We're gonna call to order the Planning Commission, City of Heaven Bay Planning Commission meeting for Tuesday, May 12th.

Bridget, do you want to go over the protocols?

Sure, I'll quickly go over.

We will allow public speaking um general for three minutes as well as the specific topics that are being discussed this evening.

And that is all I have for tonight.

Okay.

If everyone could stand and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance.

And Bridget, we need a roll call.

Yes, Commissioner Delagro?

Here.

Commissioner Rems.

Here.

Commissioner Reddick is absent this evening.

Our Vice Chair Hernandez.

I am present.

And Chair Gorn.

I'm here.

We have four commissioners present this evening.

Um so um I wanted to approve minutes.

Let me see if we can do that.

Yes.

Uh no, we can't.

Because we only had three people at that meeting, and one of them was uh Commissioner Reddick.

So we're gonna skip over that and do it next time.

And I wanted to open up um the floor for public comment that's for anything that is not on the agenda tonight.

So if anybody has anything to say that is not on the Planning Commission agenda, um now is the time to speak up.

Raise your hand online.

Um not seeing anyone.

So I am not going to open the public comment.

Um we're gonna move on to um our first item.

Which is the um, which uh Leslie's gonna present the um your intent to approve a temporary use permit.

Uh director's report, is that.

You want to do that first?

Yes.

We usually do it at the end.

We we switched it up just because we didn't know if we would have um a commissioner here at the end of the meeting, so it's on here.

Whatever you want is fine with me.

We'll do director's report first.

Go ahead.

Okay.

Um.

So here we go.

Uh last week we had our kickoff meeting for the implementation plan update.

Uh this was an internal staff meeting.

We're very excited about it.

We are working on tightening up the project schedule, and then we'll have our first of the working group meetings with Commissioner Del Nagro and Commissioner Rems and Coastal Commission staff, probably in the next couple months.

So we're really looking forward to getting that kicked off as well.

I wanted to let you know that on June 4th, there will be an open house for the Midpen multifamily project that's uh on the Metzger property between Maine and Cabrillo Highway.

Um they have been working with staff on uh getting their application ready.

They plan on submitting their application on June 1st.

This is an SB 35 application, uh so only objective standards apply, and there are no public hearings.

So they are doing these open houses as a form of outreach to educate people on the project.

Uh they also plan to come to a council meeting and uh provide information for council as well.

But the first of those uh is on June 4th, and that will be in our e-news and it'll go out on our socials, so um, let people know if you get a chance.

Um permits issued since our last meeting.

Let's see, on April 29th, we issued um a coastal development permit and architectural review for um additions and a remodel at 132 Kelly Avenue.

Uh we also issued um a CDP same day and architectural review for a new single family dwelling and attached ADU on one of our info sites in the downtown area.

And I'm sorry I don't have the address.

Um, and on May 5th, we issued a minor amendment to allow a one-year expiration date extension um for the child care center.

I think it's called Coast Child Care Child Development Center that's at 565 Redondo Beach Road.

Uh other items of note, uh the Pullman culvert, which this planning commission approved on my first night as director in front of you, um, is uh they're starting the staging to uh to construct that at Dunes Beach.

Um so that's supposed to start this Friday, um, and they will be um blocking the coastal trail for part of that and rerouting.

Um, and if you have questions, uh Scott can answer those.

Um also there will be some Monterey Pine Tree removals on the south side of Strawflower Shopping Center.

Um that's scheduled to start next week, um, and Scott can also answer questions on that if you have them.

Um for the next planning commission meeting that is on May 26th.

So that is the day after Memorial Day, and we really appreciate that you uh plan to be here.

Um we're gonna bring forward a project, um, a coastal trail project uh near Murata, and um uh a mural at Aulis at 507 Parisima, that's their new uh building.

And um public works will bring forward their CIP program uh for general plan conformance review.

So that's it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um, so while we're on this uh back end of the agenda, um we do have uh space for planning commission communications.

Do any of the planning commissioners have anything they want to share?

Vice Chair, um two things.

The first one is today I had the great pleasure of going down to Poplar Beach and helping to install the polls for the new seasonal volleyball courts.

So there's six of those that are being put in place.

The nets will be in place on Thursday, thanks to city staff who helped lug the posts down to the beach and all the volunteers from the Half Boom Bay Volleyball Club and Red Rock volleyball club in Redwood City who contributed uh photos to come once the nets are up.

Uh second thing is in this very room.

I believe next week there is a new uh line dance series for Coast Side Country starting sponsored by Parks and Rec and our own coastside country.

So if you haven't joined the line dancing phenomena, you guys should come check it out.

Commissioner De Negro.

I've had uh two great experiences in the last couple weeks here in Hapoon Bay.

One is, of course, we had our um car show.

Uh I was able to actually bring my car up there, meet a lot of locals, talk about a lot of issues in the city.

Um that was a really good show.

Um, and it was a little warmer this year than it was in past years, which is great.

A second one was obviously the Jazz and Wine Festival this weekend was a wonderful turnout.

I really enjoyed being out there with people and the music was fantastic.

I think we're doing a lot of great um uh events in the city where people can get together.

Thanks.

Um I also wanted to just say that um uh we are redoing our kitchen, which requires a permit, and I've been hearing all about how hard it is to get a permit in Hafoon Bay, and it was smooth and easy and fast.

And so thank you very much.

Um, so that brings us to our first item.

Commissioner Chair, to the chair, one more thing.

I just uh had I was on mute for just the very beginning of the public comment, and so I have somebody raising their hand.

I'm not sure if it's on a subject or if it's a general, so I'm not sure if you allow that to us to ask just to make sure that there we go.

So um we do have a um a time for public comment on something that is not on the agenda.

Evelyn DeSouza online.

If you are wanting to speak on that, I can open up public comment.

Um, but if you're not I'd have you if you want to comment on something that's on the agenda, you gotta take your hand down.

So let's open public comment.

Let her talk.

Hi, Evelyn.

If you need to speak on a general subject, you can.

She took it off.

She's there.

Are you there, Evelyn?

She might have just clicked on it by accident, too.

So okay.

I just wanted to be covered.

I just wanted to cover our bases.

Thank you.

Um, thank you.

Um so let's move on to our first item then, um, the temporary use permit at two Maramon Days Point Road.

Uh Half Moon Bay golf links.

Um is that Leslie?

Thank you.

Hopefully.

Um, not.

Hi.

Good evening, Chair and Commissioners.

My name is Paul Kite Lanzi, associate planner.

Um, and this first item before you tonight is a notification of the community development director's intent to approve a temporary use permit at two Miramontes Point Road for a temporary tent installation uh within the planned unit development zoning district.

And by way of background, um section 18.15.025 of the Half Moon Bay zoning code allows the community development director to approve temporary uses of land and structures for within the PUD districts for up to 90 days, provided that they uh provided that certain findings are made specifically that the use must be consistent with the general plan and applicable ordinances and must not negatively affect the health safety or welfare of nearby residents or workers.

And this item is presented to the planning commission for informational purposes only.

Um so no action is required um on this item tonight.

Um however, please note that uh any director decision um on a temporary use is subject to appeal to the planning commission um within 10 working days of the decision.

Um so a bit a bit of a project overview.

The proposed temporary use is located at the old course at Half and Bay Gulf Lanks and is requested by Ocean Colony Partners.

And the project includes the installation of one main tent, 60 feet by 100 feet, designed to accommodate up to 400 dining guests and two smaller attached ancillary tents.

And the temporary use period would run from uh July 22nd, 2026 through October 20th, 2026, and will support charitable and special events hosted at the Gulf links.

And it's worth noting that this temporary use has a long standing history at the site.

So based on the consistency with the prior approvals and the temporary seasonal nature of the use, the director intends to find that the project meets the required findings, and accordingly, um the director intends to approve the temporary use, subject to the conditions of approval.

And again, this item is before you for informational purposes only, and no actually no action is required by planning commission at this time.

Uh thank you, and I'm available for any questions.

Um I do have a question.

So is there anything at all that's different this year than last year's application or basically the 19 applications that we've approved?

Uh it's substantially um the same application.

Um there is a difference in the sort of in the types of event events they'll they'll be hosting there.

Um I believe last year or the year prior, there was um sort of an event with um pianos uh playing at the bluffs.

I don't believe that's a part of it this year.

So my understanding is that all the events are confined to the tent area this time around.

Thank you very much.

Yeah.

Anybody else?

I have a commissioner Del Negro.

Is there any impact on public access to the beach?

I'm saying is no.

There's not no.

And there's any impact on public parking uh stalls that are available at the site.

Um no.

Yeah, okay, great.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Anyone else?

Nope.

Um, we are gonna move on to our um 6B, our community banner sign program.

And that is Julissa Acosta.

Mr.

Chair, just checking we don't have any public comments for 6A.

Uh, we did not ask for that.

We okay.

Well, um, wow.

Evelyn DeSouza.

Well, she re raised her hand.

I think we're having a bit of tech difficulties with the audio, so let's just see if she can speak and we can try to troubleshoot this.

Can you speak, Evelyn?

Can you hear me?

Um, yeah, I can I can hear you, but everybody else is gonna have trouble.

So hang one second.

What about if I just send an email to the client session that I think that might be the best?

Why don't you go ahead and speak right now?

Um, can everyone hear me?

Yes, go ahead.

Okay, good evening, Commissioner.

Um I would like to ask for a public date.

Um recently residents surrounding the recently that the project may be rising quickly.

We've heard reports that the land is being subdivided.

Given this, um, Evelyn Souza.

Hold on.

Yes.

We can't hear you.

Yeah, it's coming, it's getting you're breaking up so much.

They're cutting out on your end a little bit.

No, it's not breaking out on my end.

I think it's a Zoomy issue.

Um that might be great.

I'm happy to say that no idea.

Why don't you just start at the start?

So I can understand it.

Please.

Can you hear me though?

There's not much point if you taught you me.

It's kind of cutting in and out.

She said she could send an email and we can send it to you guys.

It's general public comment.

Okay.

Um, you can send us an email, we will read it.

Um, sorry, we can't hear you.

Yeah, I'm sorry, that's happening.

Um, but yeah, send it in and I'll I'll receive it and we can transcribe it to the uh to the Planning Commission if that works.

Thank you very much.

My apologies.

No problem.

Thank you, Ms.

Sousa.

Thank you for that.

So moving on to 6B, which is the community banner sign program.

And that is Julissa Costa.

Who's gonna present to us?

Okay, right.

Uh I will uh intro the project um and then I will hand it off to Joisa later.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah.

Um so this next item before you is the community banner sign program, uh, which is proposed as a special sign program for Main Street.

Um, and at a high level, um, this program establishes a coordinated uh city managed banner system using existing infrastructure within the public right-of-way, um, including the decorative light poles and a couple of gateway locations.

And the intent is to create a consistent framework for displaying community-based banners that support civic events and local activities while maintaining design standards through a required style guide and uniform installation methods.

Um, so the AAC has also previously reviewed this program um at their March 12th meeting earlier this year, and the AAC indicated that the project um did not need to return to them and could proceed to planning commission.

And the meeting notes are included as attachment two in the agenda packet.

Um, regarding this project, staff evaluated the program under the city's special sign program requirements in chapter 15.70, and finds that it is consistent with the intent of the ordinance, um, compatible with the surrounding setting and structured to achieve a higher level of coordinated design than standard uh sign permitting would allow.

The project is also exempt from CEQA under section uh 15 311 for accessory structures.

And based on these findings, um staff recommends approval of the special sign program.

Um so shown on on this slide is um uh essentially a guide for the parameters of review by planning commission.

Um in essence, um you're tasked with reviewing the program and regulatory framework, not necessarily the specific banner graphics or sample artwork.

Um so included in that review is the code consistency and how it aligns with the special sign program ordinance, um, evaluating the fit for the downtown, um, if it's appropriate for Main Street and the public realm.

Um the program framework, including the style guide, um, size placement materials and installation rules, and um public infrastructure considerations um as the use of the existing light uh as use of existing infrastructure will be uh incorporated.

And at this point, I will hand it off to the project manager Julisa Acosta.

Thanks, Paul.

Good evening, chair, vice chair, commissioners.

My name is Julisa Casa.

I'm the interim community as her economic and community vitality manager, and I will speak to you on uh the community banner program.

Uh I'll give you a little bit of background and c and context on how we got here today.

As you may be aware, uh beautification efforts around downtown status started back in the 70s with the beautification committee and the pumpkin festival, and there have been um ongoing uh attempts to address uh the vitality of downtown, and um the goal with this project is to enhance the historic downtown, um, build on the previous community efforts and support civic engagement throughout uh the project.

Um this is like Paul mentioned, consistent uh with other public uh, sorry, other uh previously adopted plans, uh specifically the local land use plan, the downtown specific plan, and most recently the downtown streetscape master plan, which identified uh downtown Main Street as uh as a potential area to allow us to enhance the beauty of our town and create a cohesive program that allows for community participation as well.

The goal of this uh project is um to enhance the community assets that we have in downtown, and that is with the goal of serving our residents and visitors.

Um decorative elements like the light poles on Main Street with the uh hanging flower baskets and the banner option are just uh another way where we can utilize the current infrastructure that we have to enhance our community.

A little bit of what this program is and what it isn't.

Um the goal of this program is to again enhance the character throughout downtown.

We would like to create an opportunity for community-based organizations to promote their events throughout town and just increase the civic participation.

This program is not created or designed to promote any private businesses, any commercial advertising and a political or religious messaging, and it's also not intended for permanent signage.

The program is designed to host a regular mainstay banner that attracts visitors and residents.

And when it's not in use, we will create an opportunity for community-based organizations to rent set banners for a maximum of two weeks or 14 days.

This program will be administered and managed by city staff.

Um installation and removal of banners will be handled by city staff or recommended vendors.

Again, the goal is to create a streamlined process, which we previously didn't have.

Um we also want to create an opportunity to standardize our application process for this.

There's currently no structure set in place where anyone who wants to use the banners can go submit an application, be subject to review and approval, pay a fee, and then get their banners displaced.

Like I mentioned before, the maximum display for potential banners is 14 days.

Um it is uh limited to one participation per calendar year per organization, and the priority is given to city events, nonprofit uh community and community events.

Um, one thing to point out is uh we're rolling this program out.

This is our first time trying this, and so bear with us as we navigate this.

Uh, but we gave it a lot of um thought.

We did a lot of research, uh, we connected with the Downtown Business Association.

Um, like Paul mentioned earlier, this was previously presented to the architectural advisory committee.

They gave us their feedback.

One of the recommendations from them was to include a style guide that will allow us to set some guidelines around the sign so it's not very um diverse or different from a standard uh banner.

And uh we also connected with the leadership council Cemateo County and their captain project as an organization that provides opportunity for nonprofit business uh private businesses and government employees to connect and participate in a cohort throughout a year.

At the end of the year, they have to do a CAP project or community acceleration project, and we connected with them and they were able to provide a lot of research for us and best practices for this uh model.

And what you see now is uh some of the recommendations included in the program.

We have a design standards are consistent with the guidelines uh recommended by the downtown business association and the chamber of commerce.

Um, it's um it adheres to the city's uh current theme and colors and and typography.

Um we are again community-oriented messaging.

There is no uh room for private or public, um, sorry, private, private, uh, or commercial uh advertising.

Um the goal is to just create an awareness of the programming that is happening throughout town, or uh just have a welcome refreshing mainstay banner that is displayed throughout uh Main Street.

In the attachments on the packet, you'll see more in the detail of the policy that we created in a draft of the application, which is simple yet structured, which is what we were hoping to address.

Um I'll turn it over to Dale.

Uh right now he can talk more about the specifics of the project, the location, and we're playing microphone tag.

Good evening, Chair, Vice Chair, Commissioners, and members of the public, um Daleita Hinterm City Engineer.

Um, so we're talking about 42 different locations for the banners on Main Street.

That's 17 north of Main Street Bridge through the through North Main up to Highway One, and 27 locations south of the Main Street Bridge.

Um current, and these are all existing light poles uh within the city right away.

Currently, I think there's around 20 or 22 kind of existing um banner setups on the existing poles that vary um in different configurations.

Um, in addition to those locations, we're also looking at um implementing banners that would be under control of the city only, specifically on the on the north end of the main street bridge where we have those two existing uh flag poles.

Those are approximately 30 foot tall poles.

So these would serve as a gateway function, kind of welcoming people in the downtown.

Um additionally, we're looking at kind of the the four-foot diameter kind of round button on the southern gateway or the southern entrance in a downtown.

Also, this would be something that the city would be looking at implementing kind of it would be specifically, it's in the program, but it's specifically for the city's use only.

Um this is kind of an example of what a what an existing setup looks like out there.

Um the existing hardware is kind of put together with uh with steel straps, it it varies down main street.

Um there's no consistency.

A lot of these um are at the end of their shelf life and need to be replaced.

Um so we're looking at kind of one clean and consistent um replacement for all the hardware.

Uh we've been working with a local fabricator is familiar with kind of the coastal conditions here to try and develop a design that is both uh simple and low maintenance and timeless, something that is gonna hold up well under our conditions here and and allow us to kind of enjoy these for the foreseeable future.

Um we're exploring different materials, each of those come with different put price points, um, but we're we're in the process of um kind of trying to find a balance between how much we'd want to spend on individual um hardware setups and and uh the material.

Um there's a couple constraints to how these things are oriented within the public space.

Um we have to um maintain a minimum seven foot vertical clearance under any locations for accessibility path of travel along the sidewalk and within parking space.

Um we're also looking at zone zero requirements for um severe fire hazard zone.

That's that's the clearance between structures and combustible materials.

So of those 42 locations, I think there's three that are closer than five feet existing today.

So we would need to either exclude those or work with the fire department to determine if there's a material that would be suitable that would be non-combustible to meet those requirements.

Um the banners today that if you notice out there, the way they're oriented today, the the flower baskets are oriented on the street side primarily, and the banners are oriented on the on the sidewalk side.

Um we received feedback from local businesses that they would prefer the banners to be located on the street side.

Um this is to improve visibility traveling down the street.

Um there's you know, still some questions about how that's going to work with the flower baskets being on the sidewalk side for watering and also just somebody walking down the street if they're gonna tamper with them or something.

Um so we've provided kind of both options here, and public works is still evaluating those to determine if if one of or both of those would be suitable and acceptable within the public right-of-way.

Um I think that's it.

Any questions?

Yeah, we're happy to answer any questions on uh compliance or the policy or the materials for the hardware.

So uh we'll take it up here.

Um does anybody have any uh questions about um this program?

Anything they need clarified?

I got a few.

Nothing nothing controversial or anything, but uh um all events are inclusive, like no exclusive events are allowed for that is what I understood from that situation.

All community events, yes.

Yeah, no, no private uh commercial, only or that's political, none of that, yes.

Um are there reserve times annually for city events specifically that happen every year?

We have met with different organizations that manage different events like the Fourth of July parade, the Pumpkin Festival, and so those are the longstanding um events that we typically uh hosted in the city.

However, recently, like you mentioned the Wine and Jazz Festival.

There might be an opportunity for them to engage with the community through the banners, and so that is open to the community uh organizations that want to host an event that is open to the public.

But do we like reserve it for that event that time of year?

Typically, we know it's coming.

Yes, and that's why there's there's a priority uh city sponsored events, nonprofit, and then community based, and so any um any event that is hosted or co-hosted by the city will have priority, then everything else will fun under that.

Fantastic.

Um third question was uh the design standard review, is that happening prior to the manufacturing?

Do you suggest to them please don't manufacture your signs until you get a review?

Yes.

Yes, we're requesting that they uh provide us a sample uh of the design, and then city staff will review, make sure it adheres with the um standards that we have, and then we can give the how that they get the cart before the horse, it could be some conflict.

No, unless it's something that is already previously established.

Like if somebody's hosting a regular annual event, then we already have that, right?

Exactly.

Fantastic.

Um the single um event per year.

What happens if there's no event scheduled?

Why why couldn't somebody apply for a second event if it's open?

We will have a mainstay banner that is standing throughout Half Moon Bay throughout downtown and all the polls that is just a welcome Happen Bay or business half of Bay or just something very generic that is still attracts tourism.

Um we're happy to explore an option.

We just wanted to make sure that not one single organization is taking over the entire um space.

But this is something as we're rolling out this program, we're happy to evaluate and reconsider if if we get interest from the community and hear that there's more events wanting to be hosted by one organization, we're happy to explore that.

And you answered my fifth question, which is with there is no outside banner, does the city have a standard that's gonna go up?

We do, obviously.

Yes, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Commissioner Rems.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I'd be uh interested in knowing I uh a little a little more, a little deeper dive on the southern entrance to the city and the northern entrance to the city on 92 specifically.

And then are you planning anything on Coast Highway at the northern part of the city?

Not at this point, uh for Coast Highway.

Um, are you referring on the south end of town um to the gateway seal that is already there?

Yeah, that is there anything else proposed, banners, uh welcome.

Not at this point, Del maybe.

The big arrow, come this way.

Yeah, so as um as far as other wayfinding elements, kind of finding your way to downtown or welcoming folks to Half Moon Bay.

Um, we still have um a capital improvement project, our downtown streetscape implementation um CIP project, and I'll be presenting that uh at I will be presenting our CIP at our next council meeting, but um this project includes kind of wayfinding throughout downtown and and looking at opportunities um along both the highway kind of corridors and coming into into town.

Is your goal on the south side to to bring people into Lane Street or to just notify them that something is there?

I'm sorry, can you repeat it?

Well, on the south side, uh I'm curious to know how if your goal is to bring the people in onto Main Street, or just to notify them that oh, there is a Main Street and there is a downtown half Moon Bay, and that they continue north on Coast Highway.

What's the goal there?

So the goal is to so the goal is to create consistent kind of wife wayfinding throughout both going to downtown and just traveling through that lets people know where where the beach is at, where the parking is at and where downtown is at.

A lot of people come out to Half Moon Bay to visit the beach, and they don't they've remarked they don't even know we have a downtown.

There is an existing sign out near Cameron's, which I know there's interest in uh replacing that with something that's a little bit more vibrant and more appealing, and capturing that theme and kind of duplicating in other areas, um, whether it's that specific theme or or some other consistent theme that helps distinguish and direct people to different locations, um, that's something we'll that we'll likely be coming back to Planning Commission at a later date.

Well, uh, I'll be quite frank with you.

I'm kind of concerned that if you're trying to trap people and get them into town so that they can you know enjoy Main Street in the summertime or any time for that matter, um, and just putting up a colored banner saying hi.

Uh, I don't think that's gonna do it.

You need to you need to have a grabber, you know, to say why do I want to go down Main Street, and that applies to 92 and maybe on the north side on Coast Highway.

So I would I would suggest that maybe there's some thought given to that, maybe.

There's been a lot of that'll capture the audience, you know, that you're trying to, because sometimes I would imagine there's people that haven't been in town, and they blow by right by town.

Like you say, the the beachgoers, and uh and then I'm wondering uh this is another I'm going to another question.

I'm wondering if you've given any thought on maybe doing studies as to what the effect and what the success or non-success of this program is going to be.

I didn't hear anything about that.

Like we're gonna we're gonna monitor it this way, and here's how we're gonna evaluate that, whether it's successful or not successful, because I hope it's really successful.

I think this is a great great idea, and I would be interested in some data in six months that that you come back to us and say, look, you know, this is here's what we've measured, and then at that time I think at least from my perspective, it's if it's really successful, I hope it is, that I would recommend putting it down Kelly and Redondo and all the all the beach roads because a lot of those beach people I know they just they took they turn on Coast Side when they're gone, so we never capture them.

So that's that's just my two cents work.

Thank you.

Um I think I'll just provide a little clarification before they speak to the monitoring part of your question.

Um what Dale was saying was that there's two different projects.

So the banner project before you this evening is not the project that's addressing getting people from Highway 92 and Cabrillo Highway to Main Street.

That's a different project.

And that different project, that second project, is gonna come before you at a future meeting.

I think actually on the 26th at the next meeting, and so there will be um presenting uh the wayfinding kind of signage to get people from 92 and Cabrillo Highway to Main Street, so two different projects.

Um but I think uh I think your monitoring question is a really good question and and applies to both projects, so maybe they can address that.

Thank you for that comment.

Uh we had uh thought about including that as part of our um process implementation, make sure that we monitor the use of probably engage.

We haven't really nailed down the way to get the accurate data.

We'll be engaging with businesses and um and downtown organizations that oversee or have a heavy influence in the in the area so they can tell us what they're seeing.

Um one way we can in economic development uh monitor this is um the increase in sales tax and visitors to town, and so we partner with the chamber, we partner with the downtown business association, and we try to monitor through out through other uh means uh the successes um of our program.

So this is something definitely we'll be on the lookout for.

Thank you.

Well, Mr.

Chairman, may I may I just follow up on the director's comments on uh a little bit confused as to why why you would put the attraction to get people in the town after.

So there's two projects.

So one project is something that they've been the city's been talking about for a really long time, which is to change the signage to attract people into um Happen Bay downtown from 92 and from Highway One, and that's something that we've heard, and that we're again gonna hear, I think, at the next meeting.

That's like a bigger project.

That's like those are big signs, and it's a it's much more expensive and much more um sort of uh research went into because it's a big deal.

Like that's that's getting people to downtown.

This one is more like publicizing the nonprofits and the events in town, which is currently happening, but they want to do it in a more organized way.

Do I have that right?

Is that right?

I'd just like to add also the the opportunity sites that we're looking at kind of outside of downtown to get people into downtown.

Um, many of those are either on private property or within Caltrans right away, not within cities right away.

Um, and so that adds a level of complication and collaboration that we need to go through.

So they are much larger, more extended kind of delivery time frames.

Well that when I was gonna just gonna say when I was a young man driving across the country many many times, there would be a series of signs.

I don't know if they're barbarol signs or bar barbersol or the other signs, but for miles and miles and miles, you saw a sign and another sign.

And at the end of it, it told a message again.

We had one big message, and so I'm thinking that you know, are you gonna do the same thing essentially, or you're gonna just hopscotch around or what are you gonna do?

That's probably going to be a slightly different than this banner program.

And I just also want to point out that this has been like um Chair Gore mentioned, this is part of the bigger project that was uh sort of came to life recently because of the Street Kit Mass Streetscape Master Plan with the idea of the gateway arch coming into downtown, and so this is part of that larger vision to address the fact that there's no pointing, come to downtown um idea.

And so this this both of these projects have been um worked out through similar simultaneously.

The program that you have in front of you today was identified as low-hanging fruit um coming from the gateway idea um to enter downtown, and so because this is a smaller effort, a little bit of a smaller scale, uh doesn't require uh a big CIP uh budget in in preparation, doesn't require us to go out and be uh bid for contractors and and create all the design elements yet.

Uh we decided to attempt this first to try to address the area in downtown, and once that is ready, we can tackle the bigger um scope.

Thank you for your clarification.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um Vice Chair Hernandez.

You have a question?

I do.

Um are you thinking that there's only going to be one organization at a time that gets the banners, or are you gonna allow multiple organizations to use the banners, like alternate?

We can explore that idea.

There are over 40 banners or banner locations throughout downtown, and should an organization choose to only rent 10 banners, there's the opportunity to allow another organization to promote their event at the same time.

And it's just something that we'll have to navigate as we get the applications.

We have we don't really know yet what the influx of that will be, uh, but there's opportunity for that, unless somebody really says I want all 42 banners right now, then there's opportunity to promote another event.

And the organizations that can participate would include a nonprofit like Coastal Rep, it would include a school, government institution, a community group that's not advertising a commercial project.

Exactly.

As long as it's on a commercial project or um, you know, political or religious, we welcome any community events.

The way we structure our, for example, in our e-news uh bulletin uh that we provide to the community weekly, uh when we advertise other organizations' events, it has to be open to the public, it has to be free, and so that will be a criteria that is part of this process.

Um, it's not something that is going to generate uh revenue for another entity.

It strikes me that if the city is hosting concerts or allowing third parties to have concerts for profit at Carter Park or other places, and it's under the city's property that you might make an exception because again, like we want revenue coming into city owned properties, city it's a city-sponsored event that that's and I it's the question of have you considered that?

We have and we've met with downtown businesses.

Um preferences given to community events uh that are free, open to the public, no charge.

Um we haven't encountered that yet, but as we monitor the progress of the program, uh if we need to make adjustments and and we hear from other interested parties that there's uh specific idea to you know rent some of the banners for a private or a host co-hosted event, we'll happy to um evaluate.

Okay, um just just to clarify you've got um we're talking about putting replacement banner hardware so that one can hang a banner along um Main Street from 92 to South.

Um sorted you have the south end of Main Street.

Yes, correct.

I'm gonna go to the locations.

If you see on the map, there are a few locations uh between 92 and highway one.

Um yeah, so from North Main Street where Main Street meets highway one on the north end.

Um there's several um close to Lewis Foster Drive, which there are existing polls, there's no there's no banner hardware out there today.

But we're including those in this program.

And then heading south through downtown, they may go as far south as about the IDES hall, and then and then there are no existing polls south of there.

So any place we see one of those old fashioned stylized posts, light posts is where we could see the hardware.

That's correct.

And I should add there are several where there's other existing signage, whether it's a direction for um a bus stop or some other traffic wayfinding sign, which we will need to navigate that with with those specific locations.

Um there's not there's not very many, but there are there are a few.

And there's no issue with like these don't have to be fireproof or fire resistant with the new fire standards that are coming in.

So there were three locations that we identified where they would be within kind of the zone zero, the five-foot clearance from existing structures where they would need to meet some fire resistance criteria.

Um what that looks like, we haven't established that yet, and we'll work with Coastide Fire to ensure that they're comfortable with it.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Hi in there.

Um, so I have two really like insubstantial questions.

Um I know that you're trying to get some consistency here, and that you've done this for a while.

Um, but the place where I see the being a problem is that there's a lot of pla a lot of nonprofits that have their own logos and their own style, like you know, got the Shakespeare in the park or whatever, and they are going to insist that they just have their banner the way they want it.

And do you have a way to help them in terms of design, or is that something that they would have to do?

I just don't know.

As far as design ourselves, we wouldn't be able to provide that advice.

However, we can provide the style guide to help them guide that process and share with their designer or their design team to try to uh embrace those elements that are suggested on the style guide.

That was a recommendation from the architectural advisory committee because uh we didn't have that at the time when we presented to them, and that was one of the recommendations to bring forward to planning commission.

Just so there's so there's something, some structure and guidance on that design.

Obviously, like you mentioned, every organization has their own style colours representation identity, and that could be embraced uh in the design uh and guided at the same time with the style guide.

Okay, so I have an opinion about it, but this is clarifying.

So uh the other thing that I wondered about is the little circle on the south of town.

There's a little blue circle.

Um, what is that?

What's gonna be there?

I don't understand.

The blue circle, uh, there's already a sign there, and it's interchangeable.

It was just for commission to know what we were talking about in the program, so that will be the same as the signs.

Exactly, exactly.

So that could that uh a few weeks ago CoSide Gives had their banner there for promotion.

Exactly.

So something like that, yeah.

All right, I knew you weren't doing a blue dot.

Thank you.

I would like to open this up to public comment.

Um so anybody online who wants to uh speak, you should raise your hand.

Uh we have one green card from Amber Stowe.

Um and we would love to hear from you.

I have no one online, yeah.

There we are.

Okay.

Good evening.

Thank you, Bridget.

Thank you so very much.

Um good evening, uh, commission and um city staff and members of the public.

My name is Amber Stowe.

My family owns the paper crane in historic downtown Main Street, and I am part of the Downtown Business Association.

I would like to fully endorse the banner signage program that city staff has put together.

It has been a collaboration between downtown business association, various uh members of the business community, and also various uh stakeholders in downtown vitalization who've been able to give a lot of input, and we've had a lot of our concerns listened to in uh regards to how the downtown banners would be put up and presented, and also what the priorities would be in terms of what would be on those banners.

We fully endorse not having any private entities represented on those banners as well.

Um, something that I was thinking about when we were talking about the sign facing, um, we would prefer that the sign face out toward the street, as was uh put in the first example.

Um, on the southwest corner of uh Miramontes in Maine, there's actually a flower basket example where it's perpendicular on the street.

Um I know that there were a couple concerns that architectural advisory had about the flower baskets hanging over the street and what the watering of the baskets might do to the actual street itself, but if that was swung perpendicular, then uh I think that that would be perfectly addressed.

That's the only note that I have.

Um, so yep, thank you so much.

And we're fully behind this.

Thank you very much.

Is there anybody else who would like to speak?

I am seeing none.

I'm closing public comment.

And we take it back to the dias.

Anybody have any opinions they would like to share about this?

Vice Chair Hernandez has one.

I think it's great.

Um I think that uh I know we've got a wayfinding project going here, but in absence of renters, consider using these signs as wayfinding as well.

Uh I dare say um I like the idea of the bar Barbasol-inspired uh signage as you're heading back towards 92 going over the hill, which is it's not too late.

Are you hungry, stuck in traffic, pull over now?

Um, eat it, eat at Sam's.

Uh any of those kinds of things, I think.

I and I'm in seriousness, like it's it's people don't.

I've heard many, many people say you have a downtown.

Uh so I agree with uh Dale's comments on there.

So anything we can do to promote the downtown business, I think is really important.

We we need to do more.

Um, and I like the style guide.

I think it's important to have one.

I would encourage bright colors that are not garish, but something that people can actually see.

Big fan of putting the signs out on the street.

If you go to like Westwood or Hollywood or other places, uh you see those types of signs, and they're almost always on the outside.

The whole point is you want people to see the signs.

So I think that that's really good.

You guys need to figure out how to water.

And as long as the flower pots are high enough that it's not somebody's not gonna hit their head, I don't really care.

Um, but you guys got to figure out the watering thing.

Um, I think this is great, go faster.

So I really like the plants in.

Um, I say that from two perspectives.

I think it looks better, but second is as a car owner pulling in, you don't want plants dripping on your car, particularly if you have an old hot rod car like I do.

Um I appreciate that towards as a pedestrian, you can kind of avoid it a little easier.

Um I do appreciate the locations, the style guides.

I think it's a very well-thought-out plan.

Um the only thing I kind of felt like was maybe missing was on the corner of Main Street and Highway 92, coming south on Main Street in front of the coffee shop.

It would have been really nice to have a sign there saying keep going straight for downtown.

I think most people who are coming through don't even know downtown is straight on Main Street from that intersection.

That would have been a big value added, is just to make sure that there's a little bit more on that corner.

Pointing in the right direction.

But other than that, this is extremely well done.

Do you have anything?

Commissioner Rims.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um, I'm gonna temper my excitement about this project because it's it's it's just so exciting.

I don't want to be disappointed later.

I and I hope it's not.

If there's anything I could do to help you push this along, I think it's a wonderful launch pad also, Mr.

Chairman.

I've seen this in other parts of the state where they start out something small like this, and it blossoms into uh a real bustling business community for both uh the shoppers, the merchants, and everybody involved.

I could think of Colorado Boulevard in Pasadena, for example, that was going right down to tubes, and the city said to the merchants here, knock yourself out.

Here's a pile of money for you.

And now they've got like crate and barrel in there, they've got all kinds of fancy restaurants in there, you know.

Everything's going, the whole place is flourishing.

It's like Main Street in Disneyland.

They've got people sweeping up the sidewalks and doing all kinds of things.

So it could be something that that launches something like this for Half Moon Bay, increases the night life, the uh merchants are happy, people, guests are happy, and so on.

So I'm gonna be fully supportive of this, uh, Mr.

Chairman, and try to help whoever needs to need the help or whatever to launch this thing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I have two little directive things that I would I would say um the signs have to face the street, have to be on the street.

Like, I mean, you have there are saucers for plants that are built in.

If you really are concerned about spilling water on people, if you have to, you can take the flowers out.

I mean, they have to face the street side, I feel like.

And then the other thing is the signs have to face through the side.

The signs have to be on the street side, not the sidewalk side.

Okay.

Yeah.

And then to uh Vice Chair Hernandez's point about the the many events.

Um, I think there is something to be said for having one event at a time.

And I when I go to, you know, San Francisco and you see over and over and over again the the um the planetarium or the hall of sciences or whatever, it just has a lot more impact and also attractiveness.

Um, and especially if you're like there where you're driving and you can't look at it, which is one of the thoughts I had about that south of Maine.

You don't want to be distracted or whatever, but um it's nice to have it be sort of consistent so you don't stop.

So that's all.

Um, not against having multiple, um, especially around Pumpkin Festival, it might be a good idea.

So, but anyway, that's all I have to the chair.

We have another comment.

Well, a question is more for a discussion section here.

Um, would wouldn't we be opposed for adding on and a little bit of flexibility to add a sign or two around that corner I mentioned earlier, like give some flexibility to the plan?

Well, I think that's a isn't that a wayfinding thing?

I think that's part of the larger project that we're talking about with uh tracking VPN and pointing out where downtown is, I think is what?

Like the way wait for that for a wayfinding to happen.

All right, yeah.

Is that sound right?

So it'll be clear we are not presenting wayfinding at the next planning commission meeting specifically.

We are we are presenting our capital improvement program for general plan conformance, of which one of the projects within our CIP is the downtown streetscape implementation, which includes the wayfinding element.

Well, then I'd like to make a motion.

What for approval of the stated plan here?

I can pull up the language and text if you don't mind.

I pull it down on the screen any chance.

I can't.

Thanks.

The recommendation based on the finding contained in exhibit A of the draft resolution instead of the conditions and approval in exhibit B staff recommendations that the planning commission approve the special sign program PDP 26017 for the community banner sign program along Main Street, making a motion to approve.

And the project we determined to be exempt from CEQA pursuant to section 1531.

I'll second that.

Can we have a vote, please?

Commissioner Rems.

Yes.

Commissioner Tel Negro.

Yes.

Vice Chair Hernandez.

I and Chair Gorn.

Yes, please.

Motion approved 4-0.

Yay.

That's followed.

So we're gonna move on to um.

Before we move on, I just wanted to let you know that our general public comment did come in via email, and I'm asking if you would like it to be read into the record now or at the end of the meeting.

Now would be a good time.

Okay.

That'd be great.

Thank you.

Let me just pull it up.

So this is the public comment that we couldn't hear, and that she sent an email, and this is what she had to say.

That's correct.

So, um good evening, commissioners.

I would like to respectfully ask that the public for a public update and greater transparency regarding the proposed development at 940 Main Street.

Many residents in the surrounding neighborhood have recently heard that the project may be progressing quickly, including reporting reports that the land is being subdivided.

Given the scale and significance of this proposal, I believe it would be appropriate for the planning commission to publicly review where things currently stand.

This is not a small infill project, it is a multi-story housing complex located in an already constrained area near Poplar in Maine, where residents continue to raise concerns about circulation, parking, traffic safety, infrastructure capacity, and neighborhood via viability.

I would also ask the commission to consider some of the broader observations raised by Planning Commissioner Rick Hernandez in his analysis of 555 Kelly project.

In particular, Commissioner Hernandez emphasized the importance of ensuring that housing projects are not only well intended, but also realistic, infrastructure supported, and transparent to the community.

He spoke about the need for measurable milestones, public accountability, and certainly around public accountability and certainty around delivery, infrastructure impacts, long-term feasibility.

Those same principles seem highly relevant here.

Residents are not asking the city to stop planning for housing.

What many of us are asking is for openness, clarity, and confidence that projects of this scale are being evaluated holistically and transparently, particularly when they are substantially reshape when they may substantially reshape important gateways and neighborhoods within Half Moon Bay.

I would respectfully ask that the planning commission to agendize the public status update on 940 Main Street so the community can better understand where the project stands today, what further approvals are being contemplated, how infrastructure and traffic impacts are being addressed, and what safeguards will exist to ensure accountability, compatibility with and compatibility with the surrounding areas.

Thank you for your time and your service to the community.

Evelyn D'Souza.

Okay, um, thank you, Evelyn Sousa.

And um, just because uh Vice Chair Hernandez was mentioned in it, do you have anything like is that fair, a fair representation of what you had to say, or are you um would you like to clarify anything?

So the comments I made were specific to 555 Kelly, but they can be generalized, as uh uh Miss D'Souza laid out.

I think the challenge we have with um the project um that's being proposed by midpen is that under I think it's state bill 36 if I got that 35, SP 35, um we have very little um control um over these types of projects um given the various things that are existent within housing law.

I do think midpen is being a good partner by coming to us, and I think everybody should attend the session that community development director LACO uh Lako presented to us and be there, be present.

I think they listen to the feedback.

Um I've had an opportunity to talk to some people involved in the project and provide my feedback.

Um, but if we want to fix this, it goes to objective design standards, and those need to be updated.

Like we've got some, thank goodness, but we can do a better job updating those, and you know, in the long list of many priorities we put in front of city staff, it's something we should probably take a look at once we get through our implementation plan.

But um, that's how I'd respond to that.

So it was fair and accurate.

Yeah, fair and reasonably accurate.

Yep.

Thank you.

Um, I would like to move on to um 6C, which is uh proposal to have a ballot measure to amend measure D.

Um, and Commissioner Rims.

Uh the floor is yours.

Mr.

Chairman, uh, out of abundance of caution, I've been advised to uh well, it was my decision to uh recuse myself because I live within the area that's gonna be discussed tonight, and I understand that there may be um conflict there, so with all due respect, I'd like to recuse and leave.

Thank you very much.

Yes, you may go.

We'll soldier on without you, okay.

Um.

So who is presenting this um residential growth limitations program?

That would be Ruby, hi.

Hi.

Uh good evening, Chair, Vice Chair, Southwando.

Yes, um, and Commissioner.

I'm Ruby Zaldoondo, assistant planner.

Today I'm here with Leslie Lako, the community development director, and we are bringing you a proposed ballot measure to amend sections of our local coastal land use plan and zoning ordinance that relate to Measure D, the city's residential growth management system.

We are bringing this to you today because Planning Commission is required to provide a recommendation in advance of any local coastal program amendment.

So, for some background, Measure D is the city's growth management system.

It was adopted by voters in 1999 and certified by the California Coastal Commission in 2009.

It accommodates up to 1.5% population growth annually, which is split between the downtown area and outside of downtown area.

This downtown area was defined as the Half Moon Bay Redevelopment Survey Area in 1998.

You can see this original map on the slide.

The shaded area is the downtown area, capturing the north downtown, historical downtown, the sewer authority land, but is also missing parts of the south downtown.

Original text associated with Measure D can be found in the staff report.

So fast forward to March 2024, City Council identified possible Measure D amendments as a priority for fiscal year 24-25.

They directed staff at the time to prepare a ballot measure, adding exemptions for ADUs and deed restricted homes, and to modify the downtown area boundary.

City Council then decided not to place any Measure D amendment on the ballot.

And so then in January of this year, City Council again directed staff to prepare a ballot measure to modify the downtown area boundary associated with Measure D.

So this proposed ballot measure would include amending the local coastal land use plan and zoning ordinance to change the existing downtown area map associated with Measure D to align with the town center map of the LCLUP.

So again, on the left is the existing 1998 downtown area, and on the right is the 2020 LCLUP town center map.

We, as the staff decided that these uh maps aren't very legible or comparable at the scale, and so we reproduced the maps on the next slide for clarity.

Um again, here is the existing downtown map on the left and then the proposed map on the right.

Um and I'll pause for a second so that we can uh look at it.

So this town center map was adopted with the 2020 comprehensive land use plan update and is more reflective of the community's perception of the downtown area, which captures North Downtown, Heritage Downtown, and South Downtown.

Um in the L C L U P.

The town center strives to be the core walkable area in Half Moon Bay and to promote compact infill development uh in the downtown rather than outward sprawl into the city's remaining open spaces.

It would also create consistency between Measure D and the certified LCLUP.

Now, this map shows the areas that would be added and subtracted from the downtown area if the amendment is approved.

The areas outlined in green would be added to the downtown area, and the areas in pink would be subtracted.

Um we also analyze the locations of applications for measure D from previous years.

So based on Measure D applications from 2022 through 26, and considering these boundary changes, 20 allocations applied for outside of the downtown area would have fallen within the boundaries of the town center designation.

Um conversely, three allocations within the existing downtown uh would be, would have been outside of the downtown uh boundaries based on the the town center map.

Um, and so because the number of Measure D applications for outside of downtown consistently exceeds allocations available, amending the map would have opened up allocation out availability outside of the downtown and increase the amount of competition within the downtown.

So the specific changes in the local coastal land use plan would be to policy two-16, updating the language to define the downtown area as the town center in figure two-2, which we showed earlier.

Um in the municipal code, there would be changes to subsections 17.06.020, 17.06065, and 18.04010 to similarly update the language to define the downtown area as the town center in figure two-2.

So it has been about two years since staff originally brought a Measure D map amendment proposal to Planning Commission and City Council for consideration.

Um, and so today we are again proposing um an amendment which only includes the map amend the the map change.

Um and so upon recommendation by the uh planning commission, the city council would review the proposed measure at their regular May 19th meeting.

Um and then if city council adopts a resolution, this would be placed on the November 3rd, 2026 general election ballot.

And at that point, if it is approved by voters, it would then be sent to the California Coastal Commission for certification, and then staff would continue to coordinate with the Coastal Commission throughout this process.

Um staff recommends today or the staff recommendation would be for planning commission to adopt a resolution recommending that the city council place a measure on the November 3rd general election ballot, proposing this amendment of Measure D to adopt the town center map in uh figure two-2 of the LCLUP as the designated downtown area of Measure D.

As well, um staff recommends uh finding the amendments exempt from or the amendment excuse me, exempt from uh CEQA.

And I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um, do you have any questions um clarifying questions?

Uh Vice Chair Hernandez.

We're changing the map.

We're changing the map.

That's it.

That's it.

Great.

Um, on the Measure D allocations in terms of ADUs, that's something that's gonna be addressed probably through City Council.

Staff is gonna work on something in the city that's gonna come to the planning commission or city council.

Yeah, that will be through code amendments.

Okay.

Um, and we will bring that forward um either as part of the implementation plan update or as part of the ADU ordinance update.

So would we get a bite at that apple?

Yes.

Excellent.

Do you have any questions?

I do.

Commissioner Del Negra.

Um can you clarify that there is changes to the zoning itself?

Um I don't really understand what are the zoning changes implications there.

The zoning is not changing, it is just the designation or the the redistribution of um resident or parcels to be either within the downtown allocation pool and the outside downtown allocation pool.

Okay, and does that affect the density that someone can build in those areas?

No.

Okay, does it affect the um I had some very specific questions here?

Hold on.

Um, is there a prioritization for small individual builds over larger developments?

No.

Okay.

Um so the stated purpose is to promote infill and not increase urban sprawl across agricultural areas, is that correct?

That is one of the goals of both Measure D and the L C L U P.

Okay.

Well, that's my basic question so far.

And um just to clarify, the reason that we want to change the map, besides, I mean, number one, it's annoying to have two maps, right?

And then the second reason is because of the distribution of one percent going to downtown and half a percent going to outside of downtown.

Historically, we have a lot more people wanting measure D's outside of downtown.

And so you want to sort of change that.

But but I also wondered, so the what this what that sort of clarification doesn't include is the transfer.

So like that that one percent that goes to downtown and the half percent that goes to outside of downtown, they get all their measure Ds.

The downtown gets every measure D they want, and then outside we have to decide who's gonna get the measure D, and then six months later there's a transfer, and everybody outside of downtown gets all the leftover downtown ones.

So nobody's actually refused a measure D.

They just have to wait six months for it, right?

Um, well, just to give you a little bit more context.

Um, or some numbers as well if this will help.

That would be helpful.

Um so over the last four years, so from 2022 to 26, 108 um allocations have been uh distributed for outside of downtown, and 22 for within downtown.

And so this is a it's a very large difference.

And so what the map change would be doing is uh again just redistributing the properties that would be within the downtown designation, hopefully, I mean, or rather it would open up availability for allocations in that for all those properties that are left in the outside of downtown area and then create more um competition for the that one percent within the document.

Right.

That's a really good explanation.

Um again, people outside of downtown, if they don't get their measure D, they still get their Measure D on the transfer.

Potentially, yes.

Um, that's what's happened in the last several years happened.

So, and and the last time we did this Measure D thing, the one thing we really concentrated on as a planning commission is um recommending that we somehow figure out how to move that transfer up so people don't have to wait the full six months for a transfer.

Which can hopefully be done as like an administrative change, a code change.

A code amendment you are correct.

So um so if that does happen and people have to wait two months for the transfer instead of six months for the transfer, then what we're doing with the map is making it so that people don't have to wait that extra two months or one month or whatever it is that they have to wait until there's a transfer.

And and technically we could even have the transfer after the determination has been made about who gets downtown and who gets outside of downtown.

So I mean it it's still to be to be determined how tight we can make that window, whether you can make it three months or two months, one month or or two days, like we don't know, but but that's theoretically the same thing as the map, except it's not as annoying.

You know, except that the map is annoying, two maps is annoying.

I get that one.

But is that accurate?

Yes, I I think it is very accurate.

Um I would say in my experience, the measure D process is can be really um difficult on applicants, and anything that we can do to make it more transparent and and I hate the word streamlined, but this would be streamlined, um, would be better for them.

And then I I guess the other point that I'd I'd like to make is that the in speaking to one of your earlier comments, the reason that we're bringing this forward is because council asked us to bring bring it forward.

No, that's definitely true.

So um I'm gonna open up to public comment, if that's okay with everyone.

Um so anyone who would like to speak, we don't have any green cards on this, and they're not really a whole lot of people online.

But um raise your hand if you want to speak on this topic.

It looks to me like there is no one, so I am gonna close not open public comment, and we're gonna take it back here and talk about opinions.

You have an opinion?

Um Commissioner Del Negro.

I have you know some confusions.

You know, town center does not equal downtown.

Town center has residential, it has commercial, it has industrial.

Uh a downtown has usually commercial industrial with some maybe some housing mixed in, but it's not exclusive housing area.

So I don't understand the purpose of being so caught up on aligning two maps.

Um for me, it's about logic of where is infill needed, where does the definition of infill happen?

And to me, some of these properties in here are not infill at all.

These are agricultural lands historically, some of which have maybe been redefined as PUD, but they aren't in fill, they're large tracts of land that could have large developments.

So I'm concerned that we're not actually promoting infill, we're promoting expansion into some areas on the map where I see other areas we could have done infill better.

I mean, just looking at between Railroad Avenue and Highway One, there are 60 empty lots in there that are infilled between houses that don't have access to this directly.

To me, that is more of infill than spreading out north of Highway 92 into some of the agricultural lands that are up there.

So I'm a little confused because it's not meeting the agenda of what measure D's purpose is.

To me, this is urban sprawl on this map.

So, um I have an opinion that I think I'm in the minority, but I think that um the reason that we're doing the map is because of HTD, which is the California housing and community development um department.

So they don't like measure D, and they've done everything they can to kill Measure D.

They got the they wanted the city council first to put on uh to to put on the ballot something to repeal it.

They wanted um to do the the uh the ADUs, and then this is sort of what they're settling for.

Um, they went to the coastal commission also.

They were gonna get the coastal commission to say measure D is is gone.

So none of those things worked, and this is what they've gone to, and so to me, what this ballot measure is for it fixes something that isn't a problem, no one like the voters saw a problem, and the voters circulated a petition to pass measure D, and then the voters passed it overwhelmingly, and that's powerful, like that's the voters did that, and here's no problem with measure D, everyone gets their measure D's.

Some people have to wait six months, maybe with the transfer change, they'll wait three or two or whatever, and I just don't see any voter concern about it.

What I see is California housing and community.

What I see is housing and community development concern.

Um what they want is something on the ballot that tells voters there's something wrong with measure D, and you're gonna vote on it and decide whether it, you know, whether we are gonna fix it or not, and it doesn't actually fix anything because all it does is it just changes a map to another map, which you know, I get that it's annoying to have two maps, but it's just annoying.

And so, you know, later on, now that the voters have had, you know, the impression that measure D is failing or has a problem in some way, and we had to fix it.

Now they're gonna come back with another one, whether it's the ADU's being exempted from it, or whether it's getting rid of it altogether, and and like the impression has been made on voters that you know, Measure D, we always have to fix it.

So to me, this map doesn't fix a problem.

I don't really even see a problem, and I believe that what is going on here is that HCD has been pressuring the city and the city council in many ways, and this is what they've settled on.

So that's what I believe.

Well, I'm not a fan of the vague bullying tactics of HD HCD, their flip-flops from guidance that they provided to staff when we were going to our local coastal land use plan update.

Um I don't think you see that email, by the way.

Um, uh, let me finish this thought.

Okay, so um we spent six years working on the LCLUP update.

Um, I was very involved in that process, and we defined a town center as part of that process.

Uh, your point about is it a downtown?

It's not a real downtown, but we use the terminology north downtown, historic downtown, south downtown, fair.

It's but the whole point was we wanted to concentrate development in this specific area.

Uh I've talked to two of the authors of Measure D.

Um, they describe it as a map of convenience because it was the only legally defined map they had at the time that defined downtown, and it contains some strange artifacts.

Um, the large, unless I missed something, um, I don't believe there are any new large tracks of um farmland um prime soils that are being added to the town center, and in fact, some are being removed from town center.

So I don't think there's any substantial change.

Um, and there's a map up there, but I'm I'm pretty sure that that's actually the case.

There might be a minor piece, but um I can see prime soils in pink that are being removed.

I don't see any prime soils that are being added uh to the project.

So so I do think this accomplishes the clear stated goals we had as the GPAC and the planning commission at the time to update this.

It's just taken us a long time to get here.

So I I the map is the map we talked about.

Um I think it makes a lot of sense.

There's a lot of reasons for doing it.

Uh and uh frankly, I will be surprised that if in two or three years any measure D's are transferred out of downtown, because they're gonna go away.

Um, and for the po folks watching at home, listening at home, um the planning areas contained in here, generally speaking, go up to 36 feet high, in some cases go up to 50 feet high in the spot that we're on right now, three stories.

Um so this is the area where you know, if I think about the next 13 years, we're probably gonna have to add something like a thousand units of housing.

I hope ninety-five percent of them go in this area, so we don't have sprawl, and though that's what the policies that we developed are for.

So I don't I don't think it's arbitrary.

I don't like HCD's approach that they're taking with this because it does seem uh a little over the top, but uh but I think those there's it's a separate issue.

So I would to the chair to ask Rick.

Um just go ahead.

So talk.

The LCUP, I mean it was really density based, is what you're saying.

Is that there's there was a a focus on trying to get the density of housing in a specific area.

Yeah, we wanted to create density, but we wanted to do it in areas that had the highest walkability.

We also envisioned a general, we've put in place a lot of policies that are designed to increase circulation in the downtown core, and as we add new housing, um, because you have higher walkability, the benefit it becomes you have people who can actually walk to the grocery store, walk to the restaurants they eat at instead of getting in a car.

And then this would connect with a longer term that the streetscape plan that we heard about earlier is part of, but also these the circulation plan where we're gonna have a bike path, uh, a class one bike trail, you know, up and down with Naomi Patridge.

We have the coastal trail, we're gonna have a class three bike trail, we're gonna have trails that connect downtown to Skyline.

You know, this is all part of this general thing.

But yeah, we want the density downtown, and we don't want to encourage policies that unlock prime soils outside of the downtown.

That's an important thing.

We don't want to encourage policies that make it easier to block uh large, unobstructed coastal views.

Uh we want to raise the we've in fact we haven't raised the burden, but we've made it really clear that the the burdens that we put on developers are well defined.

We've created the case history so that it makes it um the there's a higher standard that somebody has to go through with less ambiguity to build out to do large scale projects with high density outside of the downtown core.

But what we do tonight or anybody does on measure D approval does not change the zoning ordinance and the density allowed within Ed community.

You know, some of these areas that are single family residences doesn't allow them to now suddenly build high density housing.

That's correct.

So it's not actually changing.

If you incorporate a new area density, I think it's really important the public understands.

You're not saying we're gonna suddenly start building the high density units in the new areas that are included as ad.

We're not changing the zoning for those areas.

The zoning that's in place supports higher density, taller buildings, but that's the existing density.

Okay, that was my question earlier, and that's why I asked it.

It was very specifically, and so I'm glad to hear that.

Um, what I'm most bothered by, so in the last couple weeks of all the social events that have been going on in the city, I've been talking to everybody I can publicly about their feelings on the issue.

Um, and I do get a lot of complaints that hey, I'd wait too long to get my measure deallocation.

I get those.

I get a lot of people saying, really want to see ADUs taken off that list because I'm sick of waiting for my ADUs shouldn't apply.

Those are the two biggest arguments I have heard from the general public.

Uh, the other one was is they don't understand the info locations.

Um people on the west side of highway one in particular don't understand why they're not included in the measure deallocations.

Because if you look at a map, the map that's up right now, you look at the housing density in Hack Moon Bay, I see a huge housing density from Railroad Avenue to Arroyo Leon Creek, from Parisima down to Seymour.

Like that is the density of infill housing.

Yet all that area doesn't apply yet.

Now we're suddenly, we are still applying this historical agricultural land of the pedestal property up top into the existing development.

That's a huge, that's a huge development.

There's some agricultural lands along Highway 92 right along Chris Ma Creek that are included in there as well.

To me, that's agricultural land that is spread into that land.

And so we're including that instead of the infill into the housing areas, and as I said, there's over 60 empty lots in that area.

There's only 30 empty lots in the area west or east of Highway One between uh Royal Leon.

So it doesn't make sense to me from a map perspective what this town center is compared to measure D allocations if the point is to infill lots in housing areas rather than expand into bigger properties with bigger developments.

And the biggest thing I get from the public is I don't want to see large developers get all the measure D allocations when individuals are fighting for it.

Just like what happened recently with uh was it the nine the main street development where 30 fill allocations?

This has pissed off more people that I've talked to than anything else.

And so when you start including lots like the Podesta, the open agriculture lands up there, that makes prime developers take all the Measure D funds for large amounts of time that should have gone to residents who have buy-in on measure D.

And if I'm gonna go to the public and say I want us to pass a measure measure D, it has to serve the public's interest, not large developer interests.

And you're gonna have a hard time passing a measure D that bows to developer lands and large tracks as opposed to residents trying to add a house or expand a house or fill a lot they've owned for a while.

So for me, this is going to hurt Measure D passing an amendment to include the map as it is, as opposed to doing something like grabbing more of the housing that already exists on the map I'm discussing between railroad and Arroyo Leon.

I mean, for me right now, if you said, hey, we're gonna go from Prisma Creek to Royal Leon from uh Jenner as a cutoff, Kelly as a cutoff, railroad Seymour, and um uh colonel high uh Colonel Way, I would have very little problem with including that as a Measure D allocation enhancement.

I have a real hard time saying that the pedesta property, the property long 92 around Piscima Creek, that those aren't that those are infill, because they're just not it's not in fill.

It's um so let me there's several issues, right?

Um I have an infill house, right?

Like I built an infill house, my next door neighbor built an infill house, we did it at the same time, right?

Um we have a policy that allows for individuals to build outside of the downtown core, and there's a certain number of measure D's that are allocated for that.

So I think we should take great care and give guidance to our city council.

Hey, don't be transferring stuff outside of the downtown core to somebody who's doing a large scale project in the downtown.

So I actually strongly agree with you on that because I think it's dumb.

Uh would be dumb if it was done.

Second, I don't think we should be consuming any fraction of a measure D for an ADU full stop.

And that's my position.

Getting to a half or a quarter, okay, but it should be zero ADUs are consumed.

And I don't have I'm not on the city council, I don't get a vote.

I honestly agree with you.

I actually don't see why we're playing.

So so I just I strongly agree with you, and I think it is a political issue, and it's one the city council could address, and we could work with city staff to do it.

And they provide a guidance that they think will work, which is a quarter or a half unit.

I'd go for a quarter.

Um but I don't know and I for so but that those are two points.

I do think it's important though that you know I think we had something like 24 people participated, civil civic minded people like everybody here participated in the GPAC, right?

And we we talked about some of these things.

Like, hey, do you prioritize out what is the downtown?

Where should we be prioritizing things?

And there are a lot of factors that went into the down the town center idea.

Um, one of them, there's there's three that are really important to think about.

One is we wanted to have a vi vital main street, and main street has three sections.

This is South Main Street, there's the historic downtown where Amber Stowe's uh shop is, and there's the commercial downtown, the north area.

So we wanted to make that vital, and we wanted to make it walkable.

Um the second thing was we looked at the areas that had the highest walkability score and or had the best opportunity to improve the walkability score, and those are the areas along the downtown.

So the so railroad, I live there, my walkability score is lousy.

I watch you walk there downtown all the way back all the time, I run all the time, bike all the time.

I do see that people do still walk from there.

But but I think it's it's it's a good conversation, right?

I mean, it's kind of it's sad, but it's you know, it's an observable fact.

If you look at where um the unhoused population at Half Moon Bay tends to congregate over long periods of time, those are the areas that have the highest walkability scores, right?

Because it's easy to get to things, it's easy to find things.

And so, and that does conform with this this town center.

Um, so one thing though, when I read the staff report in the beginning about the approach, it does seem to say that measure D is aiming at increasing density in certain areas.

It's not.

Measure D is very clearly has no intent on increasing density.

It simply wants to mitigate the expansion, and as a consequence, you're restricting density from expanding.

That's the goal of Measure D in the original frame.

Well, no, the goal of Measure D wasn't either of those things.

The goal of Measure D was to constrain growth.

And um, I think the point of what you're doing is I think your point you make is right.

It's to get rid of sprawl.

Yes.

We don't want sprawl.

And that might be better for city council's report.

That might be a better thing to state is the objective is to remove sprawl and promote infill and state.

And promote development in the downtown core so that we mitigate traffic as we add new development.

I think those are important things.

The word infill happens in the measure itself.

Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, yeah, it's not, yeah.

But but sorry, is it infill as a word not in there?

That's what I was gonna say is that I don't I haven't I don't recall that it's specifically in there, but in looking at the purpose, it's definitely not in there.

And I could read the planning commission the purpose identified in measure D because I think it might be helpful.

It says the purpose of this ballot measure are to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Half Moon Bay to provide for development, which is orderly, sustainable, and fiscally responsible to respond to the worsening traffic situation and to protect the city's unique scenic and rural coastal character by managing the rate, location, and density of residential development.

So the word management to me is not promote, it means to manage, it means to control it.

Yeah.

Okay.

So I think this is a good discussion, though.

I mean, it's good to kind of get this out there because there's history here.

But yeah.

Um there's there's one other thing that I feel like is kind of important, which is that I mean, outside of the fact that the city council is going to do this, whatever no matter what we say, um the to have a ballot measure on there that is um the city council's ballot measure, it kind of gives uh the city's um like recommendation approval, and that if you have you know it it doesn't really go to the sort of the what measure D was standing for, which was to it was it was actually in in direct response to the vast number of housing large housing developments that were being approved.

They were giving um what do you call it the tenant invested in approval?

They gave it to to everybody.

If you want to know the growth rate, and then they I understand.

But so I understand Happen Bay isn't growing.

But if people are concerned about it, then people need to sort of do something about it, pass a new measure that addresses their concerns, or to, but to say that okay, the city knows what to do, we'll tell you what to do, and you just vote for it and vote yes.

It doesn't really, you know, um it fixes a problem that's not there from my point of view.

Um I respectfully disagree.

I think it does fix a problem that's there.

And we've seen a lot of inconsistency in even the last few years with you know what is town center, you know, this just takes a lot of that lack of clarity off the table.

And I would say everything that our city attorney um Bazano said to us, like the change we're making does promote orderly development that protects our town character, preserves our heritage, and you know, focuses density in an area where there's you know infrastructure to support it.

I think that is the purpose of Measure D, and I think this improves Measure Dr.

I think it switches the um the percentage.

Like there's one percent that goes to downtown, and so you want to make downtown bigger so that we don't have to do the transfer.

That's that's basically it.

Like the outside of downtown gets less than downtown, so we'll make downtown bigger, and we'll have that percentage, you know, the so that people can get their measure D's in a timely way without waiting for the transfer.

I mean, that's really all it does.

I don't think there's a significant change in the total square footage or acreage of space.

I think it's roughly the same.

I mean, I'm eyeballing the the total pink area if you look at the area that's north of town.

I'm sure Ruby has the exact numbers for you.

Yeah.

I can get it in a moment.

Let's see.

You raised the point.

I mean, I don't think we're substantially changing.

I mean, what I can give you right now is the distribution of parcels of the actual number of parcels that would be added or subtracted, if that's useful.

Yeah.

Um so 491 parcels are directly affected by either being uh removed or added.

Um 326 of those are residential, so um over like two over the two-thirds.

Um a lot of numbers, but 286 would be added, like residential parcels would be added to the map, and then 40 residential parcels would be removed from the map.

So 75% of the parcels that are being removed from the map are non-residential.

Hopefully that made sense.

Yeah that helps a little.

I guess to that point, I just kind of feel like it doesn't go far enough in expanding the residential area into existing residential area, and yet still retains some areas that don't have any existing residential that we're trying to promote some residential to expand into.

And that's why I don't like the existing town center map from a housing perspective.

Town center and housing center to me aren't the same.

And aligning them doesn't fit for me a purpose that promotes the benefit to citizens of Half Boom Bay who would like to build.

And as a person who's representing citizens and listening to people out there, I really do see that this is somewhat helping organizations that aren't the individual citizens of half more bay and larger developers of half of property lots in Half Moon Bay.

Whereas we have an opportunity to incorporate more individual residential units with a larger map south of Prisma Creek and restricting what's north of Prisma Creek.

I mean, if it was my option, I would literally say from Prisma Creek to Royo Grande to railroad, that property, as long as it's not facing outward towards the agriculture, should be included in a measure D.

That's where the housing is.

Well, so can you go back to the other map that you just showed?

This is a good question.

Oops.

So this yeah, there we go.

Lovely.

Um most of the area here is R2, R3, C D, CG, or U, which allows for higher density, taller housing, and um, we're not changing for for areas where they're set aside the lots, the open lots that are being um removed uh and you know, that don't have housing on them today or don't have you know lots of housing on them today.

Um, you know, this doesn't change the measure deallocation for the areas outside of the downtown.

Your existing allocation exists, but um, I mean I don't know.

We've spent a long time getting to the town center.

I totally understand.

But I think if you want to change it, maybe it's it's a good conversation to have.

But maybe not right at this point.

I mean, I I guess I'm also looking at this from the individual developer as a person who owns a piece of property, you want to put a house on it, versus you look at those other lots and those high density plans.

Somebody comes in with a high density housing plan that's gonna add 55 units.

That's 55 units taken away from individual property owners that want to measure deallocation, and now they are in the back of the line waiting because there's a prioritization of those larger developments to meet you know HCD requirements and and growth rates.

So this doesn't, in my opinion, feed to the public who we're gonna go ask to approve an amendment.

If you have a legitimate desire to approve this amendment, it needs to serve the public's interest who are voting.

And to me, that's adding more residential infill within a suburban area where housing's already there and not and helping them to get their measure D allocations more equitable than it is to opening new high density lots elsewhere.

Ruby, do you it's Ruby, right?

Yeah.

Um do you have um at hand a list of open lots, infill lots in the city?

We did a count at one point.

I don't have it on.

Okay, I'm not trying to play gotcha.

Just my recollection is I think we have five thousand um roughly five thousand uh units of housing in Half Moon Bay.

And directionally, there's less than two hundred in fill lots in the entirety of the city, something like that.

You know, that 200 to 300 number.

Many of those are in the downtown core.

Um, so to me, if you're not getting your measure D allocation, it's it's not it's not because of this.

It's because we're consuming the Measure D's with the ADUs dumbness.

That that is what I think the issue is.

Yeah, I think that's the issue.

I mean, that's what's affecting people.

I think that's different.

To me, that's that will solve the overall growth problem as well.

Yeah.

100%.

Yeah.

So I don't mean but if we're if what we're doing is looking at this map and saying we want to put this map on the ballot, because this map will fix everything.

I feel like we've spent a lot of time and a lot of effort and a lot of election money on something that really doesn't is like still up for debate and doesn't really um uphold the the I I just I just don't think that it's that it rises to the level of we need to have a ballot measure to fix this.

And I want a ballot measure that has a substantial chance of passing because it stands on its own merit, which is why I'm speaking to this this concept that let's you know consider an alternative to this, which is more minimal to the public's interest.

Yeah, I mean, I I don't know.

I mean, I I think we've spent twelve years getting to this point, and it's not a question of, hey, just because I worked on this for a long time, we should move forward.

I think a lot of people like you and me have put a lot of time thinking about this, and this was the recommendation that we came up with collectively.

And um I think I think the the issues you raise can be addressed through other means, but this you know, we can look at putting in place rules that say, look, you can't have a single project consume more than 80 percent of the measure de allocations.

Maybe that's something that can be done administratively.

It doesn't affect this map.

But to me, this like getting rid of the the prime soils on the on the east side of um Royal Leone, that's great.

That's beautiful.

Yeah, I mean getting rid of taking that out, I think that's that's a good thing to get removing these areas near the sand plant.

I think that's a good thing.

That's a benefit to us.

So we need to have a ballot measure for that.

Well, that's the only way to do it.

Well, that's the only way we can do it.

Like that that's why we're here is because the only way to change the town center is to go to a ballot measure.

I actually would also put up another piece of observational experience so far, having moved to Hap Moon Bay, knowing a lot of people outside of Happen Bay.

I know a lot of people who visit Hackman Bay and have just said I've came out to watch see the flowers on the pedestal property.

Like that was the entire reason they came here.

If that is part of the open development that's getting measure D allocations, making it easier to develop there, to me, that hurts part of Halfman Bay's agricultural draw that's part of the original Measure D discussion, which is to keep the character of the town and what draws people here.

You know, if somebody puts a development there that doesn't maintain some of that agricultural identity or the surf fish farm.

Yeah, that the it I tell you what direction it's gonna go.

It's gonna get one thing where our community is really good at it's stopping stuff that feels like it's getting jammed down our throats, right?

And so I agree with you that that's a beautiful lot.

And the one on the other side of 92 next to Presima Creek, I get a lot of comments about it as well.

So if we have to add a thousand units of housing, 20% growth over between now and 2040, which is what's likely to happen, we've got a plan for a place to put it.

And I'd rather it go someplace like Podesta that's done thoughtfully than surf dunes or uh parts of wave crest that you know are still undeveloped and that are developable.

That's my view is this is where we should be concentrating the development.

All right, um, I think this is a great discussion.

So thank you.

I think so too.

I think really honestly.

Um do you want to go ahead?

Um, well, I'm not sure where this is gonna go, but I'm gonna make a motion to approve the item before us, uh and and uh get this recommendation uh for a ballot measure to go to city council.

Do you mind if I make a suggestion?

If your recommendation is um to approve the staff recommendation before you to go to council, um maybe you could also provide council some direction for future map changes as well, might be more amenable.

As part of the ballot measure or things to consider for future things to consider for future.

I'd like to modify my amendment or modify my uh motion.

Um so I'd like to approve this.

Um, with a recommendation that this the summary of this healthy debate be presented to City Council, and um that we get direction on ways to make it easier for people who have infill housing to do their infill.

Um, and to identify maps, potential map areas that um are adjacent to the downtown core that um increase development uh where there's already a strong development footprint.

Does that work?

Yeah, okay.

I would say sparing as much agricultural land as possible.

Yeah, I mean, I think and and reinforces the prime soils restrictions that we have.

Um I think that those are important things.

Uh that's that's my proposal.

Umless there's something else you guys want to just say, yeah, just discussion that um I think making a nod to what Commissioner Del Negro had to say for future consideration is really not what, you know, that's nice, that's good.

I definitely want city council to pay attention.

Um I feel like the um this is um this is a nod to uh appease HCD.

And you know, that's what the council wants to do, and that's what the council will do, but I don't really want to be a part of that.

I don't think that's right, and I don't think that um this map is the way to go.

Can I get a second?

I'd like to read again what and understand really what the motion is.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the staff report um with a recommendation that um the frustration the community has expressed about uh inability to develop outside of downtown and particular with infill lots be conveyed to the city council.

Um that we have um direction to um promote in fill housing in the areas adjacent to downtown or where there's already a very strong development footprint.

Um anything else, Leslie?

I think there was a third thing that I had there.

Maps adjacent to the downtown core, yeah.

Ag land protection too.

And and oh, and uh just make sure we reinforce the policies we have around um converting prime soils outside outside of the town center.

I think those are important things that we need to just make sure we reinforce those policies.

Okay to understand that that proposal um, I do need to ask a question, which is is that saying we're gonna put this, we as a commission are saying that the current proposed map is what we want to put in front of the council.

That is what I'm proposing, yes.

Alright, thank you for that clarity.

Is there a second?

Do we have a second?

I'll second the motion.

We have a vote, please.

Commissioner Commissioner Del Negro?

No.

Commission or Vice Chair uh Hernandez?

Yes, and Chair Gorn.

No, thank you.

So, just to be clear, that motion failed.

Yes, failed.

Is there an alternative motion that planning commissioners would like to make?

I don't know.

Um I might move towards some type of motion that incorporates a promoting the concept of having a new map generated through city council processes that involves maybe um their own concepts other than the one that was proposed here.

Um, but I mean, like I don't have anything against bringing a measure D ballot forward at some point.

It's just not in the context of this map.

Yep, do I feel that this is appropriate?

And that's really what it comes down to for me.

That they should revisit the map.

I got no problem with promoting the idea that city council comes up with a map that's viable on their own accord and moves forward with a measure D proposal to the public, but I'm just not gonna sit here and say that this is the map I support them doing that with understood.

I would just like to clarify that this is the map that city council asked us to bring forward.

Okay, that's great.

So just just so you know how still as a public person has had too much, I will not agree to that.

So is there another motion?

Um that would just uh I don't have another motion.

Commissioner Del Negro, do you have a motion you want to make?

I do not.

I don't think we have another motion.

I'd like to make a motion that um we provide a summary of the debate and the discussion that we had um to city council, and um and the proposal that was put forward.

Sure, second, we got a vote on that.

Commissioner Del Negro?

Sorry, I need to hear that again.

I dismissed one little word there on the proposal that we just yeah, we're not voting to approve the staff report.

We're just saying that this is what was proposed.

All I want to do is this is the discussion we had on it here.

Read out the discussion.

It's the summary of the discussion to City Council so they can be more informed around how we got to a two-one against the staff report.

Great, thanks.

I appreciate the clarity.

So okay.

Um, vote.

Okay, Commissioner Del Negro.

Yes, Commissioner or Vice Chair Hernandez.

Yes, and Chair uh Gorn.

Yes, please.

Motion approved three zero.

I had one other planning commissioner communication that I forgot about.

Why don't we move to the next item?

Uh there is no next item.

But I know we can open it before we adjourn.

Um, we can open reopen the uh planning commissioner notes.

Uh so I've observed a lot of work on um highway One as part of the Caltrans improvement.

Uh I've seen crews out at night generally doing a pretty good job of not creating obstructions or blocking traffic.

So, yay, we're making progress and we're getting infrastructure.

Um I was gonna ask you this question, Leslie, but I had the benefit of asking Dale, our city or city engineer this question.

I noticed that a lot of concrete around like Kelly and many other intersections has been replaced with asphalt.

And uh what I was just concerned that we were going to be left with hinky asphalt sidewalks where we used to have nice concrete ones.

And Dale's uh advised me that those are temporary.

There's other infrastructure that's going to go into place, and so while poles and plumbing and um electrical was going to be added later, um the that asphalt will eventually be ripped out and will be replaced with um more durable concrete that looks less hinky.

So um, but anyway, that was just something I wanted to share with everybody and and great that we're getting this done.

Go faster.

Okay, we have reached the end of our meeting.

Does anyone want to make a motion to adjourn?

I make a motion to adjourn.

I'll second that motion.

All in favor?

I think you guys.