City of Santa Rosa Planning Commission March 14, 2019

City of Santa Rosa Planning Commission March 14, 2019


>> I’M GOING TO GO AHEAD TO CALL TONIGHT’S MEETING OF THE SANTA ROSA PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASK FOR ROLL CALL, PLEASE.>>LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT EXCEPT COMMISSIONERS DUGGAN, KALIA AND PETERSON.>>OKAY. NEXT WE MOVE TO APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OUR FEBRUARY 28TH MEETING, ANY CORRECTIONS TO OUR DRAFT? NOT SEEING ANY, THEY’LL STAND AS PRINTED. PUBLIC COMMENTS, THIS IS A TIME FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION THAT AREN’T LISTED TONIGHT ADDS A PUBLIC HEARING, WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM AS A PUBLIC HEARING, SO IF THERE’S ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON AYTHING OTHER THAN THAT, I’M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN PUBLIC COMMENTS, IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, YOU CAN GO TO ONE TOF MICROPHONES AT THE TOP. NOT SEEING ANYONE MOVE, I’M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE OUR PUBLIC COMMENT. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS’ REPORT, ANY REPORTS TONIGHT? COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE?>>WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COMMISSIONER PETER HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO LONG BEACH FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ACADEMY BY THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF CITIES I BELIEVE IS WHAT IT’S CALLED AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO STAY ON THE DEBATABLY HAUNTED QUEEN MARY, AND HAD A GREAT TIME BOND WITCHING THE FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AS WELL AS ATTENDING SESSIONS ABOUT DENSITY AND DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT, CANNABIS AND THE VERY INTERESTING LEGISLATIVE UPDATE OF THE HOUSING BILLS COMING FORWARD, SO THAT WS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OF US I BELIEVE.>>GREAT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER REPORTS? I HAVE ONE TO LET THE COMMISSION KNOW THAT I DID ATTEND TUESDAY’S COUNCIL MEETING TO BE PRESENT FOR THE APPEAL OF THE BE KIND DISPENSARY ON SONOMA AVENUE, THAT WAS AN ITEM THAT WAS HEARD BY THE COMMISSION BACK IN NOVEMBER THA, WAS A CANNABIS DISPENSARY WHICH WAS APPEALED BASICALLY ON THE BASIS OF DISAGREEMENT WITH THE 600 FOOT SETBACK FROM SCHOOLS AND SPECIFICALLY THE FRENCH AMERICAN CHARTER SCHOOL, SO I WAS THERE TO REPORT OUR FINDINGS, OUR PROCESS FROM OUR NOVEMBER MEETING, AND THE APPEAL WAS BASICALLY HANDLED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT BY AN ATTORNEY, SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY REGARDING A SETBACK TO SCHOOLS. THERE ARE WAY FEWER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKING THAN I EXPECTED, SO THEY HAD THEIR PUBLIC HEARING AND ONCE THAT WAS CONCLUDED, THE COUNCIL COMMENTS, WHAT I TOOK AWAY FROM THEM, THAT THEY WERE VERY STRONGLY IN SUPPORT OF OUR CURRENT CANNABIS ORDINANCES AND POLICIES AND WERE STRONGLY IN SUPPORT OF PROJECTS THAT MEET THOSE POLICIES, SO THEY DID UPHOLD OUR DECISION. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO BOARD DEPARTMENT REPORTS?>>I HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT. THERE ARE A SERIES OF ITEMS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MAY BE OF INTEREST, THAT WAS THE MOST RECENT, BUT JUST AS A REMINDER, APRIL 2 IS OUR JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WHERE WE DO AN OVERVIEW OF HOW WE’RE DOING IN TERMS OF IMPLEMENTING THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN BUT WE ALSO BROADEN THAT PRESENTATION TO INCLUDE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED OVER THE LAST YEAR AND ALSO HOW WE’RE DOING ON OUR HOUSING ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, SO I THINK TENTATIVELY, IT’S A 2:00 ITEM BECAUSE IT IS A STUDY SESSION.>>OKAY. THANK YOU. NEXT, STATEMENTS OF ABSTENTION BY COMMISSIONERS. THERE’S NONE. WE HAVE NO STUDY SESSION OR CONSENT ITEMS TONIGHT, SO WE’LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO OUR ONE AND ONLY PUBLIC HEARING WHICH IS ITEM 10.1, THE GREEN PEN DISPENSARY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHICH IS AN EX-PARTE DISCLOSURE, COMMISSIONER CARTER, ANYTHING TO DISCLOSE?>>I DID VISIT THE SITE BUT I MET WITH NO ONE ON THE PROJECT.>>OKAY.>>I ALSO VISITED THE SITE AND SPOKE TO THE DEVELOPER OR THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE BUT NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.>>I VISITED THE SITE AND ALSO SPOKE TO THE APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE AND I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER TO DISCLOSE.>>AND I ALSO VISITED THE SITE AND I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE AND HAVE NO NEW INFORMATION TO DISCLOSE. SO, WITH THAT, WE’LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO THE STAFF REPORT. ADAM ROSS IS THE CITY PLANNER, GIVE US OUR STAFF REPORT.>>THANK YOU, CHAIR CISCO AND COMMISSIONERS, TODAY THE GREEN PEN DISPENSARY IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LOCATED AT 353 COLLEGE AVENUE, ADAM ROSS, THE CITY PLANNER HERE WITH THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.>>THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION INCLUDES GREEN PEN LLC TO OPERATE GREN PEN DISPENSARY, A MEDICAL AND ADULT USE CANNABIS RETAIL DISPENSARY WITH DELIVERY SERVICES. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES A REDUCED ON-SITE PARKING OF 50%, A TOTAL OF SIX SPACES. THE PROJECT IS AT A — IS LOCATED IN A 2943 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING WITH 1772 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE, 338 SQUARE FEET OF STORAGE WITH THE REMAINDER BEING OFFICE, EMPLOYEE ADMINISTRATION AND DELIVERY OPERATIONS. THE PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION ARE 9 A.M. TO 9 P.M. DAILY. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT IN THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA, OFF OF COLLEGE AVENUE, CLOSE TO HIGHWAY 101. HERE YOU SEE THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION, ON THE CORNER OF GLEN STREET AND COLLEGE AVENUE, TO THE NORTH IS THE RIDGE WAY HISTORIC PRESERVATION DISTRICT AND TO THE SOUTH IS ANOTHER PRESERVATION DISTRICT AND DOWNTOWN. THE ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY IS AT GENERAL COMMERCIAL HISTORIC DUE TO ITS PROXIMITY WITHIN THE RIDGE WAY HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. THE GENERAL PLAN IS RETAIL AND BUSINESS SERVICES. A BIT OF THE PROJECT HISTORY, ON APRIL 20TH, THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED, ON MAY 29, A NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION WAS SENT, ON APRIL 16TH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WAS HELD, A RESPONSE TO INCOMPLETE LETTER RECEIVED BY CITY STAFF ON JUNE 2, ON JUNE 27, THE APPLICATION WAS DEEMED COMPLETE. ON JULY 23, A NOTICE OF APPLICATION WAS MAILED TO NEIGHBORS AND INTERESTED PARTIES. ON OCTOBER 16, THE NOTIFICATION OF STAFF ISSUES WAS ALSO SENT AND THEN ON FEBRUARY 14TH, STAFF RECEIVED THE UPDATED APPLICATION WITH ALL ISSUES CORRECTED. THAT DOESN’T EXPLAIN ON MARCH 7, STAFF RECEIVED AN UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY THAT BETTER DEFINED THE W-TRANS STUDIES OF CONCLUSIONS. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN SHOWING THE PROJECT SITE WITH THE SIX SPACES WITH ADA, HERE’S GLEN STREET AND THE SIDEWALK, WHAT’S NOT SHOWN IS THE ON-SITE OR ON-STREET LOADING ZONE WITH — THAT IS 24 MINUTES THAT WAS INSTALLED BY THE CITY, IT WAS DONE DURING THE PREVIOUS USE, I’LL SHOW THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE THROUGH LATER SLIDES. HERE’S FLOOR PLAN, THIS IS THE PARKING AREA BACK HERE, HAOERS SOME OVERCLOUDED BICYCLE PARKING SPACES, SO GLEN STRAOED YOU WOULD ENTER HERE, THIS IS A BUILT OVER DOOR, WHAT THAT MEANS IS AT ONE POINT OR ANOTHER, IT WAS BUILT OVER SO IT’S NOT INOPERABLE, IT’S THERE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT’S A DOOR BUT IT’S NOT USABLE. THIS IS A SECURED ENTRANCE, WAITING ROOM, SHOW I.D. BE VERIFIED FOR THIS LOCATION, HERE’S THE RETAIL AREA, THIS DOOR FACE IT IS CORNER OF GLENN AND COLLEGE, IT’S GOING TO BE FOR CLOSED, NOT REUSED, THE REASON FOR THAT IS IT WOULD HAVE TO TAKE AWAY A LOT OF THIS AREA TO ACCOMMODATE FOR ADA. HERE’S A RENDERING OF THE EXISTING SITE WITH DIFFERENT PAINT BUT IT DOESN’T — RIGHT NOW IT’S GREEN, THE KL LOER IS GREEN BUT THERE ARE NO FACADE CHANGES FOR — PROPOSED WITH THIS APPLICATION. WE HAVE THE EAST ELEVATION RIGHT HERE WICH IS GLENN STREET ON THE CORNER OF THAT DOOR THERE, THE FRESH COAT OF PAINT BUT NO FACADE CHANGES. SO, THERE WAS A LITTLE ISSUE ON OUR PART. I DON’T HAVE THE UPDATED SLIDE SHOW WHICH HAS A BIT MORE INFORMATION SO I’M GOING TO SWITCH OVER TO THAT RIGHT NOW, OKAY.>>SO, WE DON’T HAVE THAT EITHER, WE HAVE TO LOOK UP THERE. SO, I’M GOING TO START OVER FROM THE BEGINNING BUT I’M QUICKLY GO OVER THE ONES I’VE ALREADY MENTIONED. SO, WHAT I WANTED TO START OFF WITH WAS — IS THE CANNABIS ORDINANCE OVERVIEW FOR PERSONAL USE, YOU HAVE 6 PLANTS PER RESIDENTS, COMMERCIAL CANNABIS BUSINESSES INCLUDE MEDICAL AND ADULT USE DISPENSARIES, CULTIVATION, MANUFACTURING LEVEL ONE AND TWO, THAT INCLUDES VOLATILE AND NON-VOLATILE MANUFACTURING, TESTING LABORATORY, DISTRIBUTION, SO AGAIN WITH RETAIL DISPENSARY AND DELIVERY, MICROBUSINESS AND SPECIAL EVENTS AND IT WAS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 19, 2018. CANNABIS RETAIL MEANS A FACILITY WHERE MEDICAL OR ADULT USE CANNABIS OR MEDICAL AND ADULT USE CANNABIS PRODUCTS ARE OFFERED EITHER INDIVIDUALLY OR ANY ANY COMBINATION, IT’S PART OF A RETAIL SALE FOR CANNABIS, IT INCLUDES A STATE LICENSE TYPE 10. THE ELIGIBLE ZONING FOR A RETAIL DISPENSARY IS COMMERCIAL SO CO IS OFFICE COMMERCIAL, CN IS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, CG, GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND COMMERCIAL SERVING — IT’S A SHOPPING CENTER, CSC, INDUSTRIAL IS BUSINESS PARK, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND GNERAL INDUSTRIAL. THE SETBACKS TO SENSITIVE RECEPTORS INCLUDE 600 FEET TO A K-12 SCHOOL AND OVERCONCENTRATION OF 600 FEET FROM EACH OTHER. SO, DELIVERIES ARE ALLOWED FROM A CANNABIS RETAIL FACILITY WITH A STOREFRONT ONLY, YOU CAN’T JUST BE A DELIVERY LOCATION, DRIVE-THRUS ARE NOT PERMITTED, GENERAL OPERATING HOURS IN THE CANNABIS ORDINANCE WITHIN THE CITY IS 9 A.M. TO 9 P.M., SECURITY — ENTRY MUST BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, SECURED ENTRY, SECURED PRODUCTS, SECURED CASH, SECURED DELIVERY, ON-SITE CONSUMPTION IS NOT — IS ALLOWED PROVIDED THAT THEY CAN FIND A WAY TO GET AROUND THE SMOKING ORDINANCE AS WELL A SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS IN THE CANNABIS ORDINANCE, BUT THERE IS NO ON-SITE CONSUMPTION PROPOSED HERE. FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, WE HAVE REQUIRED FINDINGS, SO ONE IS THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THE ZONING CODE, IT’S CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, IT’S COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USES AND THE SITE IS PHYSICALLY SUITABLE FOR THE TPE DENSITY AND INTENSITY OF USE, IT WOULD NOT CONSTITUTE A NUISANCE AND IT’S COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. SO, AGAIN, THIS IS THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION, THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE CTY, THERE’S AN AERIAL OF THE PROJECT, GENERAL COMMERCIAL IN A HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT, RETAIL AND BUSINESS SERVICE GENERAL PLAN, PROJECT HISTORY, SITE PLAN, FLOOR PLAN, FRONT ELEVATION, EAST ELEVATION, AND I WANTED TO GO OVER THE LEGAL NON-CONFORMITY OF THIS SITE, SO THE BUILDING — THE SITE WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1962 PER GIS RECORDS, I’LL SHOW YOU IN THE NEXT SLIDE, THE PARKING RIMERS WERE DIFFERENT BACK THEN, THE SITE WAS BUILT WITH A PARKING LOT THAT PROBABLY WOULDN’T — THAT WOULDN’T BE TO CODE TODAY. AND WHILE THE BUILDING ITSELF MAY BE LEGAL NONCONFORMING, THE SITE — THE USE FOR THE SITE LOT IS NONCONFORMING STATUS BECAUSE THE PEVIOUS USE HAS BEEN VACATED FOR MORE THAN SIX MONTHS. SO, THIS IS AN AERIAL FROM — THIS IS 1963 PER GIS, THE CITY’S GIS STANDARDS, THERE’S NO INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE PARKING LOT SITE. AND HERE IT IS ON THE LATEST GIS AERIAL. SO, THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE SITE IS 2963 SQUARE FEET AND PER CITY CODE FOR A CANNABIS RETAIL DISPENSARY, IT’S ONE SPACE PER 250 SUARE FEET, THIS WOULD EQUAL OUT TO 12 TOTAL PARKING SPACES REQUIRED FOR THIS SITE. THE TOTAL EXISTING PARKING AT THE SITE IS 6 SPACES AFTER THE REMOVAL OF AN EXISTING ILLEGAL CHAIN LINKED FENCE THAT IS COVERING UP PART OF THE PARKING LOT, SO THEREFORE THE SITE HAS A DEFICIENCY OF SIX SPACES OR 50%. THIS IS A FEASIBILITY STUDY PARKING LOT RESTRIPING PLAN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT TO SHOW THAT THEY CAN SUCCESSFULLY FIT SIX SACES INCLUDING THE UPDATED AA VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACE FOR THE SITE. THE ZONING CODE SECTION 2036.040, ITEM C-2 STATE THAT IS BH A BUILDING’S USE CHANGES TO A NEW USE, FOR EXAMPLE, A RETAIL TO RESTAURANT USE WITHOUT ENLARGING THE SITE, NO ADDITIONAL PARKING IS REQUIRED EXCEPT TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT ADA STANDARDS BUT THAT USUALLY IS A WAY FOR US TO LOOK AT AN EXISTING LEGAL NONCONFORMING SITE AND SHOULD THE NW UE BE WITHIN THAT SIX MONTH GRACE PERIOD, WE COULD POTENTIALLY APPLY THAT CODE TO THIS BUT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE IT LOST ITS NONCONFORMING STATUS, IT’S NOT APPLICABLE. ZONING CODE SECTION 20-36.050CA ALLOWS BY RIGHT THE PARKING REDUSTING OF UP TO 10 SPACES OR 25% WITH A RETREATING OF AN OGLER BUILD, BECAUSE THIS IS OVER 25 25* THRESHOLD, WE CAN’T APPLY THAT PARKING REDUCTION, SO AGAIN, THE NEXT SLIDE WILL GO INTO HOW WE GOT — HOW STAFF HAS SUPPORTED THIS PROJECT BECAUSE UNDER ZONING CODE SECTION 20-36.050 C1 BT REVIEW AUTHORITY MAY REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF PARKING BY ANY AMOUNT FOR A PROJECT THAT REQUIRES A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AFTER MAKING THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, SO DUE TO SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE OPERATION OF THE USE AT THE LOCATION, THE PROPOSAL AND THE PROPOSAL WILL GENERATE A PARKING DEMAND FROM THE STANDARD SET FADER IN THE CODE AND THE NUMBER OF SPACES WILL BE SUFFICIENT FOR ITS CONDITION AND OPERATION AND USE. SO, A LITTLE REITERATION HERE IS THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING SIX PARKING SPACES ON-SITE, ONE IS ADA COMPLIANT AS REQUIRED, SIX EMPLOYEE PARKING PASSES ARE BEING PROPOSED TO BE PROVIDED TO STAFF TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO PARK AT CITY PARKING GARAGE NUMBER ONE, IT’S LOCATED AT 521-7TH STREET, IT’S APPROXIMATELY 1230 FEET AWAY, I’S AN ESTIMATED 7 MINUTE WALK USING THE SAFEST WALKING ROUTE UP HEALDSBURG AVENUE, CROSSING COLLEGE AVENUE AND PROCEED TOG THE COLLEGE SITE RATHER THAN — THAT’S WITHOUT ANY SORT OF JAYWALKING OR USING AN UNPROTECTED CROSSWALK OR A LIGHT PROTECTED CROSSWALK I SHOULD SAY. 12 COVERED BICYCLE PARKING SPACES ARE PROPOSED, ONE BICYCLE PARKING SPACE IS REQUIRED PER CODE, THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING 12 COVERED SPACES ON-SITE. THERE’S SIDEWALK INFRAHAVE YOU BEENING KHUR AND PUBLIC TRANSIT AROUND THE SITE, THERE’S AN ON-STREET LOADING SPACE WHICH WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT OR THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION BUT AFTER FURTHER REVIEW, IT’S THERE, IT WAS INSTALLED BY CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AND WITH THE CONVERSATION WITH THEM, IT WOULD STAY, IT’S NOT — THEY DIDN’T LOSE IT BECAUSE IT’S NO LONGER A LEGAL NONCONFORMING SITE, IT’S THERE. THEY CAN REMOVE IT BUT I DON’T THINK ANYONE WANTS TO REMOVE IT. A FOCUS TRAFFIC STUDY BY W-TRANS CONCLUDE THE PARKING SUPPLY PROVIDED SUFFICIENT FOR THE USE AS PROPOSED. THIS IS — IT’S A LITTLE DARK, THIS IS AN AERIAL — A STREET VIEW IMAGE OF WHAT’S EXISTING THERE NOW. SO, I DON’T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE IT BUT THERE’S THIS ROLL-UP DOOR RIGHT THERE, THIS IS WHERE THE COVERED BICYCLE PARKING SPACES ARE GOING TO GO, THIS CHAIN LINKED FENCE WILL BE REMOVED, THE PARKING LOT WILL BE RESTRIPED AND THIS AWNING HERE IS AN ILLEGAL NONCONFORMING PORTION OF THE BUILDING THAT WOULD BE REMOVED SHOULD THE USE PERMIT BE APPROVED. STAFF RECEIVED PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THE APRIL 16, 2018 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WHERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAME OUT. SINCE THEN, THESE ARE ALL APPROXIMATE NUMBERS, 18 E-MAILS, SEVERAL PHONE CALLS THROUGH WRITTEN LETTERS SIGNED BY 30 RESIDENTS FROM 23 HOMES IN THE RIDGE WAY PRESERVATION DISTRICT WHICH HAVE BEEN SUPPLIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL. CONCERNS WERE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY, LOITERING, INCREASED CRIME, PROXIMITY TO SCHOOLS, ODORS, NOISE, TRAFFIC AND PARKING. SO, THE RESPONSE, SOME OF STAFF’S RESPONSE TO THAT IS THE SITE IS IN A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR ON COLLEGE AVENUE, THERE ARE OTHER RETAIL BUSINESS USES THERE, THIS SITE ITSELF WHICH I’LL GO OVER IN A COUPLE OF THE OTHER SLIDES, IF YOU HAVE THIS LOCATION HERE, NO MATTER WHAT THE RETAIL SPACE IS, THERE’S GOING TO BE A PARKING REDUCTION. THERE ARE SLIGHT VARIATIONS IN THE REQUIRED PARKING BUT A GENERAL RETAIL LOCATION REQUIRES THE SAME AMOUNT OF PARKING AS THIS LOCATION. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES A SECURITY PLAN, IT INCLUDES SECURITY GUARDS AND NIGHTLY PATROLS. THE SIX FOOT SETBACK TO SCHOOLS AND BASED ON THE MEASUREMENT OF HOW THE — AS THEY WOULD SAY, AS THE CROW FLIES IS APPROXIMATELY 1225 FEET AWAY FROM A SCHOOL AND A CERTIFIED ODOR MITIGATION PLAN WAS PROVIDED, THAT INCLUDES ADMINISTRATIVE AND ENGINEERING CONTROLS, SO HERE’S A MAP OF THE CLOSEST SCHOOLS, SO WE HAVE THE PROJECT LOCATION HERE, I JUST OUTLINED THE PARCELS FOR EACH SCHOOL AND PUT A DOT THERE AS WELL. SO, I BELIEVE THIS IS A CHARTER SCHOOL, THIS I A PRIVATE CATHOLIC SCHOOL, I CAN’T REMEMBER, THERE’S A SCHOOL HERE AND THEN THIS IS SANTA ROSA HIGH AND ANOTHER SCHOOL RIGHT HERE WHICH I CAN’T REMEMBER THE NAME. RIDGE WAY HIGH SCHOOL, SORRY. AGAIN, A FOCUS TRAFFIC STUDY AND STAFF FINDING CONCLUDE THE SITE IS SUFFICIENT WITH NO SIGNIFICANT INCREASE OF TRIP GENERATION, THERE’S NO ON-SITE CON SUMS PROPOSED WITH THIS PROJECT, PROPOSED DELIVERIES TO DISPENSARY FROM THE DISPENSARY FOR CUSTOMERS IS 9 A.M. TO 9 P.M., DISTRIBUTOR DELIVERY HOURS ARE 6 A.M. TO 10 P.M. DAILY, AS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT, AND ALL OTHER FED EXOFFICEFULLIES LARGER VEHICLES SHOULD BE MADE NO EARLIER THAN 8 A.M. DAILY. WHAT’S NOT MENTIONED HERE AS WELL IS IN THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION, IF YOU’RE — YOU CAN HAVE A MEDICAL RECOMMENDATION TO BE 18, 19, 20, 21 OR OLDER BUT IT STARTS AT 18 RATHER THAN 21 FOR RECREATIONAL SO YOU CAN PURCHASE WITH A RECOMMENDATION AT 18 AS AN ADULT. THIS SITE WILL NOT SERVE PATRONS AT THE LOCATION WHO ARE BETWEEN 18 AND 20, SO YOU HAVE TO BE 21, WHETHER IT’S A PRESCRIPTION OR NOT, THEY WILL PROVIDE DELIVERY SERVICES TO THOSE WHO ARE 18 TO 20. THE PROJECT IS — QUALIFIES FOR A CEQA CLASS 1 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND THAT IT’S A EXISTING PRIVATE STRUCTURE REQUIRING NEGLIGIBLE EXPANSION OF USE, THE PROJECT ALSO IS A CLASS 3, A CEQA CLASS 3 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AS IT INVOLVES A CHANGE OF USE WHERE ONLY MINOR MODIFICATIONS ARE MADE TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE STRUCTURE, A WELL AS A CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AS AN INFILL DEVELOPMENT, IT’S CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THE ZONING DISTRICT, IT’S LESS THAN 5 ACRES IN SIZE AND WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, IT’S SURROUNDED BY URBAN USES, THERE’S NO VLUE FOR HABITAT OR ENDANGERED OR RARE THREATENED SPECIES, IT’S SERVED BY NECESSARY UTILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICE AND IS NO FORESEEABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO TRAFFIC, NOISE, AIR QUALITY OR WATER QUALITY ARE INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT. SO, THE PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE RESOLUTION CUP 18-O 0* 8020 ALLOW THE MEDICAL AND ADULT USE CANNABIS DISPENSARY WITH DELIVERY AT 353 COLLEGE AVENUE WHILE ALSO INCLUDING AN APPROVAL OF A PARKING REDUCTION, AN ON-SITE PARKING REDUCTION OF 6 SPACES WITH THE CONDITION THAT PARKING PASSES TO CITY GREJ NUMBER ONE BE SUPPLIED TO EMPLOYEES AND 12 COVERED BICYCLE PARKING SPACES BE PROVIDED ON-SITE AS WELL. AND AGAIN I’M ADAM ROSS, CITY PLANNER, AND I’M READY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE WITH REP — REPRESENTATIVES AS WELL WHO WORKED ON THE PROJECT. THANK YOU.>>ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF RIGHT NOW? I’M SORRY, WE CAN DO THAT, OKAY. NOW WE CAN HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.>>[INAUDIBLE].>>I DON’T THINK YOUR MIC. IS ON.>>AM I LIVE NOW? THERE WE GO, I’LL REPEAT AGAIN, GOOD AFTERNOON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE AND ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER, I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR THEIR WORK, VERY DILIGENT WORK IN HELPING US WORK THROUGH A NUMBER OF DIFFICULT HISTORIC ISSUES AND OTHER ELEMENTS AND I’LL TOUCH ON BRIEFLY IN THE PRESENTATION, I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FOR THIS PROJECT STARTED OFF A NUMBER OF THE ELEMENTS THAT YOU SEE IN OUR PROPOSAL WAS ONE OF THE MOST COLLABORATIVE ONES THAT I’VE EXPERIENCED, WHILE I KNOW THAT THERE ARE REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE ASSOCIATION HERE IN OPPOSITION, THEIR COMMENTS WERE WELL REASONED, PROVIDED US WITH IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND I BELIEVE LED TO A SUPERIOR PROJECT AT THE END OF THE DAY, SO I THANK THEM FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION AND LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING THAT RELATIONSHIP ONCE THE DISPENSARY IS OPENED HOPEFULLY WITH YOUR APPROVAL. THE STAFF ANALYSIS AND WORK AND THE STAFF REPORT THAT YOU RECEIVED IS SOMETHING THAT WE BELIEVE THEY’VE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB IN REPRESENTING THE PROJECT. I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE ONE CLARIFICATION FROM A WRITTEN RESPONSE I GAVE EARLIER TDAY TO A QUESTION FROM ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THE USE OF AN ON-SITE 15 MINUTE PARKING SPOT FOR THE DELIVERY VEHICLE, IT WAS BEFORE WE HAD RECEIVED CONFIRMATION WE COULD USE THE 24 MINUTE PARKING SPOT THAT’S OFF-SITE, SO THE DELIVERY VEHICLES WON’T NEED TO UTILIZE ANY OF THE SIX ON-SITE SPACES AT ANY POINT IN TIME BUT WE MAY STILL MARK SOMETHING AS 15 MINUTES BECAUSE WE HAVE NO ON-SITE CONSUMPTION BEING PROPOSED, THIS IS NOT A FACILITY THAT’S INTENDED FOR THE LINGERING OF CUSTOMERS BUT IS REALLY A RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT IN THE CONCEPT OF OTHER RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AND OTHER INDUSTRIES AS WELL. I WANTED TO NOTE THE HISTORIC CONTEXT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS SOMETHING WE TOOK VERY SERIOUSLY, IN WORKING WITH STAFF AND THEIR DISCOVERY OF THE ILLEGAL NATURE OF SOME OF THE IMPROVEMENT TOS THE BUILDING, WHILE WE ARE PROPOSING NO EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS BUILDING IN PART TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF IT, WE DO LOOK FORWARD TO RESTORING THE NATURE OF THIS BUILDING, BEING ABLE TO ADD BACK IN THE ADA PARKING SPOT THAT WAS MADE UNUSABLE WITH THOSE MODIFICATIONS AND THE ADDITIONAL PARKING SPOT THAT WAS BLOCKED FROM THEM, SO WE BELIEVE THE REMOVAL OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS IS AN IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS PROJECT, AND SECOND TO LAST, I WANT TO CITE GENERAL PLAN POLICY T B-2, WHILE WE’RE LOOKING AT TRAFFIC USES, T B-2 SPECIFICALLY CALLS FOR HEAVY TRAFFIC GENERATING USES WHICH WE’RE NOT, EVEN IF WE WERE A HEAVY TRAFFIC GENERATING USE, THERE’S SUPPOSED TO BE WITH DIRECT OR IMMEDIATE SECONDARY ACCESS TO REGIONAL AND ARTERIAL STREETS, AND THAT’S THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND THIS PROJECT, IT HAS IMMEDIATE SECONDARY ACCESS TO A REGIONAL AND ARTERIAL STREET AS DEFINED IN THE GENERAL PLAN WHICH IS COLLEGE AVENUE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I CALL THAT PART OF THE GENERAL PLAN AS WELL AS THE ONES THAT YOU KNOW SO WELL, THIS IS A LOCAL COMPANY THAT’S BRINGING IN A LOCAL VERTICAL INTEGRATION, WE HAVE TWO SUPPLY CHAIN BUSINESSES THAT ARE PARTNERING IN PART ON THIS THROUGH DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF IT SO YOU’RE NOT JUST CREATING JOBS THAT ARE GOING INTO THIS RETAIL DEPARTMENT, YOU’RE PARTNERING WITH THE JOBS OF THESE SANTA RAISE BUSINESSES WHICH DIRECTLY AFFECTS EB4 WHICH CALLS THOSE TYPE OF SANTA ROSA STRATEGIES. WHILE MY PERSONAL CELL NUMBER WILL BE BOTH AVAILABLE TO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS FROM NOW UNTIL THE PROJECT OPENING AND QUITE HONESTLY ANYONE ELSE IF THERE ARE ANY ISSUE THAT IS COME U DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME, ONCE THE MANAGER IS HIRED FOR THE FACILITY CLOSER TO OPENING, THEIR DIRECT NUMBER WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVES FROM ALL ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS TO IMMEDIATELY HANDLE ANY CONCERNS SHOULD THEY ARISE, BUT WE BELIEVE THAT THE OPERATING PROPOSAL OF HAVING A SECURITY GUARD BE AVAILABLE TO ALSO GO TO THE ALLEY WAY THAT’S A COUPLE DOORS DOWN FROM THIS PROPERTY WOULD HOPEFULLY IMPROVE MANY OF THE EXISTING IMPACTS THAT WERE NOTED BY THE NEIGHBORS. WITH THAT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION AGAIN, WE CONCUR WITH STAFF’S ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION AND RECOMMENDATION AND I’M AVAILABLE AS IS CAMERON NAIY WITH W-TRANBACKER TRANS THAT COMPLETED THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS TO ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS.>>GREET, THANK YOU, WE’LL HAVE YOU CME BACK UP AGAIN AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANSWER QUESTIONS TOO. OKAY. SO, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT, I HAVE MULTIPLE CARDS AND SO IF YOU HAVEN’T BEEN HERE BEFORE, I WILL LET YOU KNOW THAT I’M GOING TO CALL YOUR NAME, THERE ARE TWO MICROPHONES UP THERE, I’LL CALL THE NAME THAT’S GOING TO BE SPEAKING AND THEN CALL THE SECOND NAME SO YOU CAN BEGIN TO QUEUE UP. I AM A PRETTY STRICT TIME KEEPER, SO I’M GOING TO ASK YOU TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE LIGHT BAR THAT’S IN FRONT OF YOU, IT’S GOING TO START WITH GREEN AS YOU BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION, AS IT GETS CLOSER TO THE THREE MINUTE DEADLINE, IT WILL GO TO YELLOW. WHEN IT TURNS TO RED AND THE BUZZER GOES OFF, I’M GOING THE ASK YOU TO STOP, IF YOU CAN KEEP WITHIN THAT TIMEFRAME, I WON’T HAVE TO INTERRUPT YOU AND WE’LL GET THE FULL BENEFIT OF YOUR COMMENTS. IT’S OKAY IF YOU HEAR SOMEBODY SAY SOMETHING THAT YOU AGREE WITH, YOU CAN RAISE YOUR HAND, YOU MAY NOT FEEL YOU NEED TO MAKE YOUR OWN STATEMENT TO REPEAT IT, WE WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY, WE DON’T ALLOW APPLAUDING OR BOOING, SO IF YOU HAVE SOME AGREEMENT, RAISE YOUR HAND TO THE SPEAKER AND I SUPPOSE IF YOU DISAGREE, YOU CAN DO A THUMBS DOWN OR SOMETHING, BUT NON-AUDIBLE, PLEASE. OKAY. SO, WITH THAT, I’M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN OUR PUBLIC HEARING, AND THE FIRST PERSON IS MARK PERRY FOLLOWED BY TRINA [INAUDIBLE]>>HI, I’M MARK PERRY, AN ARCHITECT, I LIVE WITH MY WIFE CATHERINE AT 419 BENTON STREET, I HAVE A SPECIAL INTEREST IN OUR HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IF PRESERVATION DISTRICT PRESERVATION INCLUDING THIS PRESERVATION DISTRICT AND DESIGN POLITICS AND BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, ETC., I’M A FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE RIDGE WAY HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS IS A HISTORIC DISTRICT WHICH MEANS IT’S A CULTURAL RAOE RE SOURCE FOR THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA AND I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE TREATED WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION BECAUSE IT IS INDEED A CULTURAL RESOURCE. THE WHOLE PRESERVATION INDUSTRY STARTED AS A GRASS ROOTS RESPONSE OF THE COMMUNITY TO DEMOLITION AND EXCESSIVE EFFECT O THE CULTURAL RESOURCES. I THINK THAT TOO MUCH PRESSURE TO ADVANCE WITHOUT CAREFUL CONSIDERATION CAN GET IN THE WAY. THIS HAS BEEN ILL CONCEIVED IN MY MIND. THE PARKING IS HORRENDOUS, THE TRAFFIC IS HORRENDOUS, GIVING PARKING CREDITS WHEN IT’S OVERLY EXTENDED ALREADY IS REALLY UNBELIEVABLE TO THOSE OF US THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. NOT ONLY MORE SECIFICALLY THE PROXIMITY TO THE JC SANTA ROSA HIGH SCHOOL AND RIDGE WAY HIGH WHICH IS A CONTINUATION SCHOOL OF AT-RISK CHILDREN IS HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE AS WELL. I THINK THERE IS A MUCH, MUCH BETTER PLACE FOR THIS FACILITY THAN ONE THAT CLEARLY IS UNDERBRED ON A VERY, VERY BUSY NEIGHBORHOOD AND IS RESISTED BY THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE — OTHER 24 OF US SHOWED UP IN THE MEET, I’M SURPRISED IT WENT FORWARD WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY WHICH I GUESS THEY DON’T REALIZE TAT THE NEIGHBORS DON’T WANT THIS AT LARGE AND I WOULD ASK YOU TO PLEASE VOTE NO. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU, MR. PERRY. NEXT IS TRINA DE LA SHAPELL FOLLOWED BY DUSTIN MAXUM.>>HELLO. MY NAME IS TRINA AND I LIVE AROUND THE CORNER FROM THE SITE THAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT, I’M HERE REPRESENTING A LOT OF NEIGHBORS WHO WORK AND COULD NOT BE HERE. I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT — I ALSO WROTE A LETTER AND I CERTAINLY HOPE MY TIME HERE TODAY AND THE TIME I SPENT WRITING MY LETTER WAS NOT A WASTE OF TIME AND IT WOULD BE IF THIS IS A DONE DEAL. SEVERAL THINGS ABOUT THE PARKING IS — I DON’T KNOW IF I CAN ASK ADAM ROSS A QUESTION, IS THERE ANY GUARANTEE THE EMPLOYEES WOULD USE THOSE PARKING PASSES AND PARK IN THE GARAGE THAT’S 7 MINUTE WALKING DISTANCE AWAY, IS THERE ANY GUARANTEE THEY WOULD NOT PARK IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD?>>AND ICAN GET A RESPONSE FOR YOU AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.>>OKAY, SO THAT’S A CONCERN I HAVE BECAUSE IT FEELS TO ME LIKE THAT’S JUST PUT OUT THERE TO FURTHER TRY TO COMPLY WITH THE PARKING SITUATION. ALSO, RESTRIPING THE PARKING LOT JUST SOUNDS LIKE WE’RE CREATING ANEW PARKING SPACE OUT OF THIN AIR. IF THAT PARKING LOT WAS STRIPED THE WAY IT IS NOW, THAT’S WHEN CARS WERE SMALLER AND THERE WEREN’T SUV’S, I DON’T SEE HOW THEY’ EAR GOING TO CREATE YAIT A NEW PARKING SPACE WITH HOW BIG CARS ARE NOW FROM WHAT’S ALREADY THERE, IT IS A TINY, TINY PARKING LOT AND I DON’T KNOW IF THOSE SLIDES ACCURATELY SHOW HOW NARROW GLENN STREET IS, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT IN THE 20’S, 1920’S, GLENN STREET, WHEN THERE ARE CARS PRKED ON EITHER SIDE OF IT, YOU CANNOT HAVE CARS GOING IN BOTH DIRECTIONS, SOMEBODY HAS TO PULL OVER. I’M NOT SURE IF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RECOMMENDING THIS UNDERSTAND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AT ALL. WE HAVE THREE SCHOOLS THAT FEED INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TWICE A DAY, THREE. THE JC, SANTA ROSA HIGH AND RIDGE WAY, THEY CUT THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY THINK IT’S A SHORT CUT TO GET ON TO COLLEGE, SO IF YOU COME AROUND 8 A.M. OR 7:30 AND 3:00 IN THE AFTERNOON, I CANNOT GET OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY, CARS ARE BACKED UP DOWN EVERY STREET AND WE’RE GOING TO HAVE DELIVERY TRUCKS NOW AND CUSTOMERS. ALSO, COLLEGE AVENUE IS NOT REALLY RETAIL, THE ONE — THE PART OF COLLEGE THAT BORDERS ON OUR — IT IS OFFICES, THE ONLY OTHER RETAIL I CAN THINK OF IS A BIKE SHOP ON THE NEXT BLOCK. THEY’RE OFFICES. IT’S 50% LESS PARKING SPACES THAN IT’S SUPPOSED TO HAVE, AND YOU’RE IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU’RE NOT IN AN INDUSTRIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. I MEAN, IF YOU’RE NOT GOING TO ENFORCE THE PARKING ZONE REQUIREMENT IN THIS CASE, ARE YOU ENFORCING IT FOR OTHER BUSINESSES?>>THANK YOU. NEXT IS DUSTIN MAXUM FOLLOWED BY JAY KASULE.>>MY NAME IS DUSTIN, MY WIFE AND I OWN A HOME ON 325 COREY OWE STREET WHERE WE LIVED FOR THE LAST 16 YEAR WEBSINGER HAVE TWO BOYS, AGES 4 AND 6 WHO PLAY ON OUR FRONT LAWN 300 FEET FROM THE PROPOSED PROJECT. WE ASK THAT YOU DO NOT APPROVE THIS PROJECT, IN ADDITION TO OUR CAMBERS INCLUDING TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE, MANY OF THE FINDINGS NEEDED SIMPLY CANNOT BE MET, FOR EXAMPLE, FINDING A, THE PROJECT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH MANY PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING IN CITY CDE. IF IT DID, A PARKING REDUCTION WOULD NOT BE NEEDED. A 50% PARKING REDUCTION IS DETRIMENTAL TO BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SURROUNDING BUSINESSES. THERE’S AN INCREDIBLE PARKING SHORT TANL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. MOST HOMES WERE BUILT IN THE 1920’S AND 40’S AND HAVE ONE OFF STREET PARKING SPACE, I AM LUCKY IF I CAN EVEN PARK ON MY BLOCK EVERY DAY WHEN I GET HOME FROM WORK. THE ZONING CDE ONLY ALLOWS FOR A 25% REDUCTION, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERS’ ENTIRE ANALYSIS IS FLAWED BECAUSE IT IS BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT 6 SPACES WILL BE UTILIZED IN THE DOWNTOWN PARKING GARAGE. THIS PROJECT IS BEING ANALYZED AS IF I WERE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL BUT IF IT WERE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL, THIS USE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED. IT IS NOT REASONABLE TO ASSUME THE EMPLOYEES WILL WALK A QUARTER MILE, 7 MINUTES IN THE RAIN OR COLD. IT IS ALSO NOT REASONABLE FROM A PERSONAL SAFETY PER SPECIE TO MAKE THAT WALK IN THE DRK. I KNOW FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE. ALSO, THE PROPOSED RECONFIGURATION OF THE PARKING LOT DOES NOT MEET THE CURRENT PARKING DESIGN STANDARDS OF SECTION 26-30, THIS INCLUDES SETBACKS, IT ALSO DOESN’T MEET THE CITY’S LOW IMPACT DESIGN REQUIREMENTS OR THE LANDSCAPE STANDARDS OF SECTION 20-24, IT DOES NOT MEET THE FULL ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION B TOF CBC, GIVEN THE SMALL SIZE OF THE PARKING LOT AND BACKUP SPACE, VEHICLES WILL HAVE ISSUES TURNING AND NAVIGATE THING PARKING LOT THUS CREATES AN UNSAFE EXIT. BAGGING UP ON TO THE RESIDENTIAL STRAOELT. THE BUILDING AND FENCES APPEAR TO CONFLICT WITH VISION TRIANGLES REQUIRED BY ZONING SECTION 20-30, THESE VEHICLES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SAFELY EXIT THE PARKING LOT OR VIEW PEDESTRIANS ON THE SIDEWALK. I’VE WRITTEN YOU A LETTER DETAILING OTHER CONCERNS I HAVE ABOUT RESIDENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND I HOPE THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER THOSE AS WELL. WHATEVER THE OUTCOME TONIGHT, I’M SURE THE DECISION WILL BE APPEALED TO CITY COUNCIL, SO WHY NOT TAKE A STAND WITH THE NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PEOPLE INCLUDING MYSELF ARE PREPARING TO LEAVE.>>THANK YOU, MR. MAXUM, AND THANK YOU FOR DOING YOUR LT E WE DO HAVE IT.>>( CALLING SPEAKER NAMES ).>>GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS JAY KASULE, WE’RE A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION SERVING YOUTH HERE IN SANTA ROSA COUNT COUNTY, IT IS 20 STEPS TO THE PROPOSED DISPENSARY, EVERY MORNING I HAVE YOUTH THAT COME TO MY DOOR FOR WORK, VOCATIONAL COUNSELING TO BETTER THEMSELVES AND FROM EVERY SINGLE HIGH SCHOOL THAT HAS A PROBATION YOUTH IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY, YOUTH COME TO MY DOOR FOR PROGRAM, TO IMPROVE THEMSELVES AND TO STAY OUT FROM BEHIND BARS. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE YOUTH THAT COME TO MY DOOR ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO HVE ISSUES WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND WITH IMPULSE CONTROL. JUST IMAGINE STANDING AT MY FRONT DOOR AND LOOK OVER AND SEEING A SUBSTANCE PURVEYOR ACROSS THE STREET, NOT ONLY THAT, TERE HAVE BEEN TWO LETTERS FROM THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN SERVICES AND THE DIRECTOR OF PROBATION HERE IN SONOMA COUNTY TO ADAM EXPRESSING THEIR CONCERN ABOUT MY PROGRAMS AND THE APPROPRIATENESS OF BEING RIGHT NEXT TO A DSPENSARY. THAT MEANS TO ME THAT NOT ONLY COULD THIS BE INJURIOUS TO THE YOUTH THAT I SERVE, WHEN M RFP’S COME OUT TO THESE COUNTY AGENCIES, THOSE PROGRAMS MAY VERY WELL NOT BE FUNDED AGAIN AND THAT MEAN IS THE LONG-TERM, YOUTH TAT HAVE A DESPERATE NEED TO PICK THEMSELVES UP, TO BETTER THEIR CASE HERE IN SONOMA COUNTY WILL NOT HAVE THAT RESOURCE AND THE COURTS THEMSELVES WILL ALSO NOT HAVE THE RESOURCE OF THE CENTER TO KEEP THESE KIDS FROM BEHIND BARS WITH THEIR FAMILIES AND GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO IMPROVE THEIR LIVES. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. NEXT IS ARIAN ZEE FOLLOWED BY ANDREW.>>HELLO. THE MAIN THING I WANT TO SAY IS THAT FROM WHAT I’VE WITNESSED OTHER THE LAST DECADE WITH THE OWNERS OF THIS PROPOSED DISPENSARY IS THAT THEY HISTORICALLY LEAVE EVERY PLACE THAN THEY FOUND IT, [INAUDIBLE], I UNDERSTAND THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS CONCERNS, I FEEL THE PROPOSED DISPENSARY MAY RELIEVE THEM OF SOME OF THOSE PROBLEMS BECAUSE UNLIKE MANY A PROPOSED DIVE BAR IN THE AREA, I FEEL LIKE THE OWNERS OF THIS COMPANY WILL LISTEN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TRY TO GO OUT OF NAIR WAY TO HELP THEM OUT. I DON’T THINK — I’M JUST CONFIDENT THAT THIS PROPOSED DISPENSARY WILL CONTINUE TO BUILD ON THEIR TRACK RECORD OF HELPING AND IMPROVE THING COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU.>>NEXT IS ANDREW KRAUSE FOLLOWED BY JOHN LONG.>>IT’S ANDREW KRAMER.>>SORRY, OKAY.>>YEAH, SO I KIND OF LIKE TO SPEAK TO — THE OWNERS OF GREEN PEN OWN ANOTHER DISPENSARY THAT WAS RATED NUMBER ONE IN TE ENTIRE NATION FOR THE OPERATORS BASED ON SUSTAINABILITY, BASED ON ENVIRONMENT, BASED ON THE WAY THEY TREAT THEIR EMPLOYEES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE SO YOU’RE NOT HAVING SOMEONE COMING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT’S A SHADY OPERATOR, I WOULD LIKE THE SPEAK TO THEIR CHARACTER BECAUSE AS ALEX WAS SAY, IT’S A VERTICALLY INTEGRATED COMPANY, WITH WE HAD THE FIRES HAPPEN, I KNOW DENNIS DROPPED EVERYTHING, WITHIN TWO OR THREE DAYS OFFERED UP A BUILDING TO THE RED CROSS FREE OF CHARGE SO WE HAD THE RED CROSS COMMAND STATION OPERATING OUT OF THERE AND I KNOW THE CANNABIS INDUSTRY IS NEW TOO LOT OF PEOPLE BUT AS ARI SAID, I’VE ONLY VISITED 100 DISPENSARIES FROM ALL OVER AND I’VE NEVER SEEN AN UPTICK IN CRIME FROM IT, TYPICALLY YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE CLEANING THEIR PARKING LOTS, YOU HAVE PEOPLE WATCHING THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT’S TYPICALLY A GOOD THING FOR THE COMMUNITY, SO I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK TO THAT, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.>>THANK YOU. JOHN LAWN FOLLOWED BY KATIE CLARK.>>JOHN LAWN, IEM A HOMEOWNER ABOUT 950 FEET AS THE CROW FLIES FROM THAT LOCATION, I LIVE IN A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD, HOUSE IS 1901, I HAVE A BUSINESS RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO ME AND I CN TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION WITH THE PEOPLE — THAT THEY HAVE WITH PARKING AND I GET FRUSTRATED SOMETIMES WHEN I DON’T HAVE A SPOT IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE. AT TE END OF THE DAY, IT IS A BUSINESS LOCATION, THERE’S GOING TO BE A BUSINESS IN THERE REGARDLESS OR IT’S JUST GOING TO BE VACANT AND ANY BUSINESS IS GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE CARS PARKING THERE, SO UNLESS IT IS TO BE TORN DOWN, I DON’T SE THE PARKING THING AS — THAT BIG OF AN ISSUE THAT DOESN’T HVE TO BE DEALT WITH IN ANY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I ALSO THINK THAT HAVING THE SECURITY GUARDS THERE AND HAVING THE PLACE CLEANED UP WOULD BE A NICE TOUCH, THAT BUILDING’S LOOKED REALLY BAD FOR QUITE A WHILE. THAT’S OFF I HAVE TO SAY.>>GREAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT IS KATIE CLARK FOLLOWED BY JOANNA CEDAR.>>HI, IT’S IMPORTANT TO THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THIS BUILDING BEING VACANT ISN’T HELPING ANYBODY, IT’S NOT HELPING WHAT’S GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I DOESN’T HELP THE COMMUNITY IN GENERAL. BUSINESSES HAVE COME AND GO FROM THIS BUILDING, A DISPENSARY WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WILL REMAIN AND BE SOLID COMMUNITY AND WITH EMPLOYMENT, SO I THINK IF YOU’VE ALL BEEN OUT TO THE PARKING LOT, YOU SEE THERE’S A LOT OF ISSUES GOING ON NOW, THEY’LL TAKE CARE OF THOSE ISSUES. THANK YOU.>>GREAT, THANK YOU. JOANNA CEDAR FOLLOWED BY JOHN PHILLIPS.>>THANK YOU. MY NAME IS JOANNA CEDAR AND I APPRECIATE THE OPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY ABOUT THIS PROPOSED DISPENSARY PROJECT. I’M CREDENTIAL TO TACH SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HEALTH EDUCATION AT THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEVEL AND FOR ALMOST 20 YEAR, I TAUGHT IN THE SANTA ROSA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, MOST OF THEM AT SANTA ROSA HIGH SCHOOL, ONE OF THE HIGH SCHOOLS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE PROPOSED DISPENSARY, I REVIEWED ALL OF THE ANCILLARY MATERIALS AND LETTERS SBMITTED BY THE COMMUNITY AND LISTENED TO MANY OF THE COMMENTS OFFERED HERE TODAY AND I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECTLY ADDRESS THE IDEA THAT THIS DISPENSARY POSES A PROBLEM OR CONSTITUTES A NEGATIVE INFLUENCE ON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS, EVEN THOSE AT RISK OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE. THE DATA DO NOT SPPORT THESE CONCLUSIONS, IN MY DIRECT EXPERIENCE, I CAN WITHOUT EQUIVOCATION ASSERT THAT HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS OBTAIN THEIR CANNABIS FROM THE BLACK MARKET, NOT THE REGULATED DISPENSARY SYSTEM, NUMBER TWO, NORMALIZING THE PROCESS OF ADULTS OBTAINING CANNABIS FROM THE REGULATED MARKET DECREASES TEEN USE OF CANNABIS T MORE TEENS LEARN ABOUT AND VIEW THE LEGAL MARKET, THE LESS DESIRABLE MISUSE AND ABUSE OF THE PRODUCT BECOMES TO THEIR DEMOGRAPHIC. OPPOSITION TO THIS DISPENSARY SEEMS TO BE PREDICATED ON THE ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTION THAT THOSE WHO ARE CUSTOMERS OF A CANNABIS DISPENSARY ARE SOMEHOW UNDESIRABLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND POSE A RISK TO YOUTH, THIS BELIEF IS ROOTED IN 80 YEARS OF STIGMA AND PROHIBITION BUT IT IS UNTRUE, ANYONE WHO HAS SUCCESSFULLY PARENTED OR TAUGHT A TEENAGER KNOWS THAT ATTEMPTING TO SANITIZE THEIR ENVIRONMENT WITH THE INTENTION OF CONTROLLING THEIR BEHAVIOR DOES NOT WORK, DUE TO MY UNIQUE EXPERIENCE IN TRAINING AND IN LIGHT OF THE EMPIRICAL DATA AVAILABLE ON SIMILAR PROJECTS AND IN SIMILAR LOCATIONS, I ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER MY COMMENTS WITH PROPER WEIGHT AND MERIT. ADDITIONALLY, I ASK THIS BODY DEEM THAT WHICH THE MAJORITY OF WRITERS ABOUT THIS ISSUE HAVE FOUND COUNTERINTUITIVE, THAT THE IMPACTS OF A WELL REGULATED CANNABIS MARKET ON YOUTH ARE LARGELY POSITIVE AND I ASK YOU TO VOTE TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. JOHN PHILLIPS FOLLOWED BY RALPH SIEX.>>HELLO, MY NAME IS JOHN PHILLIPS, I LIVE AT 228 BENTON AND I THANK THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR HAVING COMMENTS TODAY. MANY YEARS AGO, I LIVED DOWN AT THE PENINSULA AND WAS A PLANNING COMMISSION MYSELF AND HAD TO REVIEW MANY PROJECTS, SOME WERE FAVORABLE TO THE COMMUNITY AND SOME WERE VERY QUESTIONABLE AND SOMETIMES I HAD TO MAKE A DIFFICULT DECISION AND HAVE THAT WILL TO DENY A PROJECT. LIVING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND WALKING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD EVERY DAY WITH MY DOGS, I REALLY COMMISERATE WITH ALL THE NEIGHBORS ON GLENN STREET, THE PARKING, THE TRAFFIC, THE PARKING AND TRAFFIC ESPECIALLY DURING SCHOOL HOURS IS REASON ENOUGH IN MY MRAOEF TO DENY THE PROJECT. I THINK THAT I’M ALSO A WINERY OWNER TODAY SO I DO ALSO UNDERSTAND OWNING A BUSINESS AND OWNING A BUSINESS THAT SELLS A SUBSTANCE THAT CAN BE USED INAPPROPRIATELY AT TIMES. AND I’VE ALSO HAD TO ASK PEOPLE THE LEAVE MY WINERY WHEN THEY ARE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT SUBSTANCES, SO I DO GET THE NATURE OF WHAT’S BEING ASKED FOR IN TERMS OF WHAT’S BEING PROPOSED TO BE SOLD AT THIS LOCATION. I THINK THAT THE DANGER REALLY DESPITE THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER HAVING AT-RISK KIDS WALKING THE STREET EVERY DAY, HAVING WALKING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MYSELF IN THE MORNING AND SEEING KIDS RIGHT UP IN THE MORNING BEFORE SCHOOL, HAVING EASIER ACCESS TO CANNABIS IS JUST NOT A GOOD IDEA SO CLOSE TO THESE HIGH SCHOOLS. WE HAVE PLACES WHERE FOLKS CAN JUST PULL OFF AND TOKE UP RIGHT BEFORE SCHOOL AND VERY LITTLE ENFORCEMENT AND I REALIZE THAT MAYBE THAT’S THE EXCEPTION RATHER THAN THE RULE FOR LEGITIMATE CANNABIS BUSINESS BUT IT STILL IS A PROBLEM IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH TWO HIGH SCHOOLS AND A COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND ALSO THE ARMORY WHERE WE HAVE A LOT OF AT-RISK PEOPLE ESPECIALLY IN THE WINTER MONTHS USING THAT AS THEIR RIGHT-OF-WAY TO REACH A SHELTER SO I AM SEEING WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE NEGATIVE IMPACTS. I DN’T KNOW WHAT WILL BE THE MITIGATION OF THOSE IMPACTS ONCE THIS PROJECT IS APPROVED AND MOVES FORWARD. I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT ONCE THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE AND I TRULY THINK THE PARKING ALONE AND THE TRAFFIC ISSUES ALONE WILL WILL CREATE A NUISANCE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND BE A DIFFICULT — I THINK THAT WOULD BE A DIFFICULT REASON ENOUGH TO APPROVE THE PROJECT. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR LISTENING TO ALL OF US FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I’M ALSO VICE CHAIR OF THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD BUT I’M SPEAKING AS MYSELF, IT’S A WONDERFUL NEIGHBORHOOD AND I JUST DON’T WANT THE SEE THE DISRUPTION ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE LIVING AROUND GLENN BECAUSE THERE WILL BE AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND PARKING PROBLEMS. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. NEXT IS RALPH SIEX.>>HI, SOME OF THESE POINTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN TOUCHED BUT I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE PARKING, I AGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER, THIS TO ME IS NOT REALLY ABOUT THE CANNABIS ISSUE, IT’S REALLY ABOUT THE FACT THAT QUITE FRANKLY, THIS IS JUST NOT A VERY GOOD SITE FOR RETAIL USE. THE CURRENT DESIGN OF THE PARKING LOT THAT WAS SHOWN IN THE PLAN, I BELIEVE IT’S BEEN TOUCHED ON, IT MEANS IN THE PARKING LOT IS FULL OR HAS AT LEAST FOUR OR FIVE VEHICLES IN IT, EVERY CAR WILL HAVE TO BACK OUT ON TO THE STREET IN ORDER TO EXIT THE PARKING LOT. NOW, I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE PARAMETERS ARE IN THE LAW BUT THAT JUST SHOULDN’T BE A WAY THAT WE ALLOW A PARKING LOT TO BE USED ON A STREET THAT HAS A LOT OF TRAFFIC AT CERTAIN TIMES OF DAY. I WOULD WONDER WHETHER ALL OF YOU VISITED THE SITE BUT DID ANY OF YOU VISIT THE SITE IN THE MORNING AROUND 8:00 WHEN SCHOOL — WHEN PEOPLE ARE GOING THE SCHOOL OR AT 3:00 OR 3:30 IN THE AFTERNOON WHEN PEOPLE ARE LEAVING SCHOOL. AT THOSE TIMES OF DAY, IT IS DIFFICULT TO EVEN NEGOTIATE THAT STREET BECAUSE OF THE CROSSWALK THAT IS LOCATED ON COLLEGE AVENUE, THAT IS A MAJOR AVENUE FOR CHILDREN TO BE WALKING BACK AND FORTH TO SCHOOL AND A GATHERING SPOT, BUT AGAIN WITH THE PARKING, IF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BACK ON TO THAT STREET AND THAT STREET OFTEN BECAUSE OF EXISTING PARKING CAN ONLY ACCOMMODATE ONE LANE OF TRAFFIC, THAT JUST DOESN’T MAKE SENSE TO ME THAT YOU WOULD ALLOW THAT USE. THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER RETAIL SPACES THAT ARE BETTER THAN THAT FOR THIS USE. SO, THAT IS THE PRIMARY THING. I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND YOU ALSO OR LET YOU KNOW IF YOU’RE NOT AWARE, I LIVE ENCORE RAOE OWE STREET ON THE 400 BLOCK, WE LIVE EVERY DAY WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF A DECISION MADE ABOUT 40 YEARS AGO TO ALLOW TWO RESIDENCES TO BE TORN DOWN AND REZONED SO THEY COULD BE TURNED INTO A PARKING LOT. THAT IS — IN OTHER WORDS, IT WAS ORIGINALLY RESIDENTIAL HOUSES, WE NOW HAVE A SITUATION WHERE OVERFLOW EMPLOYEE PARKING IS ALWAYS ON CORILLO STREET, IT’S PART OF WHAT ADDS TO THE PARKING ISSUE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO I WOULD AGREE AGAIN, IF THERE AREN’T ENOUGH PARKING SPACES HERE, I DON’T THINK WE SHOULD THINK THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE PARKING 7 MINUTES AWAY AND ALWAYS WALKING WHEN IT DOESN’T SUIT THEM, THEY’RE GOING TO BE PARKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ONCE YOU APPROVE THIS, I GUARANTEE YOU, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. RIGHT NOW, I’VE HAD A CAR SITTING ON THE STREET NEAR MY HOUSE FOR 30 DAYS AND ISTILL HAVEN’T GOTTEN ANYBODY FROM THE CITY TO COME OUT AND DEAL WITH IT. THAT’S THE WAY THIS CITY OPERATES, ONCE YOU ALLOW SOMETHING, NOBODY WANTS TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE PROBLEMS. SO, THIS IS THE TIME TO SAY, NO, IT’S NOT THE BEST PLACE TO DO THIS. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. NEXT IS NANCY GRUH CH FOLLOWED BY JULIE MERCER ENGLAND.>>HI, OF COURSE I AGREE WITH A LOT OF GOOD POINTS THAT WERE BROUBLG BROUGHT UP WITH PARKING AND TRAFFIC, I LIVE AT THE CORNER OF COREY OWE AND GLENN, AS I LOOK OUTSIDE MY HOUSE, I CAN SEE THE PROPOSED PROJECT. IN PARTICULAR, ONE THING THAT HAS NOT BEEN POINTED OUT IS HOW THE USE OF THE BUILDING IS BEING PROPOSED AND THAT’S THE ORIENTATION OF THE ENTRANCE. THE BUILDING WAS DESIGNED TO BE USED FROM THE FRONT. TODAY I WAS SURPRISED, I WAS NOT INTENDING TO SPEAK, THEY ARE NOW INTENDING TO USE THE REAR OF THE BUILDING AS THE PRIMARY ACCESS. THAT IS NOT HOW THIS BUILDING WAS EVER DESIGNED TO BE USED. BY PERMITTING THE BUILDING TO BE USED IN THIS FASHION, THEY ARE SHOVING THE ENTIRE USE BASICALLY INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD . THE HOUSE THAT LIVES BASICALLY RIGHT THERE WILL NOW BE FRONT AND CENTER TO THE ENTIRE BUSINESS ALL DAY LONG. FIVE HOUSES, FOUR HOUSES WILL BASICALLY BE RING SIDE TO THE BUSINESS ALL DAY LONG. THIS IS EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTING TO ME. IF THIS BUILDING WERE REQUIRED TO USE THE FRONT ENTRANCE AS THIS BUILDING WAS DESIGNED, PERHAPS THE CUSTOMERS WOULD PARK AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING ALONG THE CURBS, ALONG THE FRONT OF THE STREET, PEOPLE WOULD USE THE PARKING IN THE BACK LOT AND THEN GO TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, IT WOULDN’T BE PUSHED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULDN’T BE SUBJECTED TO THE BUSINESS SO RUDELY WITH THE ARCHITECTURE AS THEY PROPOSED IT, THIS IS PRETTY EGREGIOUS THE WAY THIS IS DESIGNED SO NOT ONLY IS THE PARKING BEING SHOVED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE TRAFFIC IS BEING SHOVED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE WAY THEY’VE ORIENTED THE ENTIRE ARCHITECTURE, IT’S LIKE HERE WE ARE AND WE ARE IN YOUR FACE. I DN’T WANT THE BUILDING TO BE VACANT BUT THE WAY THEY’VE ORIENTED THE WHOLE THING IS LIKE HERE WE ARE AND YOU’RE NOT GETTING RID OF US, AND I DON’T NECESSARILY WANT THEM TO GO AWAY, BUT, MAN, CAN YOU TURN YOURSELVES AROUND AND FACE COLLEGE, THAT WOULD BE NICE.>>THANK YOU. JULIE MERCER IMGRIM FOLLOWED BY ISABELLA TERASTSUS. ER>> MY NAME IS JULIE, I’M A RESIDENT OF SONOMA COUNTY AND A BUSINESS OWNER HERE IN SANTA ROSA, I RUN A BUSINESS CALLED KINDLA, MY OFFICE IS NOT FAR FROM THE PROPOSED LOCATION AND I REPRESENT PART OF THE BUSINESS OWNERS OF THIS PROPOSED BUSINESS AND I’VE WORKED WITH THEM FOR SEVERAL YEAR, I’VE KNOWN THEM TO BE VERY COMPLIANT AND FAIR AND HONEST BUSINESS PEOPLE AND I LOOK FRWARD T YOU WELCOMING IN THIS BUSINESS. I WOULD TLIEK CHANGE THE THINKING AROUND THIS LOCATION, I HEAR A LOT ABOUT PARKING AND THIS AND THAT, BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT OUR COMMUNITY IN A DIFFERENT WAY. WE ARE NO LONGER RURAL OR SUBURBAN, WE ARE BECOMING A MORE URBAN COMMUNITY ESPECIALLY WITH ALL THE COMMERCE AND TECH PEOPLE THAT HAVE MOVED UP HERE FROM THE LOW COST OF LIVING AND THE COMMUNITY, BEING IN TRANSIT IN A CORRIDOR THAT IS EASY TO ACCESS FOR A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY IS ACTUALLY A BENEFIT TO SANTA ROSA. BEING LEZ THAN A THOUSAND FEET FROM A BUS STOP, BEING NAR TO FREEWAY ACCESS AND ANY OHER HIGHWAYS AND PARTS TOF CITY WILL HELP CONSUMERS FIND SAFE ACCESS TO MEDICINE AND CANNABIS PUGS RUGT — PRODUCTS WITHIN THE LEGAL MARKET WITH THESE AND SECURITY. SPEAKING OF SECURITY, THE CITY AND THE STATE HAVE PRETTY STRICT RULES WHEN IT COMES TO CANNABIS RETAIL FACILITIES. SURVEILLANCE, GUARDS, AGE RESTRICTIONS, ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE HIGHLY REGULATED AND WILL ENSURE THERE’S NO DIVERSION ESPECIALLY TO CHILDREN. FURTHERMORE, PACKAGING MUST BE OPAQUE AND UNRECOGNIZABLE, SECURE FROM CHILDREN AT LEAST UNTIL 2020 AND ALL MATERIALS INSIDE OF THAT SECURE AS WELL FROM CHILDREN, SO I SAY IT’S GOING TO BE DISCRETE, THERE’S NO ON-SITE CONSUMPTION PROPOSED IN THIS LOCATION, SO IT WILL BE A NET BEN — BENEFIT TO A VACANT SPOT AND THAT COLOR, WOW, I DON’T KNOW. MY HUSBAND IS A PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCATE, I HAVE TO CHIME IN ABOUT THE SAFETY OF LIQUOR VERSUS MARIJUANA, CANNABIS HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BELESS OF A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE THAN ALCOHOL AND I WOULD JUST HAVE YOU GOOGLE MAP THIS LOCATION AND SEE THAT THERE IS A BAR ACROSS THE STREET, SO ANY ARGUMENT ABOUT THE SECURITY OF OUR CHILDREN’S HEALTH IS DISINGENUOUS WITH HAVING LIQUOR IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. I HAVE ATTENDED ALMOST ALL OF THE MEETINGS HERE IN SANTA ROSA AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT I LOVE WORKING HERE BECAUSE THE MENTALITY IS LET’S TREAT CANNABIS OPERATORS LIKE ANY OTHER BUSINESSES, SO IN THIS CASE, I UGE YOU TO UPHOLD THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT IS A NET BENEFIT. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. ISABELLA TERATSUS.>>HI, MY NAME IS ISABELLA AND I’M A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN SANTA ROSA HIGH SCHOOL. UNTIL I CAME TO THIS MEETING, I HAD NO INTENTION OF SPEAKING UNTIL FIVE MINUTES AGO WHEN I WROTE THIS, SO THAT ASIDE, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS DISPENSARY, THIS IS NOT BECAUSE I WOULD UTILIZE IT IN ANY WAY, I’M NOT OLD ENOUGH NOR DO I HAVE A DESIRE TO, I BELIEVE IT WOULD PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GROW AS A SOCIETY ESPECIALLY REGARDING OUR YOUTH. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT ONCE AGAIN THAT THE LOCATION IS NOT WITHIN AN ILLEGAL DISPENSE TO ANY SCHOOL IN THE AREA, I BELIEVE IT WAS POINTED OUT THE PROPOSED HOURS WOULD BE AT 9 A.M. WHICH IS AFTER THE USUAL TRAFFIC HOURS CAUSED BY SANTA ROSA HIGH SCHOOL AT LEAST, I DON’T KNOW THE TIMES OF THE OTHER SCHOOLS. AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THIS IS A HISTORICAL DISTRICT AND WHEN CALIFORNIA LEGALIZED MARIJUANA, THEY CHANGED HISTORY IN A WAY, I HAVE NOTICED THAT A CONCERN HAS BEEN MADE WITH THIS LOCATION IS IN CLOSE POXIMITY TO MANY SCHOOLS AND THIS IS A CHANCE TO BETTER EDUCATE OUR SCHOOL, I DO NOT MEAN TO SAY THE CHILDREN SHOULD BE USING THE SUBSTANCE, BUT I WOULD SAY THIS IS MISLEADFINGER THIS IS A PERFECT OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW OUR YOUTH THAT THERE IS A PROPER WAY TO HANDLE MARIJUANA AND ANYONE WHO USES THE SUBSTANCE IS A BAD OR IMORAL HUMAN BEING, THIS IS A HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AS A COMMUNITY WEBSINGER CANNOT CONTINUE TO REFUSE HISTORY’S NATURAL CHANGE. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. THAT WAS THE LAST CARD THAT I I HAVE, IF THERE’S ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK, YOU DON’T HAVE TO HAVE FILLED OUT A CARD AND — COME ON UP, IF YOU WOULDN’T MIND STATING YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD FOR US AND WE CAN COLLECT YOUR CARD LATER.>>I DIDN’T REALLY WANT THE SPEAK EITHER, BUT MY NAME IS GAIL GOOD BRED AND I LIVE AROUND THE CORNER FROM THIS LOCATION AND I’M NOT ANTIPOT, I’VE USED MEDICAL MARIJUANA, I DON’T MIND DRIVING DOWN SANTA ROSA AVENUE BUT THIS LOCATION IS TERRIBLE. I MEAN, I CAN’T EVEN GET OUT OF MY STREET, I LIVE ON CORILLO, IF I WANT TO GO TO CODDINGTOWN AT 3:00, I HAVE TO DRIVE THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION TO GET OUT OF MY HOUSE TO GO AROUND THE BLOCK AND THEN GET CAUGHT IN THAT TRAFFIC BECAUSE IT’S CRAMMED WHERE WE LIVE. THAT BACK ALLEYWAY IS A NIGHT MARE, I CALL ALL — I MEAN AT LEAST TWICE I’VE CALLED FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE BACK THERE, GUNSHOTS, KNIFE STABBINGS, I NOT SAYING YOU’RE GOING TO BRING NA IN, I THINK YOU HAVE A GREAT STORE, TAKE IT OUT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD STHOE OR AT LEAST ONE THAT HAS PARKING, I CAN’T EVEN PARK IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE HARDLY EVER AND I HAVE TO WALK IN THE DARK TO GET TO MY HOUSE ON CORILLO BECAUSE IT’S ALREADY OVERCOMPENSATED WITH PARKING, I KNOW WE’VE SAID ALL THIS BUT I COULD NOT SAY AYTHING BECAUSE MY LANDLORD WILL KILL ME. I MEAN, HE SHOULD BE HERE AND HE WOULD DEFINITELY SAY SOMETHING. GOD, I DON’T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN SAY, THE SPEEDING, THE DELIVERY, I MEAN, WE’VE GOT JOEY’S PIZZA DELIVERY GUY, HE’S SPEEDING, PEOPLE ARE SPEEDING, THE KITTY CATS ARE GOING THE GET HIT BY A CAR, IT’S TOO MANY CARS, IT’S TOO CONGESTED. TLA’S IT, AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I’M NOT AGAINST POT, I SMOKE POT, YOU KNOW, OCCASIONALLY. MEDICAL OR OTHERWISE. ER >>THANK YOU. ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY, I NAOEMENT SEEING ANYONE ELSE RISE SO I’M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO RESPOND TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS OR ALL OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED TO HIM.>>YES, WELL, I’LL DO MY BEST TO WORK THROUGH THE CONCERNS BUT PLEASE COMMISSIONERS, IF I MISS ANYTHING, PROMPT ME TO RESPOND. AGAIN, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT WE’RE COMMITTED TO ONGOING COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE’LL BE MAKING AS I SAID — GIVING MY OWN PHONE NUMBER AVAILABLE AND ONCE OPEN, MANAGER’S OPEN LINE WILL BE VIBL TO THEM FOR ANY ONGOING CONCERNS. MANY OF WHAT WE HEARD TODAY ARE WHAT WHAT WE HEARD AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEET, THEY’RE ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS, THE PIZZA DELIVERY TING ALSO CAME UP. IT’S ONE OF THE REASONS WE TOOK CARE IN OUR OPERATIONAL PLAN, THE DELIVERY VEHICLES WON’T GO THROUGH DIRECTLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY’LL BE GOING INTO THE DESTINATION UNLESS THEY’RE GOING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I WANT TO ECHO THE COMMENTERS THAT I WANT TO REJECT — THEY REER REJECTING THIS PREMISE THAT SOMEHOW THAT CANNABIS USE IS INHERENTLY NEGATIVE. THERE’S JUST NO FACTUAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT IT WILL IMPACT AND IN ALMOST EVERY CASE, THERE IS AMARKED IMPROVEMENT IN THE EXISTING NATURE AND WE’RE DEALING WITH WHAT IS POTENTIALLY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A BLIGHTED BUILDING, AN AREA THAT WILL BE IMPROVED AND WILL HAVE AN ACTIVE USE, THAT WILL BE REMOVING THE ILLEGAL STRUCTURES IN ORDER TO CREATE THE STRIPING FOR THE ADDITIONAL RESTORATION OF THE EXISTING PRKING SPOTS AND REALLY BRING AN ACTIVE RETAIL USE TO A RETAIL BUILDING IN A GENERAL COMMERCIAL LOCATION ALONG AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY. WHEN WE LOOK AT TRAFFIC, I THINK WE VERY MUCH NEED TO LOOK AT TRAFFIC IN THE CONTEXT OF HOW WE HAVE PLANNED FOR I IN THE GENERAL PLAN, ED C-1, RETAIL AND BUSINESS SERVICES NEED TO BE LOCATED IN AREAS WITH AMONG OTHER THINGS HEAVY PASS-BY TRAFFIC, THAT ISN’T A NEGATIVE THING IN OUR GENERAL PLAN, THAT IS A POSITIVE THING IN OUR GENERAL PLAN FOR WHERE WE’RE PUTTING RETAIL USES. THIS IS ALOCATION THAT MEETS THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION, ZONING DESIGNATIONS AND POLICIES AS SET BY THE COUNCIL AND BY THIS BODY AND IT’S VERY APPROPRIATE. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE IS A BICYCLING COMMUNITY HERE, HAVING PERSONALLY LIVED IN REJ WAY AND THE JC NEIGHBORHOOD ON BENTON AND DEN TO*N, I KNOW THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE’S A CYCLING ELEMENT IN THAT AREA, WE HAVE MULTIPLE BIKE SHOPS THAT SUPPORT THAT WITHIN EASY AK SAYS TO THE SITE AS WELL, WE HAVE A HIGH WALKABILITY SCORE, AND THAT’S A PART OF WHY THE APPLICANT HAS CHOSEN TO PUT 12 COVERED BIKE SPOTS IN ORDER TO SERVE THAT SPECIFIC COMMUNITY IN THE SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD. I ALSO WANT TO ADDRESS THAT WHILE WE DON’T BELIEVE AND WE DO REJECT THE PREMISE THAT THERE IS A NEGATIVE IMPACT TO CANNABIS USE, IN HEARING OF THE NEIGHBORS OF THE ORIGINAL MEET, WE DID RESTRICT OUR OPERATIONAL AGE LIMIT TO 21 AND OVER FOR ALL CUSTOMERS AND THAT IS A DIRECT CONSIDERATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD’S COMMENTS THAT YOU HEARD TODAY AND THAT THEY PROPOSED PREVIOUSLY AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND AGAIN THE COMMENTERS THAT HAVE SAID THIS ISN’T A NEGATIVE USE ON YOUTH AE RIGHT, BUT WE WANTED TO BE RESPONSIVE TO THAT CONCERN AS THIS INDUSTRY CONTINUES TO GROW IN SANTA ROSA. I BELIEVE THAT I HAVE IN A BROADWAY ADDRESSED MOST OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP, IF THERE ARE ANY THAT I MISSED SPECIFICALLY, –>>[INAUDIBLE]>>I’LL GET TO THEM. IT’S OKAY. I’VE GOT A LIST.>>I CAN ADDRESS THE PARKING RIGHT NOW.>>LET ME GO IN ORDER SO I DON’T LOSE MY LIST, OAY. ONE OF THE COMMENTERS WAS ASKING ABOUT HOW YOU INTEND TO GUARANTEE THE EMPLOYEES USE OF THE PARKING AND HOW YOU GUARANTEE THEY WOULD NOT PARK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.>>SO, I MEAN, ULTIMATELY IT COMES DOWN TO A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT. OUR INTENT AND PART IN USING PARKING GARAGE ONE IS BECAUSE IT WAS WITHIN A WALKABLE DISTANCE WAS THAT IT WAS A GOOD PLACE TO FIND PARKING BUT ALSO BECAUSE IT’S A VERIFIABLE CONDITION BY THE CITY. WE EITHER DID O DID NOT PURCHASE THOSE PARKING PASSES AND WHEN EMPLOYEE ARES COMING TO WORK, THEY WOULD BE USING THOSE OR THEY’RE USING OUR PRETAX BENEFITS FOR PUBLIC TRANSIT OR OUR BICYCLE PARKING FACILITIES, OBVIOUSLY THEY WON’T FLEXED TO USE THE PARKING, HOPEFULLY REDUCING SINGLE OCCUPANCY VEHICLE TRIPS.>>OKAY. AND THEN CAN YOU SPEAK TO HOW THE PARKING MANEUVERS WILL WORK, THERE ARE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO BE BACKING OP TO THE BUSY STREET, CAN YOU DESCRIBE THAT AND I THINK I’M GOING TO HAVE STAFF ADD SOME STUFF TO THAT.>>IT IS A CHALLENGING SITE, IT’S AN EXISTING BUILDING THAT WE’RE PROPOSING NO MODIFICATIONS TO OTHER THAN THE REMOVAL OF THE ILLEGAL STRUCTURES, WITH THAT SAID, WE DID HAVE A PLAN DRAWN UP SHOWING HOW THE SIX SPOTS CAN BE RESTORED AND THEY HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY BEEN IN USE, THE PARKING CIRCULATION DOES NOT REQUIRE EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE SPOTS TO BACK UP ON TO IT, THERE’S AN ABILITY FOR THEM TO TURN AROUND BUT ULTIMATELY, IT WAS FEASIBLE FROM THE STUDY THAT WAS DONE BY OUR FOLKS WHO DREW UP THE PLAN AS WELL AS IN LOOKING AT IT FROM AN OVERALL OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT. I’M NOT PERSONALLY THE ONE WHO DREW THE PLANS, WITH WE SPOKE ABOUT IT AND HAD THE PROFESSIONAL DRAW THAT STRIPING PLAN, IT WAS SEEN AS FEASIBLE FOR IT TO WORK.>>OKAY. SO, I THINK — THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OVER, WE’RE GOING TO GET THE QUESTIONS ANSWERED THROUGH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT HERE. I THINK THAT’S GENERALLY ALL, WE’RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU TOO IN A MOMENT, SO DON’T GO AWAY. SOME OF THE ONES THAT I THINK STAFF MIGHT SPEAK TO HERE ARE THERE WERE CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THE PARKING STANDARDS — I KNOW, ONE MORE FOR YOU, NICK, COULD YOU TALK ABOUT THE ORIENTATION OF THE ENTRANCE.>>YEAH, THERE’S AN EXISTING — THE EXISTING FRONT ENTRANCE HAS A STOOP, SO IT DOESN’T MEET CURRENT STANDARDS FOR ACCESS AND WOULD REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT MODIFICATION TOS THE BUILDING. IT IS A BUILDING THAT’S OVER 50 YEARS OLD WHICH CONTRIBUTES TO THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT WAS JUST NOT FEASIBLE UPGRADE TO THE FACILITY. THE REAR ENTRANCE HAS BEEN USED BY PREVIOUS USES AS THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE THE PARKING LOT IS AND WE’VE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION A NUMBER OF THE THINGS WE HEAR HEARD FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND THE CONCERNS WITH THOSE PREVIOUS USES WHICH WERE MOSTLY AROUND LOADING AND DELIVERY TRUCKS BECAUSE IT WAS A HYDRO — HYDROPONIC STORE RECENTLY, BUT AS FAR AS THE CONFIGURATION GOES, IT’S A RESTRICTIVE SITE BECAUSE OF THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE PROPERTY.>>OKAY, AD THEN LASTLY FROM YOU, IF YOU COULD JUST DESCRIBE GENERALLY YOUR SECURITY OUTREACH BEYOND THE SITE SO THAT THE NEIGHBORS — I KNOW THEY’RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ALLEYWAYS.>>AS ALWAYS, WE DON’T LIKE TO BE TOO DETAILED WITH OUR SECURITY PROCEDURES BECAUSE SECURITY PROCEDURES ONCE PUBLIC ARE NO LONGER SECURITY PROCEDURE, BUT IN CONSIDERATION OF THE NEIGHBOR’S COMMENT, WE COMMITTED TO HVING ON OUR ON-SITE SECURITY GUARD NOT JUST MANAGE THE PROPERTY MAKING SURE NO ONE IS LOITERING ON CONSUMING ON-SITE BUT TO ALSO PATROL AND WALK DOWN THE ALLEYWAY AND THEN REPORTING ANY ELICIT OR INAPPROPRIATE BHAVIOR TO CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT. WE’VE USED THIS AND YOU SEE THIS CURRENTLY WORK ON OTHER DISPENSARY THAT IS ARE OPEN IN THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA AND THOSE FACILITIES, YOU KNOW X AS WAS REFERENCED AT THE LAST COUNCIL SUB-COMMITTEE HAVE SEEN NO REMARKABLE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY WITH THEM AND FOR THE MOST PART, THAT TYPE OF A PROCESS OF HAVING THAT PATROL THAT GOES A LITTLE FURTHER INTO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN A VALUE-ADD TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT CURRENTLY HAVE DISPENSARIES.>>OKAY. ALRIGHT. STAFF, IF YOU WOULDN’T MIND COMMENTING ON SOME OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THE PARKING LOT DESIGN STANDARDS, LANDSCAPE STANDARDS, HOW THAT WAS HANDLED.>>YEAH. SO, THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WERE DISCUSSED BY THE PUBLIC INCLUDED THOSE THAT WOULD BE APPLIED TO A MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT OF A SITE OR A NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, SO THOSE WEREN’T IMPLEMENTED HERE BECAUSE THIS IS LOOKED AT AS A RETENANTBACKING STIET BECAUSE NO MINOR MODIFICATIONS WERE PROPOSED.>>AS IT RELATE TOS THE CIRCULATION ON-SITE WITH THE PARKING, THE PROJECT WAS REFERRED TO THE RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND THOSE DEPARTMENTS FELT THAT THIS WAS A SATISFACTORY CIRCULATION PLAN.>>OKAY. GREAT. AND THEN GENERALLY AGAIN, I KNOW WE DID AT THE BEGINNING OF THE STAFF REPORT, BUT IF YOU WOULDN’T MIND GOING BACK THROUGH PARTICULARLY THE HISTORY OF THE 600 FOOT SETBACK FROM SCHOOLS AND SORT OF THE REASONING BEHIND THAT, HOW WE GOT TO THAT POLICY.>>I’LL TAKE THAT QUESTION. SO, THE CITY AS A LOCAL JURISDICTION, WE HAVE AND HAD THE RIGHT TO ASSERT OR OWN UNIQUE SETBACKS TO SENSITIVE RECEPTORS, SO AS PART OF THE POLICY-MAKING PROCESS WHICH SPANNED AT LEAST A COUPLE OF YEARS OF DISCUSSION WITH SETBACKS TO SENSITIVE RECEPTORS BEING A PRIMARY DISCUSSION POINT ALL THE WAY THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND VARIATIONS TO THAT AND LOOKS AT OTHER JURS DRYINGS, WHAT THEY WERE DOING AND ALSO SORT OF THE IMPACTS OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS WERE DISCUSSED BUT ULTIMATELY THE CITY COUNCIL DID PT IN THE ORDINANCE, REALLY ACADEMICALLY ORIENTED SCHOOLS AND THAT’S Assists CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW THAT IT’S 600 FEET FROM A SCHOOL.>>OKAY, AND JUST GENERALLY BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES TLA THE NEIGHBORS ARE BRINGING UP THAT EXIST WHETHER THIS BILDING IS VACANT OR NOT IN TERMS OF THE PARKING, THE SPEEDING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOODS, WHAT ARE THEIR AVENUES OF LOOKING INTO THAT WITH THE CITY OR OBTAINING SOME KIND OF CONSIDERATION OR RELIEF FROM THE CITY? WE’RE DISCUSSING — I’M LETTING HIM DSCUSS THAT.>>SO, AS THE CHAIR INDICATED, THE SITE I ZONED GENERAL COMMERCIAL SO RETAIL USES ARE PERMITTED. SO, THE SAME PARKING RATIO WOULD APPLY TO ANY RETAIL USE THAT GOES THERE. SO, AS FAR AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS CONCERNED, RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO RESTRICTION ON THE PARKING, AL OF THE PARKING IS AVAILABLE TO TE PUBLIC THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO AS A NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT COULD PETITION THE CITY FOR A RESTRICTED PRKING CONDITION THAT DOES NOT EXIST CURRENTLY. SXFRJTS WE’VE SEEN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS DO THAT. ER >>CORRECT.>>OKAY. AND THEN COULD YOU HIGHLIGHT JUST ONE MORE TIME THIS BUILDING IS KIND OF A UNIQUE ANIMAL IN TERMS OF ITS SITUATION WITH THE LEGAL NONCONFORMING STATUS AND COULD YOU SAY MORE ABOUT THAT. EVERY USE WOULD BE HAVING THIS SAME DISCUSSION IN TERMS OF PARKING.>>SO, THE PARKING IS — IT’S A NONCONFORMING SITUATION BECAUSE IT WAS CEASED, THE OPERATION CEASED FOR GREATER THAN 6 MONTHS, IT NEEDS TO BE MADE CONFORMING SO THE MECHANISM IS THROUGH A PARKING REDUCTION, BECAUSE IT’S NOT A WHOLESALE REDEVELOPMENT, WE ARE WORKING WITH AN EXISTING CONDITION, SO THE APPROPRIATE MECHANISM IS THROUGH A PARKING REDUCTION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THAT REQUIRE IT IS ADDITIONAL FIND CHASTISING MR. ROSS INDICATED. THAT WOULD BE TRUE AS WE INDICATED WITH ANY RETENANTBACKING THAT GOES INTO THIS SITE THAT HAS A PARKING RATIO SIMILAR TO THIS WHICH WOULD BE ANY RETAIL USE FOR AN EXAMPLE.>>OKAY. GREAT. THANKS. COMMISSIONERS, WHY DON’T WE START WITH THE APPLICANT, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE? VICE CHAIR WEEKS?>>I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU. THE FIRST ONE IS, WHAT ARE — DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA WHAT THE RATIO BETWEEN FULL AND PART TIME EMPLOYEES WOULD BE?>>I DON’T HAVE A SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF FULL AND PART TIME, AT NO POINT IF TIME DO WE ANT PATE MORE THAN SIX EMPLOYEE NRS THE FACILITIES WHICH IS WHY WE PICKED THE NUMBER OF THE PARKING PASSES FOR THE PARKING GARAGE, WHETHER THEY’RE FULL OR PART TIME.>>AND WOULD YOU LOOK AT WHAT KIND OF SALARY RANGE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOR THE EMPLOYEES?>>I DON’T HAVE THAT INFORMATION SPECIFIC TO THIS PROJECT BUT IN GENERAL, THE CANNABIS INDUSTRY PROVIDES LIVING WAGE EXCEEDING $18 AN HOUR FOR ENTRY LVEL POSITIONS.>>AND THEN ALSO IBELIEVE IN YOUR PRESENTATION, YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT THE PARKING AND THE LOT WOULD BE 15 MINUTES.>>WE HAD ORIGINALLY LOOKED AT A DELIVERY PLAN THAT WOULD HAVE THE ONE OF THE ON-SITE SPOTS BEING 15 MINUTES IN ORDER TO ENSURE THERE WAS A SPOT TURNING OVER REGULARLY FOR THE DELIVERY VEHICLE. BECAUSE OF TODAY’S CONFIRMATION OF THE 24 MINUTE PARKING LOADING ZONE FOR THAT USE, WE MAY STILL DO THAT ON THE SITE BUT IT WON’T BE TO ACCOMMODATE THE DL*IR RI VEHICLES AS THE DELIVERY VEHICLE WON’T FLEXED TO USE ON-SITE PARKING, THERE’S NO ON-SITE CONSUMPTION, THIS ISN’T A FACILITY WHERE PEOPLE COME AND STAY SO WE MAY STILL LOOK AT THAT SIMILAR TO WHAT A STARBUCKS OR ANOTHER TYPE OF FACILITY PUTS THAT TYPE OF LIMIT TO MAKE SURE THERE’S TURN-OVER AND PARKING FOR THEIR CUSTOMERS.>>AND MY ASSUMPTION WOULD BE IF YOU DID DO THAT LIMIT, IT WOULD BE ENFORCED BY THE SECURITY PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE?>>YES, UNLIKE STARBUCKS, WE HAVE SOMEONE THERE TO ENFORCE IT.>>WITH THE DELIVERY, I COULDN’T TELL ON THE SITE PLAN WHERE YOU WOULD BE RECEIVING DELIVERIES.>>SO, THE TL*IFR RIS AND THIS IS A PART OF THE HOURS FOR DELIVERIES BEING STAGGERED WITH OTHER TYPES OF DELIVERY, THEY WOULD BE USING THE SAME ENTRANCE OF THE CUSTOMERS AND WOULD BE STAGGERED TO OCCUR IN SUCH A WAY THAT THEY DON’T COME WHEN THE FACILITY IS OPEN, THAT’S WHY THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR DISTRIBUTION AND DELIVERIES ARE 6-10 WHILE WE HAVE OTHER FED EXWON’T START UNTIL 8:00 BECAUSE OF FEEDBACK FROM THE NEIGHBORS, ONE OF THE PEAK TRAFFIC HOURS IN THE CITY IS COMPLETELY UNIMPEACHED BY THIS PROPOSAL BECAUSE WE DON’T OPEN UNTIL 9 A.M.>> AND ONE MORE QUESTION, I KNOW THAT THE WHOLE IDEA OF DELIVERY TO CUSTOMERS IS NEW, BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION AS TO THE PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMERS THAT GET HOME DELIVERY FROM OTHER — SANTA ROSA DOESN’T HAVE IT YET REALLY, BUT FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS?>>ON A NATIONAL AND STATE LEVEL, IEM AWARE OF STATISTICS FROM PREVIOUS YEARS CITING 54% OF TRANSACTIONS BEING DONE BY DELIVERY, I CAN’T VERIFY THOSE RESULTS MYSELF BUT THAT’S WHAT I’VE READ IN PUBLICATIONS. I WOULD SAY THAT WE DO HAVE ONE DISPENSARY IN SANTA ROSA THAT HAS DELIVERY SERVICES OF OUR THREE AND WHAOL WE’RE NOT AT A POINT OF STATISTICAL VALIDITY IN THE RESEARCH AROUND THIS TYPE OF TRAFFIC, IT DOES APPEAR NA THERE IS A REDUCTION OF TRAFFIC TRIPS TO DISPENSARY WIDTHS DELIVERY SERVICE AND IS THAT’S BECAUSE WHEN A CUSTOMER COMES IN AND THEY FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY WANT, THEY CAN SIGN UP FOR RECURRING DELIVERIES AND THEY WON’T HAVE TO MAKE THE TRIP TO THE FACILITY.>>GREAT, TLA’S ALL MY QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW, THANK YOU.>>ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE?>>YES. SO, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, AND I’M SURE YOU CAN GUESS WHAT THEY ALL REVOLVE AROUND. IS YOUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER HERE?>>YES, WE HAVE CAMERON NIGH FROM W-TRANS HERE.>>TO CONFIRM, A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT IS USING THOSE PARKING PASSES, RIGHT, IF THE APPLICANT’S EMPLOYEES ARE FOUND TO NOT BE USING THAT PARKING ON LINCOLN OR COREY OWE OR BENTON, THEY’LL BE TERMINATED.>>THAT IS THE EVENTUAL OUTCOME, I WOULDN’T SAY THAT’S WHERE WE’D START, CORRECTIVE ACTION, EDUCATION, WE DON’T WANT PEOPLE TO JUST LOSE THEIR JOBS BUT, YES, CONTINUED ACTIONS THAT CONFLICT WITH THE COMPANY’S POLICIES, THAT IS AN OUTCOME THAT THEY COULD FACE.>>OKAY. YOU SAID NO MORE THAN SIX EMPLOYEES PER SHIFT?>>CORRECT.>>SO, DOES THE TRAFFIC STUDY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL THOSE SIX SPOTS BEING USED AT THE SAME TIME AT THE GARAGE?>>YEAH, SO IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY, IT’S STATED IN THERE AND IT’S BEEN STATED THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT THAT 12 SPACES ARE NEEDED TO SATISFY PARKING REQUIREMENTS, [INAUDIBLE] I THINK IT’S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THERE ARE FOUR STREET PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE SITE ON GLENN AND ON COLLEGE AVENUE, SO ANY USE THAT COMES IN HERE COMMERCIAL OR RETAIL IS GOING TO BE IN THE SAME PARKING SITUATION BUT WITH THE OPERATIONAL PARAMETER THAT IS ARE BEING PROPOSED IN TERMSER OF BIKE PARKING, 12 COVERED SPACES, CONNECTED PEDESTRIAN NETWORK, ACCESS TO TRANSIT AND THEN 12 TOTAL PARKING SPACES PLUS ANOTHER FOUR ON THE STREET, SO UP TO 16 TOTAL PARKING SPACES IS PROBABLY ABOUT AS GOOD AS YOU CAN DO IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS.>>OKAY, AND YOUR TRAFFIC REPORT SAID THE P.M. PEAK HOURS, THE TRIPS WOULD PROBABLY DOUBLE, CORRECT?>>YES, THAT’S CORRECT.>>SO, LET’S THAN 50 NEW PEAK HOUR TRIP AND IS PER POLICY, ANYTHING GENERATING LESS THAN 50 TRIPS IS CONSIDERED LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT AND NO IMPACT STUDY WOULD BE NEEDED.>>SO, IF THE EMPLOYEE ARES USING SIX SPACE INS THE GARAGE, FIVE, PLUS THE ADA SPOT PLUS THE THREE ON THE STREET, FOUR FOR THOSE 40 TRIPS. ER>> YES, I THINK SOME TRIPS WOULD NOT BE MAKING TOIT THE SITE AS THEY WOULD BE EMPLOYEE TRIPS GOING TO THE PARKING GARAGE, IS THAT CORRECT?>>BUT THAT’S A LOT OF TRIPS, IF YOU’RE SAYING THERE’S 12 SPOTS FOR ALL THESE PEAK HOUR TRIP, HALF OF THOSE DON’T COUNT BECAUSE THERE ARE EMPLOYEES PARKING OFF-SITE SO NOW YOU HAVE A SMALLER POOL — >>THAT WOULD BE CORRECT, WE DIDN’T SPECIFICALLY QUANTIFY THAT, THAT WOULD BE A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE NUMBER OF PEAK TRIPS.>>OKAY, AND THEN I NOTICE IN THE STAFF REPORT, THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, WALKABILITY, GREAT, BIKING, GREAT, LESS THAN 5% OF PEOPLE BIKE TO WORK OR TO DO THINGS IN THIS COMMUNITY, I LEARNED THAT THROUGH THE BIKE AND PED MASTER PAN A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, MY QESTION IS THE WALKABILITY FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF COLLEGE AND THE BUS STOP THAT YU GUYS HAVE MENTIONED IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF COLLEGE, DOES THE TRAFFIC STUD STUDY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE USAGE OF THAT CROSSWALK X THE RIPPLE EFFECTS IT WOULD HAVE ON COLLEGE ON — OR THE TRAFFIC OP COLLEGE?>>NO, IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY, THEY JUST LOOKED AT TRIP GENERATION AND PARKING IN TERMS OF NUMBERS SO NO, WE DID NOT SPECIFICALLY LOOK AT WHERE THOSE TRIPS WOULD BE GOING IN TERMS OF TRIP DISTRIBUTION.>>ALRIGHT, AND THEN DID THE TRAFFIC STUDY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE DELIVERY ASPECT, WERE THOSE TRIPS COUNTED?>>NO, SO THESE — THE RATES THAT WE USE ARE STANDARD RATES DEVELOPED BY THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND THEN FOR THE P.M. PEAK HOUR AND THE DALE TRIP AND IS THE A.M. PEAK HOUR, WE DEVELOPED OUR OWN RATES HERE AT THREE EXISTING DISPENSARY INS THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA, WE USED THOSE RATES FOR A.M. PEAK HOUR AS DISPENSARIES IN THE CITY TO OPEN UNTIL 9:00 A.M., BUT WE DID NOT SPECIFICALLY QUANTIFY FOR DELIVERY TRIPS REDUCING ANY OF THE TRIP GENERATION, SO THIS WOULD BE A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE, ALTHOUGH I CAN SAY FROM THE DATA WE COLLECTED IN THE A.M. PEAK HOUR, ONE AOF THE RATES — OR ONE OF THE LOCATIONS WE COLLECTED DID HAVE A LOWER RATE THAN THE OTHERS AND IT DID HAVE A DL*IR RI SERVICE, WHILE THAT THAT’S THE ONLY ONE DATA POINT, IT IS INDICATIVE OF GENERATING LOWER TRIPS BUT WE CAN’T KNOW THAT FOR SURE UNTIL WE’RE ABLE TO COLLECT MORE DATA. ER>> THANK YOU, THAT’S ALL MY QUESTIONS.>>ANYMORE QUESTIONS?>>YES, MY QUESTIONS ARE GOING TO TAG ON TO COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE’S WHICH ARE LARGELY TRAFFIC RELATED SO YOU MAY WANT TO STAY UP THERE. LET’S GO TO THE LOADING ZONE SPACE, THAT’S A 24 MINUTE STREET SPACE, CORRECT, ON GLENN?>>CORRECT.>>DOES IT REQUIRE ANY SPECIAL PERMIT TO USE, DO YOU HAVE MEANS TO RESERVE THAT SPACE BY ANY WAY?>>I’VE RECEIVED THIS INFORMATION MOST RECENTLY FROM THE PLANNER ON THE PROJECT AND I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR HIM TO ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE HE HAD THE DIRECT CONVERSATION WITH THE TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT.>>YEAH, I SPOKE WITH CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ABOUT THAT ISSUE AND WAS WONDERING — AND ASKED THAT SME QUESTION AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE ONLY WAY FOR IT TO BE REMOVED IS IF THEY REQUEST FOR IT TO BE REMOVED BUT OTHERWISE IT’S PERMANENT UNTIL THAT POINT IN TIME AND IT CAN BE USED BY THE — WHATEVER TENANT IS AT THIS LOCATION.>>BUT IT’S RESERVED FOR THE SUBJECT SITE AND IT’S NOT AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC USE?>>YES. I’M SORRY, — OKAY.>>THERE’S NOT A SPECIFIC RESTRICTION TO THE SUBJECT SITE, NO.>>[INAUDIBLE].>>OKAY, MY NEXT QUESTION HAS TO DO WTH THE TRIP RATES. I THINK I ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE PM. PEAK IS 40-SOMETHING TRIPS AND WITH 6-12 AVAILABLE SPACES, THAT WOULD BE MAYBE A TURN OVER OF EVERY 6-8 MINUTES IF THERE WERE 44 TRIPS COMING TO USE THOSE 12 STEPS, AM I DOING MY ARITHMETIC RIGHT HERE?>>I’M GOING THE GET CAMERON ANSWER THE SPECIFIC NATURE OF THAT QUESTION. THE CITY CODE IS WHAT CALLED FOR — THE CITY TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT ASKED US TO PUT TOGETHER A MEMO IF WE EXCEED 50 TRIPS, THEN WE GET INTO SPECIFIC TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WHERE A LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS GET ANSWERED, IF WE’RE UNDER THEM, THE CITY CODE SAYS STATISTICS LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND THAT THOSE THINGS DON’T NEED TO BE ANALYZE SOD WHILE WE WERE SCOPING THIS ANALYSIS FOR W-TRANS TO LOOK AT, WE RELIED ON THE CITY’S POLICIES AND SO THE CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE THAT CAMERON IS REFERENCING MEANS THAT YOU’RE SEEING WHAT A WORST CASE SCENARIO COULD BE. WE PUT IN PLACE MANY PROVISIONS SO ENSURE THAT THAT WORST CASE SCENARIO DOESN’T OCCUR AND I’LL LET CAMERON ADDRESS ANY OF THAT.>>I WANT TO ADD IN THERE WE’RE TALKING ABOUT 44 TRIPS, BUT YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THAT — HALF OF THAT WOULD BE IN AND HALF OF THAT WOULD BE OUT, YOU’RE LOOKING AT 22 VEHICLES IN THAT ONE HOUR. I DON’T KNOW IF THAT HELPS WITH YOUR CALCULATIONS.>>THAT DOES, THANK YOU.>>OKAY.>>I HAVE A MINOR DESIGN QUESTION ON THE BUILDING ITSELF. YOUR PROJECT DESCRIPTION MADE A POINT OF SAYING THERE WOULD BE AN ART DISPLAY ALONG THE COLLEGE AVENUE FACADE TO SCREEN THE RETAIL OPERATION IN PART. I NOTICE THERE’S A WINDOW ON THE GLENN AVENUE SIDE, IS THERE A SIMILAR SCREENING GOING ON THERE OR — >>NO, IT WOULD NOT BE VISIBLE FROM GLENN AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP, IT WAS A POINT THAT I WANTED TO MAKE WHEN I REFERENCED OUR WALKABILITY SCORE FOR THE SITE BECAUSE THAT’S A FEATURE WE BELIEVE WILL ALSO HELP INCREASE THE WALKABILITY OF THIS STREET AND WITHOUT MAKING ANY EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS FOR A BUILDING THAT’S ALREADY ON THE SIDEWALK AND ON THE STREET OF GLENN WITHOUT HAVING A PARKING LOT IN FRONT OF IT WHICH IS ANOTHER ONE O OUR GOALS IS TO CREATE AMORE WALKABLE CITY, THAT ART FEATURE WILL ADD T THE DESIRABILITY OF THOSE LOCATIONS AND ALL WINDOWS WILL BE SCREENED WITH IT ALTHOUGH WILL BE SCREENED IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE RETAIL ACTIVITY ARES NOT VIEWABLE FROM THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING.>>THANK YOU, AND I’M GOING TO BACK UP FOR ONE LAST PARKING QUESTION. PART OF THE MATERIALS SUGGESTED THAT IF THE SPACES WEREN’T AVAILABLE IN CITY PARKING STRUCTURE 7, YOU WOULD LOOK WR*. HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO CONFIRM THAT SPACES WILL BE AVAILABLE IN THE PARKING STRUCTURE?>>MY APOLOGIES, CITY GARAGE 1 ON 7TH STREET, ONE OF THOSE SLIP-UPS ON OUR PART, WE ADDRESSED THAT SPECIFIC UNLIKELY EVENT JUST TO SAY THAT THERE ARE — THOSE PARKING SPOTS ARE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE IN THAT PARKING GARAGE, WE INQUIRED ABOUT THEM AND W INTEND ON SECURING THEM WEBSINGER ARE NEED TO HAVE LICENSE PLATE NUMBERS THAT CONNECT TO THE VEHICLES THAT WILL BE PARKING THERE BFORE WE APPLY FOR THEMFINGER WE ATTEMPTED TO GET PARKING PASSES THAT WOULD NOT NEED THOSE LICENSE PLATES, IF THERE WERE NO PASSES AVAILABLE, WE WOULD COMMUNICATE WITH THE CITY ABOUT HOW TO GO ABOUT THAT. WE PICKED THIS IN PART BECAUSE OF ITS WALKBACKER WALKABILITY AND CONVENIENCE FACTOR, BECAUSE OF THE ABILITY FOR THE CITY TO BE ABLE TO CONFIRM WHETHER WE HAVE THESE SPOTS AVAILABLE TO HAVE THIS ONGOING CONVERSATION IF FOR SOME REASON THERE WEREN’T SPOTS AVAILABLE IN THAT PARKING GARAGE, AS OF TODAY, W CONFIRMED WE COULD GET 6 SPOTS IF WE HAD THE LICENSE PLATE NUMBERS AND EVERYONE WOULD BE USING THEM.>>[INAUDIBLE].>>THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OVER SO WE’RE WORKING ON — YOU CAN TALK TO STAFF AFTERWARDS BUT WE DON’T TAKE QUESTIONS SHOUTED OUT, OKAY, THANKS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER CARTER? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. YEAH, I JUST HAVE ONE AGAIN FOR THE — ON THE TRAFFIC STUDY, YOU DID YOUR CALCULATIONS BASED ON THE ENTIRE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THEN YOU MADE A COMMENT THAT IF YOU’RE JUST LOOKING AT THE RETAIL SPACE, THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE, WE’D ONLY BE DEFICIENT BY ONE SPACE. COULD YOU JUST SAY WHAT ARE YOU INTENDING TO SAY THERE?>>SO, WHAT I THINK YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT IS IN OUR ORIGINAL ANALYSIS, WE CALCULATED THE TRIP GENERATION AND PARKING BASED ON THE RETAIL SQUARE FOOTAGE ONLY OF THE FACILITY BECAUSE PARKING FOR EMPLOYEES WOULD BE PROVIDED OFF-SITE THEREFORE THERE WOULDN’T IF b ANY DEMAND ON-SITE AND THEN AS WE — AS DISCUSSIONS WENT ON WITH CITY STAFF, WE REALIZED WE WANTED TO APPLY IT TO THE ENTIRE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE FACILITY WHICH BEN IS CONSERVATIVE IN NATURE WHICH IS USUALLY HOW WE GO ABOUT THIS AND THEN THAT’S THE RESULTS OF THE ADDENDUM ANALYSIS THAT WE PREPARED.>>OKAY. I JUST WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED THERE.>>OKAY. SO, I THINK THAT’S IT FOR YOU ALL RIGHT NOW AND I THINK WE HAVE QUESTIONS OF STAFF.>>CHAIR CISCO?>>YES.>>SORRY.>>SURE.>>I JUST WNTED TO PROVIDE CLARIFICATION FOR THE COMMISSION AND THE AUDIENCE IS THAT THE LOADING SPACE ON THE PUBLIC STREET IS AVAILABLE FOR THE BUSINESS BUT NOT SPECIFICALLY DEDICATED TO THE BUSINESS. FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE BUSINESS.>>GREAT, THANKS FOR THAT. VICE CHAIR WEEKS, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OF SAFF?>>I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, ACTUALLY A COUPLE OF THEM. ADAM, CAN YOU TELL ME IF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAD ANY COMMENTS WHEN THIS WAS REFERRED ON TO THEM?>>YES. THIS WAS REFERRED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUT NO COMMENTS WERE GVEN BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.>>AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION IS, MR. KSAULE MENTIONED SOME LETTERS FROM PROBATION AND HUMAN SERVICES THAT WERE SENT IN AND IF — THAT CAME TO US, I MISSED THEM.>>THEY’RE IN THERE.>>THEY ARE?>>ONE FROM PROBATION.>>I DIDN’T SEE ONE FROM PROBATION. ER>> MAYBE HUMAN SERVICES. . ER EVERYTHING I HAVE RECEIVED TO THE THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, I HAVE INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE AS WELL AS ANYTHING ADDITIONAL PROVIDED AFTER THE ATTACHMENT TO YOU, YOU HAVE RECEIVED TWO HARD COPIES OF PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED EVEN LATER THIS AFTERNOON, SO I WOULD HAVE TO CLARIFY THAT I RECEIVED THAT, IF I DID RECEIVE IT, IT SHOULD BE IN YOUR HANDS, I CAN’T TELL YOU IF I SPECIFICALLY DID OR NOT.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. I’LL LOOK THROUGH IT AGAIN.>>COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE?>>YEAH, JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS. I DN’T KNOW IF STAFF OR MAYBE THE APPLICANT, THIS IS MORE OF A FIRE MARSHALL QUESTION, WHAT’S THE CAPACITY OF THE BUILD, DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY CLUE?>>NO, WE DON’T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.>>OKAY. ALRIGHT. AND THEN WHERE WAS I? MY OTHER QUESTION WAS, SO SHOULD WE APPROVE THE CUP AND THE PARKING REDUCTION WITH THE CAVEAT THAT THEY WILL PURCHASE THE GARAGE PASSES, SAY A YEAR DOWN THE LINE AFTER APPROVAL, THEY’RE UP AND RUNNING, THEY STOP BUY THING GARAGE PASSES, IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO, ANY REPERCUSSIONS?>>SO, THAT IS REFERENCED IN THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION SO IT’S PART OF WHAT WOULD BE APPROVED WITH THIS USE PERMITFINGER IT’S ALSO SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION OF APPROVAL SO CONDITION 13 REQUIRES IT, SO IF THERE WAS ANY NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THAT, THREADING BE A CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION.>>LET ME DOUBLE CHECK AND MAKE SURE I DON’T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. YEAH. ASIDE FROM — THE ONLY OTHER ONE I HAVE IS I DON’T HAVE THE LETTER OF PROBATION, I JUST LOOKED THROUGH EVERYTHING.>>COMMISSIONER CARTER, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?>>YES. FOLLOWING UP ON THE NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS QUESTION, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE QUESTION THAT YOU ANSWERED PREVIOUSLY, ADAM, WAS THAT NON-COMPLIANCE IS USUALLY ENFORCED ON A COMPLAINT BASIS, THERE’S NO ONGOING REPORTING OR MONITORING FOR COMPLIANCE, IS THAT CORRECT?>>FROM THE CITY STANDPOINT, THAT IS CORRECT, CODE ENFORCEMENT WOULD BE THE ENFORCEMENT BODY AFTER THE APPROVAL, THE SITE IS SUBJECT TO ANNUAL FIRE INSPECTIONS, I BELIEVE, YES.>>SO, IF A NEIGHBOR OBSERVED PARKING THAT WASN’T CONSISTENT WITH THE PARKING OPERATIONS PROPOSED, THEY COULD COMPLAIN TO THE CITY AND HAVE A POSSIBLE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION?>>YES, SO HOW THIS WORKS, THIS IS A LAND USE AND SO WHAT THEY’RE SEEK ISING ALAND USE PERMIT AND THAT USE PERMIT COMES WITH CONDITIONS INCLUDING AND ALSO REPRESENTATION OF THE OPERATION, SO IF ANY OF THE — IF THE USE OR ITS OPERATIONS AS DESCRIBED TO YOU TONIGHT AND AS CONDITIONED ARE NOT COMPLIED WITH, IT’S A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE AND THAT DOES — SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE CONDITION NUMBER 13 SPEAKS TO HAVING PARKING PASSES FOR EMPLOYEES, THEN THEY — THAT USE, THIS USE, IF APPROVED, MUST COMPLY WITH THAT FOR THE LIFE OF THE USE. THERE ARE ISSUES WE’VE HEARD THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR PARKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN GENERAL, WE RESPONDED SINCE THERE’S THING THAT IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN’T CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE IF THEY WANT TO DO A PERMIT PARKING PROGRAM AND RESTRICT IT TO RESIDENT, ONE THING I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR ON THE PARKING AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD F IT’S PUBLIC PARKING STREET PARK, IT’S AVAILABLE FOR THE COMMUNITY, IT’S AVAILABLE TO ALL, THAT PARKING IS NOT RESTRICTING CUSTOMER AND IS THEY’RE MAKE AGO REEFFORT TO MAKE EVERY SPACE THAT THEY DO MAKE AVAILABLE ON-SITE AVAILABLE INSIDE FOR CUSTOMERS.>>JUST A QUICK QUESTION, THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WHAT’S THE ZONING ON THAT, I THINK WE HAD A MAP SOMETIME EARLIER BUT IT’S ASSIGNED AS THE BUSINESS I BELIEVE.>>IT’S CG AS WELL.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. AND FINALLY, WITHIN THE RESOLUTION, ITEM C, IT SAYS THAT THE PROPOSED MEDICAL ADULT USE CANNABIS RETAIL DISPENSARY AND DELIVERY WITH ON-SITE CONSUMPTION IS ALLOWED. IS THAT STRAIGHT FROM THE ZONING CODE OR SHOULD THAT –>>THE ON-SITE CONSUMPTION SHOULD BE STRICKEN FOM THE RESOLUTION.>>GREAT, THANK YOU.>>GO AHEAD, COMMISSION OKREPKIE.>>IN A THEORETICAL WORLD, THE CITY IS MAKING A CONCERTED EFFORT TO DEVELOP DOWNTOWN AND ONE OF THE THINGS THEY’RE PUTTING ON THE TABLE IS PURCHASING OF CITY PROPERTY INCLUDING GARAGES, CORRECT? SO, IF GARAGE ONE IS BOUGHT TO BE DEVELOPED, WHAT HAPPENS?>>WELL, THROUGH THAT PROCESS AS WELL AS ON GO*IJ EFFORT TOS LOOK AT ALL OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING, ISSUES RELATED TO DOWNTOWN PARKING WILL BE A PRIMARY CONCERN, SO TO ENSURE — AND IN ADDITION, THERE WILL BE A GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CITYWIDE THAT’S GOING TO OCCUR STARTING SOON AND GO FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS, PARKING WILL BE A PRIMARY FOCUS, SO THE IDEA IS THAT PARKING WILL BE PROVIDED AND SUFFICIENT FOR ALL OF THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA.>>CORRECT, IT WILL BE ACCOUNTED FOR.>>OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? DID YOU WANT TO SAY? ING?>>THERE WAS A COUPLE OF THINGS I THINK WE HAVEN’T ADDRESSED THAT CAME UP IN THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT I TOOK NOTE OF. I THINK WE HAD A LOT OF DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP AND WE’VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THOSE, BUT TERE’S A COUPLE THAT I THINK ARE IMPORTANT AND I MEAN, THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE USE PERMIT AND I KNOW THERE WAS MENTION OF APPEAL PROCESS AND THERE IS AN APPEAL PROCESS BUT THIS IS WHERE WE SHOULD ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP. AND ONE OF THEM IS JUST THE WAY THIS PROCESS WORKS, I THINK SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE PART OF THE PUBLIC IS NECESSARY. THERE WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD MEET WEBSINGER DO REQUIRE THAT FOR ANY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THAT IS IN THE VICINITY OF RESIDENCES, SO WE DID CONDUCT THAT AND IT WAS WELL ATTENDED AND THERE WERE A NUMBER OF THE ISSUES THAT YOU HEARD TONIGHT BUT AS WE’VE GONE THROUGH IN THE LAST 30, 40 MINUTES ANSWERING THEM, THEY ARE EXPRESSLY ANSWERED, RAISED AND ANSWERED IN THE STAFF REPORT, PARKING, TRAFFIC, PROXIMITY TO SCHOOLS, SO THE WAY THIS PROCESS WORKS IS THAT THE APPLICATION CAN CONTINUE TO GO ON THROUGH THIS DUE PROCESS BUT WE DO HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES AND THAT’S WHAT WE AO*F BEEN DOING THROUGHOUT THE STAFF REPORT, THE ANALYSIS AND THIS PUBLIC HEARING. THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO NOTE WAS ONE OF THE FINDINGS WAS REFERENCED, I THINK IT WAS THE FIRST FIND, COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING CODE, AND SPECIFICALLY IT WAS A REFERENCE TO HOW CAN IT BE IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE THEY DON’T MEET CURRENT PARKING STANDARDS, BUT THE CODE ANTICIPATES THAT, THIS IS AN EVOLVING COMMUNITY AND SOME THINGS GET CONSTRUCTED LIKE THIS AND BECOME OUTDATED TO CURRENT PARKING STANDARDS SO IT HAS VARIOUS MECHANISMS FOR PARKING REDUCTIONS, PARTICULARLY TO — IN SUPPORT OF RETENANTBACKING OLDER BUILDINGS, SO TO MAKE THIS RETAIL SITE WORK OR FRANKLY RETAIL, WHETHER IT’S CANNABIS RETAIL OR STANDARD RETAIL OR OFFICE, THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME CURRENT PARKING STANDARDS, ONE SPACE PER 250 SQUARE FEET, SO THE ONLY WAY TO PUT 12 SPACES ON THERE IS TO REMOVE THE BUILDING SO OF COURSE THE CODE AND THE GENERAL PLAN DO NOT ANTICIPATE THAT, SO THERE IS A WAY TO COMPLY WITH THE ZONING CODE AND THAT IS HOW THEY’RE DOING IT, YOU NEED A USE PERMIT AND AN OPERATIONAL PROGRAM THAT CAN BE CONDITIONED AND TRACKED AND ENFORCED AND THAT PACKAGE, THAT PROGRAMMATIC PACKAGE IS WHAT MAKES IT COMPLIANT WITH THE ZONING CODE, BUT I THINK THAT’S NEEDED TO BE CLARIFIED AS WELL. AND THEN TO REITERATE T THE WAY THE PROCESS WORKS, THESE ARE SITE SPECIFIC, USE SPECIFIC AD ALL THESE CONDITIONS ARE SPECIFIC TO THIS PARTICULAR PERMIT, SO THEY MUST COMPLY WITH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE CONDITIONS AND, YES, WE ARE COMPLAINT BASED BUT WE ARE ALSO — WE HAVE ADEQUATE STAFFING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND IF THERE’S A COMPLAINT, WE’RE GOING TO BE RIGHT ON IT. WE’RE GOING TO CHECK WITH THE OWNER, WE HAVE VERY HIGH SUCCESS WITH COMMUNICATING WITH OWNERS AND TENANTS TO REMEDY ANY ISSUES SHOULD THEY OCCUR, THAT’S ALWAYS THE FIRST STEP AND THEN THERE’S A SERIES OF PROGRESSIONS ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO IF THIS USE REALLY BECOMES A NUISANCE, THEN THERE’S POCESSES EVEN FOR THAT, BUT THERE’S A LOT OF PROTECTIONS I THINK FOR THE CITY’S USE PERMIT PROCESS THAT WE DON’T HAVE WHEN THINGS ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND THIS ONE IS BY USE PERMIT FOR A CANNABIS RETAIL BUT GENERAL RETAIL WOULD BE BY RIGHT SO THIS PARTICULAR PERMIT HAS EXTRA PROTECTIONS.>>GREAT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER CARTER? OKAY. SO, WITH THAT, LET’S BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AD IS SOMEONE WILLING TO READ THE RESOLUTION, NOTING THE STRIKE-OUT OF THE LANGUAGE ON NUMBER C ABOUT ON-SITE CONSUMPTION FOR DISCUSSION.>>I WILL MOVE A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA APPROVE AGO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GREEN PEN LLC, AMEDICAL AND ADULT USE RETAIL CANNABIS DISPENSARY WITH DELIVERY IN A 2943 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND APPROVING REDUCED ON-SITE PARKING AT 353 COLLEGE AVENUE, APN 180-750-046, FILE NUMBER CUP 18-080 WITH A CHANGE IN SECTION C ON THE FIRST PAGE TO ELIMINATE ON-SITE CONSUMPTION. AND WAIVE FURTHER READING, SORRY.>>DO I HAVE A SECOND? OKAY, SO THAT WAS MOVED BY VICE CHAIR WEEKS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CARTER. VICE CHAIR WEEKS, YOU WANT TO BEGIN OUR DISCUSSION?>>SURE. I WANT TO JUST START OFF BY SAYING THAT THERE WERE MANY PUBLIC MEETINGS DURING THE TIME THAT THE CITY WAS DEVELOPING THE COMPREHENSIVE CANNABIS ORDINANCE AND GOT A LOT OF PUBLIC INPUT AND IT WAS VERY THOUGHTFULLY DONE AND OUR ROLE IS TO IMPLEMENT THE POLICIES AND PLANNING AND ZONING O THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA AND THAT’S OUR ROLE, THAT’S OUR SCOPE, AND I AM ABLE TO MAKE ALL THE FINDINGS AND AM GLAD TO SEE A FACILITY SUCH AS THIS IN THAT QUADRANT AND EAST OF 101. SO, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE PROJECT.>>COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE?>>SO, WHEN I WAS APPOINTED TO THIS POSITION, SO I WAS EXCITED FOR HOUSING AND CANNABIS AND EVERYTHING THAT GOES WITH IT AND THEN SOMEONE SAID THA,’S GREAT BUT IT’S ALL GOING TO COME DOWN TO PARKING AND TRAFFIC, AND HERE WE ARE, SO NONE OF MY CONCERNS ARE ROOTED IN THE CANNABIS INDUSTRY OR THE CLIENTELE AT ALL, IT’S MOSTLY ROOTED IN THE FACT THAT THIS IS AN IMPERFECT SPOT AND SETUP FOR ANY BUSINESS, WHETHER IT’S AN ICE-CREAM PARLOR AERER OR A SHOE STORE OR A CANNABIS DISPENSARY, WE HAVE ALLOWED PARKING REDUCTIONS BEFORE AND I KNOW THAT’S A SEPARATE THING BUT THAT WAS PROBATION THAT TALKS ABOUT THE EKES ON THE POSSIBLE RFP PROCESS AND THEN IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY QUESTIONS, THERE WAS TWO [INAUDIBLE] THAT WE DIDN’T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT OR I DON’T KNOW BECAUSE IT WASN’T REQUIRED AND IT’S BECAUSE OF THAT THAT I CAN’T MAKE FINDING E WHICH IS THE NUISANCE OR DETRIMENT AOF THE PUBLIC AND IF I HAD TO VOTE TODAY, I WOULDN’T SUPPORT THE MOTION BUT I DON’T WANT TO DO THAT BECAUSE I DON’T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE A DECISION. I WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE WORD OF SOMEONE IN PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE I HAVEN’T SEEN THE LETTER AND I WOULD HAVE TO TAKE A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT HAS IN MY OPINION TOO MANY HOLES IN IT. I AGREE THAT SOMETHING NEDS TO HAPPEN, I AGREE THERE ARE A LOT OF PROTECTIONS WITHIN THIS PROCESS BECAUSE IT’S NOT BY RIGHT, IT’S SOMETHING DIFFERENT, BUT I CAN’T MAKE ALL OF THE REQUIRED FINDINGS BECAUSE I JUST DON’T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION, SO I GUESS MY COMMENT WOULD BE IF I’M FORCED TO VOTE TODAY, I WOULD HAVE TO VOTE WITH A NEGATIVE BUT I WOULD PREFER TO CONTINUE THIS TO ANOTHER TIME SO I CAN GET THAT INFORMATION SO THAT I CAN –>>AND CAN YOU BE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT INFORMATION YOU WOULD BE LOOKING FOR?>>I WOULD TLIEK SEE THE LET FRER PROBATION TO SEE IF THERE IS A POSSIBLE DETRIMENT TO AN ADJACENT BUSINESS AS WELL AS A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT DLIFR RI AND RIPPLE EFFECT OF THE COLLEGE PROCESSING WITH PEOPLE COMING BACK AND FORTH ACROSS IT FROM WALKING OR BUSINESSES OR THE PARKING FOR THE EMPLOYEES OR THE BUS.>>OKAY. COMMISSIONER CARTER?>>YEAH, I THINK WHERE I AM ON THE PROJECT IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHERE COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE IS AND PARDON ME IF I’M NOT PROCEEDING AS WE SHOULD BECAUSE I DID SECOND THE MOTION, BUT I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE PARKING. I THINK IT’S A SITUATION THAT EXISTS BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND BECAUSE ANY — AND WOULDN’T EXIST WITH ANY COMMERCIAL USE BUT I THINK WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS SOMETHING THAT COULD EXACERBATE IT WITHOUT ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS TO LOOK MORE CLOSELY AT HOW THE MANEUVERS AROUND THE FACILITY MIGHT IMPACT TRAFFIC EVEN IF IT’S NOT AT A CEQA TYPE LEVEL, I THINK OPERATIONALLY, IT’S GOT SOME PROBLEMS.>>SO, YOU WOULD WANT TO SEE A MORE DEVELOPED TRAFFIC STUDY WITH CERTAIN SPECIFICS TO IT IN ORDER TO GO FORWARD?>>YES.>>OKAY. WELL, I’LL SAY WHAT I THINK AND THEN WE’LL WORK OUT WHERE WE GO FROM HERE. WHAT I SEE HERE IS, IT’S UNIQUE SITUATION, IT’S HISTORIC DISTRICT, THIS IS A BUILDING THAT’S PART OF A HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO BRING UP TO OUR STANDARDS, IT’S LEGAL NONCONFORMING. I THINK NO MATTER WHAT BUSINESS GOES IN HERE, THERE IS GOING TO BE A VERY SIMILAR EXERCISE AS WE’VE HEARD. I THINK THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT HAS GONE TO GREAT LENGTHS TO DEAL WITH THE PARKING REDUCTION TO MAKE SURE THAT IT’S HANDLED WITH ITS EMPLOYEES. I THINK SO MANY TIMES UP HERE, WE ARE TALKING AOUT — COMPLAINING THERE’S TOO MUCH PARK SOG WE’RE IN A WALKABLE AREA, AN AREA THAT’S SERVED BY TRANSIT, THE PARKING GARAGE WHICH WOULD SERVE THE EMPLOYEES, POSSIBLY EVEN SERVE SOME OF THE INDIVIDUALS UTILIZING THE RETAIL SERVICE IS A THOUSAND FEET AWAY, IT IS WALKABLE, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS ARE ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE GENERAL PLAN AND WE ACCOUNT IN THE ZONING CODE FOR THESE KINDS OF VERY TRICKY SITUATIONS, YOU KNOW, OUR CHOICE WOULD BE IF WE WANTED TO HAVE IT BROUGHT UP TO STANDARDS IS RAISE THE BUILDING, NOBODY WOULD WANT TO DO THAT IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, SO I HEAR THAT YOU WANT MORE CERTAINTY AS TO HW IT ALL CIRCULATES BUT MY OPINION IS THAT WE WILL GET THAT CERTAINTY AND I JUST THINK AT THIS POINT, THIS APPLICANT I OFFERING A LOT, THAT BUILDING NEEDS TO BE RETENANTED, I DON’T KNOW WITH YOU ALL VISITOR THE SITE, I VISITED THE SITE ANTICIPATING THAT I WULD PARK IN THE LOT AND GET OUT AND WALK AROUND AND CHECK OUT THE ALLEYWAYS, IT WAS AT NOON ON A WEEKDAY AND TERE WAS SO MUCH NEGATIVE ACTIVITY ON THAT SITE THAT IT WAS TOO INTIMIDATING FOR ME TO DO THAT. THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE AND ABSOLUTELY WOULD CHANGE WITH THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT, BETTER THAN AN ICE-CREAM STORE OR ANY OTHER KIND OF RETAIL OUTLET BECAUSE OF THE ADVANCED SECURITY WHERE THEY’RE OFFERING — IT’S 24 HOURS SECURITY, IT’S ON-SITE PATROLS, THEY WOULD BE LOOKING AT THE ALLEYWAYS, A LOT OF THE TROUBLES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE DEALT WITH, WITH THIS USE, SO TO ME, THAT WOULD BE — IF I’M LIVING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT WOULD BE A GREAT VALUE TO ME AND THE PARKING ISSUE EXISTS WITHOUT THIS USE AND I THINK IT CAN BE ADDRESSED AND IS BEING ADDRESSED BY THIS APPLICANT. WE’RE GETTING A PAINTED BUILDING, I’S GOING TO LOK MUCH NICER IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IT’S GOING TO BE MUCH SAFER IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK ABOUT THE CMPLAINTS AND FEARS OF PEOPLE WALKING BY A CANNABIS RETAIL USE AND IF I’M A PARENT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, I’M WORRIED ABOUT PEOPLE WALKING BY THE NON-USE THAT EXISTS RIGHT NOW WITH VERY NEGATIVE ISSUES HAPPENING ON THAT PROPERTY THAT THEY’RE WALKING BY RIGHT NOW EVERY DAY, SO FOR ME, IT’S — THIS IS A PROPOSAL THAT HAS COME ALONG THAT CAN REALLY ACTIVATE THE STREET, PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SUCCESSFULLY OFFER SOMETHING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT’S A RETAIL OUTLET AND IN THE KEEPING OF THINGS THAT WE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR, THEY HAVE AN EVEN DISBURSAL ACROSS THE CITY, IT IS EASY AK SAYS AND WALKABLE, SO TO ME THE PARKING AND THE MANEUVERING OF THE PARKING HAVE BEEN WELL WORKED OUT AND SO FOR ME, IT’S A CONCERN THAT WE JUST CAN’T GO FORWARD. AGAIN, IF I’M LIVING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, I WOULD WANT THIS TO MOVE ALONG QUICKLY AND MR. SIEX, AND I ALSO WANT T SAY SOMETHING TO YOU, I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING TO YOU, NO, I WAS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR CAR SITUATION AND THAT IS I FREQUENTLY, I LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD VERY SIMILAR WHERE I HAVE CARS ALL OVERBAKED, AOEM REGULARLY ON THE PHONE TO HAVE THOSE TAGGED AND MOVED. I DON’T KNOW WHY THERE’S BEEN A BACKUP LATELY, I’VE HAD TO CALL MORE THAN ONCE TO GET THEM MOVED SO YOUR 30 DAY THING IS DEFINITELY IN KEEPING WITH MY EXPERIENCE BUT DON’T GIVE UP, KEEP CALLING BECAUSE THEY WLL COME MOVE THEM. SO, I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERNS. SO, ALRIGHT, OKAY, ALRIGHT. OKAY, SO WITH THAT, THAT’S WHERE I WOULD STAND BUT WE WOULD END U WITH A 2-2, SO I THINK WE’D BE IN BETTER KEEP TOG GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE — YEAH, STAFF WANT TOS SAY SOMETHING.>>JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I SPOKE TO MR. KASULE IN THE AUDIENCE, HE INDICATED IT’S HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LETTER FROM THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT WAS SENT TO SAFF LATE THIS AFTERNOON APPROXIMATELY 3:30, STAFF DID NOT ACCESS THE E-MAIL IN TIME, SO THAT’S WHY IT WAS NOT FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.>>THAT SOUNDS LIKE COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE WANTS MORE THAN TO LOOK AT THE LETTER, HE WANTS BETTER ANALYSIS.>>WELL, YEAH, BUT I THINK THE THING WITH THE LETTER IS WHILE THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF BLIGHT WITH THAT SECIFIC PLACE, IF IT DOES NEGATIVELY IMPACT AN ADJACENT BUSINESS, EVEN IF IT’S NON-PROFIT, IT’S STILL A BUSINESS, WE CAN’T IN GOOD CONSCIENCE TRADE ONE BUSINESS FOR ANOTHER, ESPECIALLY ONE THAT’S EXISTING.>>AND WHAT ARE THE POINTS OF HOW IT WOULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT IT?>>IF THE LETTER DOES STATE THAT TEY WOULD — IT WOULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE RFP PROCESS TO GET THEIR CONTRACTS TO CONTINUE ON AS AN ORGANIZATION AND IT IS DETRIMENTAL TO THEM, TO ME, THAT IS DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.>>AND HOW DO WE THEN APPLY WHAT OUR POLICIES ARE BECAUSE THAT — I MEAN, THAT’S THE POINT IN THE 600 SETBACK FROM SCHOOLS AND HOW THOSE THINGS WERE ACCOUNTED FOR, IF WE — ANY BUSINESS COULD COME FORWARD AND SAY I’M NEGATIVELY IMPACTED SO I GUESS IEM NOT CLEAR.>>THE PERSON THEY HAVE A CONTRACT WITH SAYING I WILL NOT GIVE YOU A CONTRACT IF THAT IS NEXT TO YOU, IT’S NOT THEM SAYING WE’RE I TROUBLE, IT’S THE PERSON WHO GIVES THEM A CONTRACT, AND IT’S ALSO A GOVERNMENT INSTITUTION, I WOULD FIND IT HARD TO MRAO*EF THE GOVERNMENT INSTITUTION WOULD LIE ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS.>>OKAY. AND AGAIN I WANT TO ASK STAFF, I KNOW WE HAD THIS ISSUE COME UP ABOUT HOUSING, YOU KNOW, HAVING CANNABIS USES NEXT TO CERTAIN HOUSING AND FINANCING WAS AN ISSUE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THAT?>>I’M SURE MS. CROCKER CAN ADD TO IT, BUT TO DATE IN THESE — THE ISSUES THAT HAVE ARISEN HAVE BEEN A COUPLE IN TERMS OF IMPACTS TO OTHER ENTITIES, IN TERMSER OF HOUSING AND THE ABILITY TO ACCESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDS, IT TURNED OUT THAT THAT WAS SUGGESTED BUT NOT TRUE. ANOTHER ISSUE EMERGED THROUGH THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS AND THAT WAS FEDERAL FUNDING TO SCHOOLS, IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT CANNABIS, APPROVING CANNABIS IN PROXIMITY 20 SCHOOLS WOULD IMPACT FEDERAL FUNDING, THAT WAS FUND TO BE UNTRUE, THESE ARE THINGS THAT CAN BE EXPLORED BUT IT’S DIFFICULT IN A LAND USE PERMIT AS YOU GO THROUGH THE RESEARCH, BUT SUGGESTIONS DOESN’T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THE IMPACT IS TRUE, IT’S CHARACTERIZED.>>AND THAT IS CORRECT, WE DID RESEARCH THAT ISSUE PARTICULARLY IN REGARD TO FEDERAL FUNDING FR HOUSING PROJECTS AND FOR SCHOOLS AND FOUND THAT THAT WAS NOT A VALID ARGUMENT AND THERE WAS NOTHING TO SUPPORT THE NOTION THAT FEDERAL FUNDS WOULD BE AT RISK FOR EITHER OF THOSE USES.>>AND YOU DO A SIMILAR RESEARCH PROCESS BY VIRTUE OF THIS LETTER?>>I WOULD LOOK INTO I, I HAVE NOT SEEN THE LETTER AND — >>IT CAME IN LATE.>>I CAN’T SPEAK T WHAT IT SAYS.>>TLA’S WHAT MR. OKREPKIE IS LOOKING FOR.>>IT WOULD GIVE TIME TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND THEN THE ISSUE IS RESOLVED COMPLETELY. ER>> OKAY, SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR A CONTINUANCE TO COLLECT MORE INFORMATION FROM THE APPLICANT, ANY DISCUSSIONS FROM THE APPLICANT ABOUT HOW QUICKLY THEY THINK THEY COULD DO THAT AND RETURN?>>THE APPLICANT JUST INDICATED HE WOULD ACCEPT A CONTINUANCE TO A DATE UNCERTAIN.>>TO A DATE UNCERTAIN?>>CORRECT.>>OKAY, SO I THINK — GO AHEAD.>>WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IS TO MAKE SURE THERE’S CLEAR COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE COMMISSION AND THE APPLICANT T APPLICANT’S TRAFFIC ENGINEER TO FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLARIFICATION THIS STUDY SHOULD INCLUDE.>>OKAY, COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE, YOU WANT TO OUTLINE THAT FOR THE APPLICANT?>>SO, YEAH, MY CONCERNS WAS THE DELIVERY TRIPS WERE NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT DURING THE STUDY A WELL AS — SORRY, I DIDN’T TAKE DOWN ALL THE NOTES, AS WELL AS — HOLD ON — ANY RIPPLE EFFECTS FOR THE USE OF THE CROSSWALK, IF PEOPLE ARE WALK FRAMING THE SOUTH SIDE OF COLLEGE OR USING THE BUS ON THAT SIDE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IF THAT BACKS UP TRAFFIC AD THEN CAUSES AN ISSUE WITH THE TRAFFIC ON COLLEGE, THOSE ARE MY MAIN CONCERNS.>>OKAY. ANY ADDITIONS THERE, COMMISSIONER CARTER?>>YEAH, I THINK JEFF PROBABLY COVERED IT BUT I TOO WOULD LIKE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW MOVEMENT AROUND TO ACCOMMODATE PARKERS AT THE FACILITY AFFECTS BOTH THE CONGESTION ON GLENN AND COLLEGE AND PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT THROUGH THAT CRITICAL INTERSECTION.>>YOU GUYS GOOD? YOU’RE CLEAR ON WHAT WE’D BE LOOKING FOR. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CLARIFICATIONS ABOUT WHAT THEY’RE LOOKING FOR?>>WE JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT THE RES*EJ WE WOULD BE TAKING ON AROUND IS AROUND THE PARKING AND SIDEWALK CONCERNS AND NOT AOUND THE FEDERAL FUNDING ISSUE THAT IS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP, THAT’S NOT WITHIN OUR SCOPE OF ABILITY AND I BELIEVE THE CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE HAS DONE A GOOD JOB IN RESEARCHING THOSE QUESTIONS IN THE PAST. ER>> I THINK THAT RES*EJ WOULD FALL TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO RESPOND TO THAT LETTER, SO –. ER YES, I’LL LOOK INTO THAT.>>OKAY. SO, WE HAD A RESOLUTION ON THE FLOOR, WE RESCIND THAT AND MAKE THE NEW MOTION, IS THAT CORRECT, COMMISSIONER CROCKER?>>YOU CAN JUST DO A MOTION TO CONTINUE AND THAT WILL STOP THE DEBATE BEFORE.>>OKAY.>>TO A DATE UNCERTAIN WITH YOUR DIRECTION.>>OKAY. WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION?>>I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS TO A DATE UNCERTAIN. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO BE — DO I RESCIND MY PREVIOUS MOTION?>>NO, SHE SAID — >>WITH DIRECTION THEN, SO A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO A DATE UNCERTAIN WITH DIRECTION TO STAFF TO PREPARE THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE TO THE PROBATION LETTER AS DIRECTED BY YOUR COMMISSION.>>WHAT SHE SAID.>>THANK YOU, WHAT SHE SAID.>>OKAY. AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND?>>SECOND.>>OKAY. SO, THE MOTION TO CONTINUE TO A DATE UNCERTAIN WITH THOSE REQUESTS OF STAFF TO LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND TO RESPOND TO THE PROBATION LETTER WAS MOVED BY VICE CHAIR WEEKS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER OKREPKIE AND YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. AND THAT PASSES WITH FOUR AYES, COMMISSIONERS DUGGAN, KALIA AND PETERSON BEING ABSENT. AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR BUSINESS TONIGHT. AND I APPRECIATE THE FRUSTRATION AND WE JUST CAN’T ALLOW SHOUT-OUTS FROM THE AUDIENCE, IT JUST ISN’T WHAT WE DO HERE, SO I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY’S COOPERATION WITH THAT. ( MEETING IS ADJOURNED ).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *