. So, I'm just a little concerned about the rationale that I had read um and us negating the potential for roundabouts because people are using examples that may not be appropriate.

Okay. I don't I have a response to that, but um I mean that's part of why we want to create these policies and adopt them as a city and then to continue to help promote that with the different commissions and also the different um you know staff directors and things. Commissioner,

from what I understand at on Third Street at Perkins, there is a plan to place a bicycle safety sign in the middle of the intersection. Um, it may have a small island around it. Not. So, it's not a formal roundabout, but it is going to require drivers to pay more attention to the fact that the street will be designated as a bike route. And the signage that will be on this small island, which I expect will be, you know, three three to five feet, um, wouldn't constitute a mini roundabout, but will have an impact on people driving down the street. They're going to have to pay attention, although they run we'll run into it uh because it'll be right in the middle of the intersection. Apparently, there was a meeting the other night in which this was discussed and the neighbors in that area came to get a clear understanding of what was being referred to as this conversion of the street to a bike uh access which it currently is is used because it connects on the south end to Frier Creek and connects on the north end to the Valo home and the and the and the northern bike path that goes east west. So, um uh but I but I don't believe in and some fears of some people that there was going to be some sort of big roundabout there were allayed when they understood what the actual concept was going to be. Commissioner O'Neal

wondering what the involvement is on the traffic sa safety committee with some of this drafting of because it seems like we're both doing similar things and I'm just wondering if it's working together or if we're on independent tracks. Um so I have sent um all the commissions um the information to participate in this process and offered to go and speak to them if they if their chairs would like or their staff. Um and then um also requested the participation of um staff in this so that they get an understanding of it as well because I don't want it to be created in in our planning silo I would call it. um because it does affect all departments throughout the city. Um I have not presented specifically to this commission um and um but I'll be reaching back out to public works um around this. Some of what our commissions do are more actionbased, right? Something comes before them and they do that part of it. Um, but they don't necessarily do the the planning side in the sense of like in the future, what does what do we want to do or set policy. Um, but I'd have to look at specifically what traffic safety commission's directive is.

Yeah, they're doing and I think some of the work they're doing is really interesting, but like putting the speed bumps on Napa Road or whatever, it just seems like if we could do it together and make it cohesive so that we were all on the same path.

Yeah. a green path hopefully. Okay. All right. Uh I don't know why that got dropped down. Um so um these are some added ones um in regards to um talking about greenways um and um you know looking at our trail system and things. What's that CPI? Complete the CPI for the dangerous. What is a CPI?

I have I that was a comment I made. It should be a CIP. Capital improvement project. That's my dyslexia I get taking in. And then these are the actions. All right. Circulation three goal is reduce our environmental impacts of transportation. This is where we really talk about um VMT or vehicle miles traveled. Um again this is looked at through an environmental lens as well. Um and we'll be coming to you um with a

proposed um VMT policy as well to implement SB743 which is what the law was that required VMT to be analyzed. And that will explain everything about VMT because it is con very confusing.

Pardon me, but we had a request to maybe turn the temperature up a little bit. Thank you. It It is It says it all suckers. Awake. The thermostat.

I have a comment on that. 3x. Um, I like it. It's aspirational, but I think it will be impossible to actually monitor and manage. So, I just I don't see how that one plays out in reality. Other thoughts? I recall we had the same conversation at the ad hoc before you started.

Really?

Well, I was the one who proposed that and the question was how would we how could you really enforce it? I would say I'd love it to be a conversation that is had with um the visitors bureau or the chamber to see if there are other ideas that they might have around to this end. All right, here's the actions. TDM

TDM measure the transportation demand management.

Thank you. Where's that? Sorry, I'll go back up. I that was one of the first projects I did when I got here two years ago. Um, and I need to work more with public works on implementing that because one of the things that we wanted to do was change the hours um along um because we have a not the amount of time you can park which is three hours but we would maintain that but to expand the actual hours to where it ends because right now you park at 2:30 in the afternoon and be fine for the rest of the night. And so the idea would be that it would go until maybe like 8 o'clock um and so that somebody um that way we can get workers to not park in front of businesses. And

wasn't the thought to take it from 3 hours to two hours also?

That was one of them. That was one that they said after let's try the time frame and then do the two hours um before we even talk about like charging for parking. But part of that is getting access to other parking lots too so that we can direct workers to go park in other parking lots um and make sure that the streets maintain availability for our visitors. All right. Number four, regional connectivity. This is our integrate. So again, just working with the county, Calrans, all of our partners.

I need help with Forex. I couldn't understand it.

So, um, 15 minute headway is the time in between a bus stopping and the next bus coming. So, that's a that's a headway. Um, so 15 minutes is what's considered rapid bus transit. Currently, our buses are, I think, 45 minutes to an hour and a half. Um, and so the idea being to enhance opportunities around public transportation to have more um actual bus um activity. Um, and part of that is we've looked at through the climate action as well is the EV shuttle um, or just a shuttle in general that would connect our communities. Um, one of them just looked at more of like the visitor serving um, and be within the city boundaries and then to the Fairmont kind of do this loop. Um, um, but the goal would be from the climate action perspective is to make sure It's an electric vehicle, but the idea also was that it would look like a trolley If you have any contacts at Calrans, tell them that they totally failed on

this last one. It was a disaster. Um, we know Okay. From what I understand, the legislature and the governor have just accelerated the funding for Highway 37.

Yeah. So, it's going to start next year. You walked Denmark recently with fear of my life. Yes. Very scary.

I've had to totally change my my route um because with the closure of 121 with the AOC bridge being rebuilt, Denmark has become a speedway and you can't get off. It's Yeah. And they're saying it's taking a month to replace the bridge. So think you could do it in less time than that. Okay. Uh any any public comment um regarding circulation element with our packed house?

Good evening. Caitlyn Cornwallis and I'm ecology center. Um, on the whole topic of connectors or trails or links or whatever we want to call them, um, we just, uh, dumped a bunch of time into, um, creating a, um, it's not quite finished yet, but it's a a professional RJS online map that I'm going to give you one of these copies, Jennifer. It's not complete yet, but um just [Applause] so this map is made with data sets, the kind of data sets the city needs to use and it's built from the county's own data sets and the city's own data sets. Uh and it also includes some of the proposed connections that have been talked about in the community for a while. Um, and it also includes uh things that local government maps need to show on um connectivity maps like grocery stores andarmacies and stuff like that. So, we're continuing to work on this. Um, we are trying to pull the many conversations that Cedra Nathan had with like 400 people around the city and get them into data that can actually be used. um like the conversation status of some of these potential links like what their land owners think about them and um and one of them is in motion maybe some of you know this but the connection behind Sasarini school that can connect the field uh next to Safeway um and go down through the school and connect to um Andrew Street is um in the works. Sasserini gave permission to the Valley of the Moon Garden Club to make a nice path there that will connect. So, um we're going to still work on this uh

but it is a start and you can see that the the project area that we've chosen is um not just the city but also part of the springs. We are actively seeking grant funding to keep on doing this planning work which we would like to do with the city and the county. Um it's a lot of work so it takes everybody. Caitlyn, is that available online or somewhere?

I mean, um, we Let's see. I don't want to I don't want to speak ahead of my colleagues here, but we could give you guys the link to see it. It's RGS online, so it's meant to be eventually a publicly available story map that kind of with words sort of walks you through this series of layers of data that are on it. Um, it's not done yet, but we could share it with you if you want to see it. So, thank you. Any other comments? Nope. All right. I'll close uh public comment and we'll close this item and move on to the next item 5.2, which is to discuss pending housing element implementation ordinances for housing element programs 15 and 20. So, in an effort to um uh move forward some of the code amendments that we need to make um these were housing constraints that were identified in the housing element. um and we have a number of them that while we had incorporated them into our code previously, there have been a couple of changes in the laws and that's why we need to update them a little bit more. So, at the next meeting, you will have a number of um not a lot of ordinances. I'm going to combine them into one, but it'll it'll be kind of meaty. um in which we're going to talk about these um different kinds um of housing. And the reason why I wanted to just start the conversation tonight is wanting to make sure that I provide you the information um if you have questions about these types of facilities or anything that you

want me to answer in the staff report that I can get that to you. Um some of the changes that you'll see will just be to like the land use table. Um and you know part of it that you see here like transitional and supportive housing um it needs to apply to all residential and mixeduse zone with the same standard. So if we allow multifamily housing or single family housing in those zones then we need to do that for this type of housing as well. And so we're just going to go through and just clean up and make sure that this is all correct and that we're also referencing the correct um government code sections for those. Um also wanted to um kind of beef up our definitions um as well for these different types um of uh housing. And a a navigation center is not a housing type, but um also something that needs to be allowed by right. Um just going down. Jennifer, I did have a a question when you got to it on um item L. Okay.

Any questions around these types of housing? Yes. Just just a more general question for you, Jennifer. Um because in looking at some of this um are you are you factoring in some of the more recent legislative changes as well? Okay. Yeah, because I I I looked at some of these and and was unsure. Um, I did have a question about the residential care facilities piece. That's a pretty hotly debated topic right now.

Um, but it's kind of an older hotly debated topic. I haven't seen a lot of legislative changes. So, is there something we just didn't have a I think I think our definition really just needs to be updated um because there's you know the different types between small and large care and we need to be referencing the correct health code sections as well for that because that's something that sometimes people forget is that it's a very defined Yes. and debated topic.

Yes, it is. Okay. Thank you. Um something maybe newer is single room occupancy. something that was very common um historically and we kind of got away from. Um but that's one of um those uh easier lower income kind of um facilities where it's a shared kitchen living space and then you have a room that you would rent. Um not as commonly seen today, but we do need to provide the ability for that type of use. So be updating our code for that.

May I ask a question around that? Sure. Will that include the the use of single family homes in that capacity?

So in this we do not say we do not regulate for long-term um rental of rooms and things. It's when you start defining it as a residential care or supportive housing that there's different requirements that are put into place. But you as an owner, if you want to rent out a room in your home long term, that is something that you can do. It's when you start renting it out short term that we have other regulations around that. Single room occupancy has very um there'll be specific objective standards around that that are pretty standard. Um, and they're typically a multifamily housing type versus a single family housing that you have extra bedrooms to rent. Uh, the emergency shelters section just needs to be updated um to meet current standards and current code requirements. Um, all right. So design standards is something that we've talked about in our ad hoc of something that we're going to be um looking at more closely. We've already adopted for the multifamily when we adopt when we modified the design review process to allow multif family developments if they meet these design develop u multif family design standards. um they wouldn't need to go through the design review process. So, we've already done that, but we wanted to continue to look at that process. So, we'll be doing that as part of the comprehensive update with the general plan of our code. Um the affordability in perpetuity. Um we need to look at our conversion uh

provisions and we'll do that as part of the inclusionary housing update. Um we are we paused on the inclusionary housing um analysis because we are in the middle of updating fees and the building permit fees will impact what that percentage would be. And so instead of doing it twice, we are just waiting until we have adopted the new fees. So we're hoping before the end of the year that we'll have new fees adopted. Um again, use permits. Um really looking at that a little bit more as part of the comprehensive update of the general plan. Um building heights and setbacks. Um I consider them part of our design standards and development standards update as well as um 94 19.42 1942. Um, historic preservation and infill development. This is something that I recently just mo uh moderated a panel on is um our secretary of interior standards for historic preservation has a lot of subjective language um but we need to modify and and make them objective. So communities are starting to do that process um and in different ways um and really um looking at um providing standards based on the context in which it is and so that sometimes looks like a form based code.

I have some other questions around this one.

Sure. Um, I mean that seems straightforward with regard to the subject of language, but um I'm curious about the if you can give us context for the review of the of the guidelines and requirements um and are they are these related to your inventory that you're doing right now? I'd just like to understand the intent of the first part of this where the direction that you're going with regard to review of guidelines and requirements. So, I just found a document that was adopted um that are historic preservation guidelines. Um it's quite a large document um that was on our website floating. Um so, it'd be reviewing those and then also chapter 19.42 where we have a set of standards and things that and findings that we were looking at. Um, and so it's to review those to to look at it what's subjective in that process. So again, a housing element is more focused on housing. So that's kind of where we can remove some of that more of that subjectivity um or that we have to remove some of that subjectivity when we're doing um housing. Um, and then you know and then the question is whether or not we apply that to commercial. Um, so that's just part of what we'll be looking at as part of this. It'll be it'll it'll be a lengthy process. We also have never in our general plan had um a section talking about historic and cultural resources. So that's something that we'll be looking at also in the coming months is what are policies that we want around um cultural resources and how we want to move forward with um historic preservation and archaeology within our city.

But how does the um the your um inventory of historic houses, how does that impact the HRE and part of that is not part of this? No, that would be part of that. Okay. So the actual inventory is kind of a separate um thing. It needs to be done anyways and that will help with the design review process that we already have to remove um the need for an HRE to be done on a property.

So how does the the new revision to SQA around housing impact this item? Does it My memory of it is that it um somewhat takes infill housing as long as it doesn't have a historic designation and treats it as it would anywhere um as infill housing. In other words, out of context of a historic areas. You're no longer analyzing its impact on a historic surrounding unless there's unless that property is a historic property.

So that's where we come in. So right now if we unless we get rid of the overlay um so there may be um based on our survey an eligible let's say a res residential district. Right now we have mostly just commercial districts except Broadway is kind of a pseudo residential. Most of those are homes um historically but um that's where those design guidelines become standards and then infill within those districts. So again, we need to as part of the new rules, we really need to finish through that process of locally designating and or bringing it um you know, working with our preservation commission to locally designate as well as maybe even pushing some of those to the state level. um because the laws are getting um uh interesting um around historic preservation and whether something is listed and if it's listed locally or if it's listed on the California register. They're they're getting confusing depends on who writes them. Um so that's going to be part of important as part of this process. Um the um so for infill development, we can also talk about infill development within um you know on maybe it's a large lot single family home and then we're adding more housing to it or um you know other types of sites do have historic properties um and that may be adding multifamily housing to them. Okay, any other questions about those ones? And then we have one more. The last one is program 20.

Uh, state law and the housing element requires um to allow developments by right um if 20% or more of the units are affordable to lower income. And these are specifically related to sites that were identified on past housing elements. So I've highlighted in purple the three specific sites that were identified on previous housing elements that are in our current housing element to provide low-income housing. And these ones are supposed to be identified to allow by right. And so we're going to do um a land use um to the zoning use table. matrix to identify these three properties because they are in different uh land use types.

Give us a little more specificity of where these parcels are.

I will um I have a slides for them when we talk about them. But one of them will be um I know it as the Norbomb House on West Napa Street. It's on the right hand side. It's a a little um vernacular farmhouse um next to Jack in the Box. Yes. Um between Jack in the Box and the gas station. Um the other one is the site next to Safeway that's behind the bank and um coffee shop. And the other one is the lots next to KJIR KJIR memory care on Napa Road. Okay. You're welcome. Any other questions about these or any thoughts of things that you would want to know a little bit more information about? Um, my intent is not to inundate you because it's a can be a lot, but I can provide you with the code sections if that's helpful for some of you. Um, that kind of make this the have to do this thing. Um, so whatever you guys need to help you. Um, but otherwise there'll be an ordinance before you at the next meeting. Jennifer, could you identify the sites that do not will not that are pending that will not be required to be reszoned? Site A, site H. Where are those?

Uh, one was the um Montalum apartments that you just did and the other ones is um the First Street East property. So, one of two of those parcels that are listed there were identified previously, but they have been um they maintained their use as single family homes and they were just um heavily invested in their remodels. Um so those will need those were removed um from um our um countdown I would call it. Um and then the other property being um for street east All right. No other comments from the commission. Are there any comments from the public with regard to the house this housing element um discussion other hat? Caitlyn Cornwall Sonoma Valley Collaborative. Um uh let's see. There were two things. Um, one I I don't actually remember that you mentioned this right now, but in the agenda that was sent out. I thought that there was an item about um considering allowing four stories along Broadway and um Highway 12.

Okay. K.

I just spaced out. Okay. Um well, I just wanted to say that for a long time the consensus of Snowy Collaborative has been yes on that. um um that there are commercial corridors in the city that should definitely be allowed to go to four stories. Um and uh um as many of you were here, but some of you weren't. Um before COVID in the before times there was the there was a really well- attended series called um uh housing town halls when a lot of maps were put on tables and a lot of people marked them up and indicated where they thought different kinds of development should go in the city and there were like eight stations where different people were working on these maps and at every single one it was really quite remarkable how people just thought that that corridor of 12 and Broadway should um to use the strong towns language should thicken up or should be able to thicken up over time um and um not just with commercial but the mixed use also. So there you have uh 30 or so organizations from across the scale of interest groups that does think that Sonoma could do fine with fourstory buildings in certain areas. Um and there was another uh point I wanted to make. Uh, it was um Oh, I guess this is actually more of a question, so I'm not sure if you can answer it or not, but I'm not really clear how extensive the historic zone is that would be affected by um item L, I think it was. So, um I'm not quite sure what to make of that or how to put it next to um uh asks that the collaborative has had so far. Thanks, Just a question for Jennifer. Do you feel comfortable making a comment just to define that or will you bring that next time?

Um, so I'm not going to bring it next time because we're doing as part of our general like we've pushed that till after we do the general plan and identify our policies and get our identification of our historic resources. So then we know what we have and then we can create better standards around that. currently I think when this was developed the historic zone was probably the overlay application of the historic overlay because chapter 19.42 is really pertaining to the overlay um and um and then um and then historic resources as well. So, I'm going to assume that that's what that's about is more that overlay zone, which um we do have a a map of, but a third of our two if that.

Thank you.

Quarter. Any other public comments? Okay. And um with that, we'll close item 5.2 and move on to item six, director comments and announcements. So, um let's see comments. Um I did want to let you know that the tree inventory has been completed. Um and so we will um once we they do their QAQC on the actual um data in the map, we'll make that public. But they did inventory 5,075 trees um so just a few um and provided some information around those um uh a lot of information around those and um so we'll get that to you guys as well as the canopy study. We are probably going to I'm going to work with um our new parks director Dave Johns who is um in charge of um the parks pros parks recreation and open space commission um and do a combo meeting with them and climate action commission. Again, I know that um some people have been asking for that around the trees and I think that's a good opportunity to talk more again about trees and how we going to move forward with that information. Um and so we'll be doing that. Um and we'll look for some dates. So just stay tuned for an email around that. And um last night um the ordinance for the design review changes for the awnings was introduced. So should be adopted at the next meeting and in place in December. With that, that concludes director's comments.

All right. And now we move on to item seven, commissioner reports and comments. Any comments? Reports. Um I will just uh I have a I guess an update, right? And a comment question for Jennifer. So the ad hoc the general plan and uh code ad hoc did meet and we generated a laundry list of items to uh evaluate for code revision. Um one of the comments I have for for Jennifer and we can bring up the ad hoc is um whether the uh affordable housing overlay is assumed or do we have to add that to the list? um we can add it to the list because I don't want to assume anything but it is something that we have to do.

Okay. Thank you. Um my other comment and I'm not don't want to put you on the spot but we had some questions earlier in the beginning that were unrelated to the agenda and I know you might not be able to answer the questions at this this time but do you um have any general comments or updates um with regard to the questions? I know it is an item in the ad hoc um that that parcel will be discussed. Um but I don't know if you want to add any comments just in general u just to update the public. Um so the only thing at this time is um because it's still you know obviously something that's being discussed um is that the land use will be the next element to be released the draft land use element and that is where um some of that in you know as far as definition of the Soma mixed juice would be um and that's where that discussion would be around that um and input into that would be um received from you all as well as members of the public and others. Um and then again obviously how that's applied or where that's applied um is part of will be part of that discussion after we get the EIR and understand a little bit more um of the general uh aspects of the environmental

and the comments that we've had over the last nine months. I know you've been accumulating so they'll be kind of incorporated in that as well um at the end but not for this version. Yeah. Thank you. Um okay. So any other Everyone's quiet. All right. Let's move on to item number eight which is adjournment. Um is there a motion to adjurnn? So move. So, the meeting of the planning commission on the 16th is over at uh 7:46. Well done. Thank you. Thank you, Carrie and Caitlyn.