►
From YouTube: Batch 2 July 18 Energy Committee
Description
Batch 2 July 18 Energy Committee
A
A
D
A
E
The
canola
hello
chris
richards
here
I
am
a
resident
business
owner
and
member
of
responsible
growth,
arcadia
local
community
group
just
quickly.
This
is
a
friendly
reminder
about
committee
members.
Responsibilities
with
recusals
committee
members
with
business,
conflicts
of
interest
and
homeownership
conflict
should
be
recusing
themselves
during
applicable
agenda
item
topics.
Be
assured
that
this
is
not
a
statement
for
personal
attacks,
but
strictly
a
business
and
proper
procedural
comment.
E
We
all
want
success
for
the
city
of
arcata's
future
and
do
not
want
the
issue
of
proper
procedural
conduct
to
become
a
trip,
hazard
or
legal
issue
for
the
city
processes.
Thanks
for
your
time.
Excuse
me
thanks
for
letting
me
talk
at
the
beginning
here
and
also
thank
you
so
much
for
all
your
hard
work
and
commitment
very
much
appreciate
it.
Thank
you
have
a
good
meeting.
F
George
is
recusing
himself,
and
but
is
there
anything
else
as
committee
members
that
we
should
be
aware
of
you
know
just
in
in
in
in
regard
to
what
was
what
was
just
said,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
it's
clear
at
all:
that's
what
what
sort
of
the
guidelines
are
often
with
the
energy
committee.
There's
there's
not.
I
don't
know
it
doesn't
seem
like
we
end
up
with
controversial
topics.
It's
not
that
it's
not
that
it
only
applies
if
it's
controversial,
but
in
any
event
it
hasn't
been.
It
hasn't
been
an
issue.
F
I
mean
I've
been
on
the
committee
for
20
years
and
it's
come
up
very
infrequently,
but
I
think
it
would
be
good.
I
just
I
just
want
to
be
clear
in
my
head
as
to
when,
when
they're,
when
I
should
be
aware
of
a
potential
conflict
of
interest,
that
for
myself
and
and
know
to
recuse
myself-
and
I
think
it'd
be
good
for
all
of
us
just
to
be
clear
on
that.
G
Sure
I
can
speak
briefly
on
it
and,
and
certainly
we'd
be
happy
to
have
bridget
dory
our
city
clerk
follow
up
with
some
additional
guidance.
If
that's
helpful
for
committee
members,
what
I
would
say
is
if
there
is
any
potential
for
what
could
be
considered
a
a
benefit
or
a
particular
personal
gain
related
to
an
agenda
item.
Then
committee
members
should
recuse
themselves.
G
G
G
Oh
gosh,
you
know
I
would
need
to
look
up
a
map.
Michael
I'm
sorry.
I
don't
have
it
offhand
and
I
think
that
the
community
development
director,
actually,
I
think,
he's
having
trouble
signing
into
zoom
and
I'm
a
little
distracted,
because
I
see
him
calling
my
cell
phone
as
I'm
talking
here.
So
why
don't
we
hold
for
now
and
then,
when
we
get
to
that
agenda
item
we'll
have
david
outline
the
boundaries
of
the
planning
area,
as
well
as
the
parameters
around
recusing?
How
does
that
sound.
A
And
michael
is
for
your
early
information
related
to
your
property,
the
closest
boundary.
Do
you
know
where
the
hideaway
mini
store
is
west
of
you?
Where
or
what
is
it?
There's
a
hideaway
mini,
there's
a
mini
storage.
It
fronts
on
alliance,
just
to
the
west
of
you,
that's
the
closest
the
east
edge
of
that
mini
storage,
that
fronts
on
alliance
and
goes
all
the
way
down
to
14th
street.
A
B
E
I
did
yeah
I
can.
I
can
easily
help
clarify
this.
I've
read
the
gateway
area
plan
draft
numerous
times.
I
know
the
area
real
well,
my
shop
is
on
the
north
end
of
the
boundary
and
michael,
your
house
is
two
blocks,
a
block
and
a
half
south.
I
mean
you're
right
across
from
rich's
auto.
That
boundary
is
right.
The
street
is
right
on
your
your
address
there,
so
I
I
would
say
you
found
the
same
realm
as
stacy
mayor
stacy,
abrams
salazar,
and
that
is
the
reason
she
had
to
recuse
herself.
E
So
you
know,
I'm
surprised,
you
don't
know
where
the
boundary
is
because
we're
discussing
the
gateway
tonight
and
that
that
would
be
a
pretty
clear
thing
for
you
to
know.
But,
yes,
you
are
definitely
within
500
feet
of
the
boundary,
so
I
would
caution
you
with
this
and
maybe
figure
out
what
your
game
plan
is
because,
like
I
said
before,
not
a
personal
attack,
I
just
want
people
to
all
be
doing
what
they're
supposed
to
so.
We
don't
trip
on
this
later
when
we're
trying
to
get
it
together.
E
H
H
A
A
G
Sure
so
our
municipal
code
states
that
committees
shall
elect
a
chair
and
a
vice
chair
every
july
or
in
other
words
at
the
first
regular
meeting
after
the
start
of
the
fiscal
year.
Last
year
we
elected
a
vice
chair,
andrea
in
july,
and
then
we
continued
the
election
of
chair
until
september
for
your
term
as
chair.
So
ideally
we
would
get
back
to
that
july
cycle
again,
but
certainly
knowing
we're
missing
committee
members,
we
could.
G
F
I
would
suggest
one
thing,
george,
just
to
get
a
sense
of
what
of
for
those
of
us
who
are
engaged
in
the
meeting
as
to
because
I
think
one
of
the
issues
here
is
like
or
who
who's
who's
interested
in
willing.
I
mean
like
we
can
nominate
each
other.
But
if
the
person's
not
really
willing
to
take
on
the
position,
then
that's
not
going
to
work.
And
if
some
of
us
that
are
on
the
meeting
tonight
aren't
on
the
meeting
in
september,
then
we're
going
to
be
right
back
in
the
same
position.
F
So
at
least
if
we
could
kind
of
get
a
sense
of
things
and
then
I'm
happy
to
wait
until
september
to
make
a
decision.
But
at
least
that
way
we
could
kind
of
have
a
bit
of
a
heads
up,
and
if
somebody
here
is
interested
in
doesn't
make
the
september
meeting,
they
could
probably
you
know,
figure
out
how
to
to
get
their
nomination
in
before.
You
know
it
not
even
being
there.
A
A
A
C
Jim,
I
think
I
sort
of
understand
what
you're
saying
and
sounds
like.
Maybe
an
appropriate
thing
to
do
would
be
take
the
summary
that
you
just
said,
like
who's
interested
in
what
and
put
that
in
the
minutes,
and
that
way
it's
in
there.
So
we
remember
what
we
talked
about
and
the
two
folks,
the
two
committee
members
who
are
not
here
will
see
that
also.
C
A
Okay,
thank
you,
I
think
yeah.
I
like
the
idea
of
all
committee
members
weighing
in
and
mike
good
good
comment
on
having
the
record
of
this
conversation
carried
forward
in
a
minute
all
right.
Thank
you
so
whole
business
remember,
we
have
one
old
business
item,
consider
the
gateway
area
plan
and
provide
a
recommendation
to
the
council
city
council,
and
I
have
a
conflict
of
interest
due
to
my
firm's
role
in
that
particular
document.
A
A
G
D
H
Yeah
and
again
committee,
I
apologize
for
not
being
here
on
time.
I
I
had
the
wrong
time
down
on
my
calendar,
so
I
apologize,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
confirm
before
we
get
started,
that
my
understanding
is
that
at
the
last
meeting
there
was
a
discussion
as
to
michael
running
the
meeting
as
chair
pro
tem,
and
that
motion
was
actually
acted
on.
Is
that
correct.
B
H
H
H
H
H
Just
so
you
can,
you
know,
be
apprised
and
there
is
an
exemption
for
a
person's
personal
property
in
which
they
live.
If
there
is
a
potential
conflict
of
interest-
and
that
is
the
that
is
the
only
potential
conflict,
there
are
also
other
ramifications
for
folks
that
operate
businesses
either
out
of
their
home
or
out
of
a
location
for
which
they
have
some
real
property
interests,
whether
that's
a
lease
or
ownership,
and
so
that's
another
layer
that
would
need
to
be
considered,
and
then
you
know.
H
Ultimately,
I
think
that
you
know
the
you
know
in
the
the
courts
deal
with.
You
know
strict
conflict
of
interest,
but
you
know
in
the
court
of
public
opinion.
If
there's
a
clear
potential
perception
of
conflict
of
interest,
then
you
know
that's
an
issue
as
well.
I
will
also
say
that
all
of
these
categories
of
potential
conflict
of
interest
are
lesser
for
a
recommending
body,
and
so
unfortunately
you
know
at
this
time.
D
Well,
since
from
just
your
description
that
since
I
have
no
real
property
other
than
my
personal
home
in
arcata
and
and
I
and
it
and
you've
read-
you
have
suggested
that
there's
an
exemption
for
a
personal
home.
I
do
an
operating
business
out
of
my
home,
but
I
have
no
real
property.
So
I
would
I
will
not
recuse
myself
and
I
will
I
will
ask
for
a
formal
ruling.
But
for
now
I
will
not
recuse
myself.
Okay.
C
C
H
B
H
All
right
so
that
process
taken
care
of
I
I
do
want
to
start
before
I
get
into
the
the
formal
staff
report
I
want
to
start
by.
You
know
just
indicating
into
the
record
officially,
since
you
know
there
are
you
know
a
lot
of
people
paying
attention
to
this
issue
and
are
very
attuned
to
the
you
know
the
various
procedures
that
we're
going
through
earlier
when
we
mentioned
that
we
had
a
discussion
about
who
would
be
the
chair
pro
tem.
H
That
discussion
was
limited
to
an
in
email,
a
bcc
email
to
individual
committee
members
in
order
to
gauge
their
interest
in
running
the
meeting
as
necessary,
and
so
I
just
want
to
be
clear.
There
were
no
brown
act
violations
there,
weren't
party,
you
know
participants
of
multiple
party
conversations
that
violated
the
brown
act,
making
that
discussion.
It
was
just
to
be
sure
that
we
came
into
this
meeting
prepared
so
that
the
committee
and
the
public
are
aware
of
that.
H
H
So
in
terms
of
the
process,
the
purpose-
I'm
sorry,
you
can
read
it
in
the
beginning
of
the
the
gateway
area
plan,
but
just
to
summarize
real
succinctly,
the
gateway
area
plan
is
an
element
of
the
general
plan.
That's
intended
to
provide
high
quality,
mixed
income,
mixed
use
and
mixed
ownership
neighborhood
revitalization.
H
The
idea
is
that
we
have
a
streamlined,
permitting
pathway
that
goes
through
this
process.
With
all
the
committees,
the
commissions,
the
decision
makers
to
begin
with,
and
then
we
tell
it
tell
the
community
and
the
the
developers
what
it
exactly
is
that
we
need
as
a
community
to
to
grow
and
develop
into
the
future.
H
H
We
did
thanks
to
a
insightful
comment
from
one
of
our
our
public
members
excerpt
out
some
some
chapters
of
the
element
to
put
in
your
packet
so
that
you'd
have
them
at
hand,
so
the
public
would
have
them
at
hand,
but
the
entire
document
is
on
online.
The
link
is
in
the
staff
report.
We'd
encourage
folks
to
read
the
entire
document.
It's
about
100
pages,
long.
H
This
process
is
designed
to
provide
efficient
review
to
the
city
council,
the
stock.
There
are
some
timelines
and
clearly
we
don't
want
to
let
the
timelines
drive
the
decisions,
but
there
are
timelines
that
we're
trying
to
adhere
to
and
to
the
extent
that
we
can
process
the
you
know,
public
participation
part.
The
committee
input
part
expediently,
we'll
be
able
to
get
through
that
process
and
and
provide
good
good
suggestions
to
the
council,
so
the
committees
can
provide
a
recommendation
through
formal
action.
H
We've
been
at
your
your
committee
body
before
we've
had
a
discussion
about
the
gateway
area
plan.
There
were
no
formal
recommendations
made.
We
haven't
changed
the
document
as
a
result
of
that
or
shown
those
changes
anywhere.
Those
discussion
points
as
we
captured
them,
are
reflected
back
to
you
in
the
attachment
that
shows
the
table
beginning
with
the
green
box
and
in
that
green
box
and.
I
H
Yeah
yeah
yeah,
the
green
box,
I'll
show
you
in
just
a
minute
when
we
get
into
that
that
piece
and
I'm
in
the
transition
slide
that
let's
see
I'll,
go
ahead
and
put
something
on
the
screen.
So
it's
not
as
awkward
no
no
problem
there
we
go
so
yeah.
I
was
in
the
transition
slide.
My
transition
went
on
too
long,
and
so
what
we're?
What
we're
attempting
to
do
is
to
reflect
back
to
you
what
you
talked
about
last
time
and
then
get
a
formal
recommendation.
H
Now
these
recommendations
are
coming
sort
of
simultaneously
we're
going
all
the
committees
and
commissions
simultaneously
with
this
information
concurrently,
and
the
idea
is
that
these
committees
will
be
able
to
provide
a
first
pass
recommendation
within
one
to
three
months
of
our
start
time.
Staff
is
going
to
collect
all
that
information
collate.
It
present
it
to
the
decision
makers.
H
The
planning
commission
is
a
review
body
and
then
the
city
council
is
the
decision
maker
and
that
will
then
be
reviewed
by
the
city
council
and
the
council
is
going
to
take
that
first
pass
information
and
say:
okay,
these
are
the
elements
that
we
want
to
change.
These
are
the
items
that
we
want
to
retain.
H
H
The
second
pass
this
this
section
takes
between
one
and
a
half
three
and
a
half
months.
Total
second
pass
will
be
basically
look.
This
is
what
the
decision
makers
brought
forward
you'll
be
able
to
review
it
again
and
then
you'll
be
able
to
make
a
final
recommendation
if
you
wish
to
at
that
point
the
and
that
that
recommendation.
In
addition,
you
can
you
can
make
a
formal
recommendation
today
or
failure
to
make
a
recommendation.
That's
formal
will,
in
a
sense,
you
know,
be
a
statement
that
you
know
it's
it's
fine.
H
The
way
it's
drafted,
so
how
are
we
going
to
convey
the
committees
and
the
public's
your
proposed
changes
to
the
city
council
so
for
those
changes
or
those
recommendations
that
are
not
policy,
changes
or
diversions
from
the
existing
policy?
They're
just
affirming
existing
policy
or
in
line
with
new
policy?
That's
in
line
with
and
better
explains
the
city's
policy.
We're
gonna
actually
make
edits
right
into
the
document.
H
You'll
see
this
both
in
the
general
plan
elements,
as
well
as
the
the
gateway
area
plan
and
then
we're
going
to
color
code
them
so
green
we've
identified
some
planning,
commission
changes,
they'll
be
green
parks
and
rec
committee
might
be
blue.
The
energy
committee
might
be
red,
and
so
this
way
we
can
show
what
the
recommended
changes
are
and
who
made
those
recommendations.
H
The
recommendation
of
say,
parks
and
rec
committee,
or
something
like
that
they'll
have
a
means
for
evaluating
those
for
policy
changes
where
we
have
conflicting
recommendations
or
where
the
policy
direction
is
counter
to
other
policy,
as
we
understand
it
at
the
staff
level
in
the
existing
body
of
documents,
we're
going
to
collate
these
into
a
table
similar
to
this.
I
don't
know
this
be
the
exact
structure,
but
this
is
the
way
we're
assuming
it
will
be
now
where
we
identify
the
element
that
the
change
is
talked
about
in
what
the
topic
is.
H
H
The
planning
commission
will
have
an
opportunity
to
weigh
in
and
then
staff
will
provide
to
the
decision
maker,
the
city
council,
in
this
case
the
policy
implications.
What
they're
going
to
balance?
If
you
go
to
four
stories,
you're
gonna
lose
some.
You
know.
You're
gonna
have
more
site
coverage,
for
example,
so
you're
gonna
lose
some
public
space.
If
you
go
that
route-
or
you
know
you
can
give
up,
you
can
get
public
space
back
if
you
give
up
on
parking
to
have
that
policy
conversation
with
them.
H
So
this
is
how
we
will
share
with
the
city
council
recommendations
of
the
committee.
Now
just
another
bit
on
process.
We
did
bring
the
we
sent
out
a
table,
tabular
format
of
the
policy
document
to
the
committee
members
in
advance.
So
you
could
take
a
look
at
it
early
and
we
had
asked
to
bring
those
back
to
staff
so
that
we
could
collate
them.
H
The
reason
I'm
asking
for
this
to
be
done,
you
know
timely,
is
again
because
some
of
these
deadlines
that
we've
been
talking
about
trying
to
adhere
to
those
as
best
we
can
we're,
also
trying
to
make
make
sure
that
the
decision
makers
can
continue
to
do
their
work
at
every
level.
And
so
we
would
ask
for
expedited
review
on
that.
H
Okay
and
then
what
we
did
was
we
tried
to
combine,
compile
where
there
were
multiple
comments
on
a
particular
policy
area
and
in
this
instance
we
didn't
get
any.
That
rose
to
the
level
of
having
a
majority
of
committee
members
who
were
interested
in
a
particular
policy,
but
there
was
a
little
bit
of
overlap,
and
so
you
may
wish
to
structure
your
discussion
so
that
you're
first
looking
at
well.
What
are
the
policies
that
we
all
want
to
talk
about
and
then
to
dig
into
those
policies
in
greater
depth?
H
H
F
F
I
guess
let
me
step
back
for
just
a
moment,
so
the
gateway
plan
will
be
a
will,
be
a
part
of
the
general
plan
or
a
plan,
that's
a
component
to
the
general
plan
and
will
establish
sort
of
policies
and-
and
you
know,
kind
of
articulate
the
the
cities
and
and
the
city.
You
know,
including
city
staff
and
and
leaders,
but
also
the
community
as
a
whole,
our
our
desire
for
the
develop
how
the
development
should
look
in
in
this.
F
In
this
geographic
area
and
and
my
understanding
is
that,
once
the
plan
passes,
one
of
the
benefits
is,
then
you
know
we've
articulated
to
potential
developers
what
we're
looking
for
and
if
they
come
to
come
to
the
city
with
a
proposal
to
do
a
development.
Let's
say
for
multi-family
housing
or
you
know
something
that
that
we're
looking
for
in
that
area
and
it
meets
the
it
meets
the
guidelines
of
of
the
gateway
plan,
then
that
the
incentive
for
them
is
that
they're
it
and
maybe
for
everybody.
F
It
streamlines
the
process,
so
they
don't
have
to
go
through
as
lengthy
of
a
review
and
an
approval
process
which
makes
it
cheaper
and
faster
for
everybody,
and
if
we've
already
articulated
what
we
want
and
that's
what
they're,
what
they're
proposing
we
sort
of
end
up?
We
all
get
what
we
want
and
it's
done
in
a
more
cost,
effective
and
efficient
manner,
and
so
I
guess
I
guess
one
question.
F
I
have
that
I've
heard
so
I
it
sounds
like
and
when
I
look
at
these,
you
know
the
this
matrix
here
there
are,
I
think
you
were
calling
them
sort
of
policy
policy
elements
and
I
see
them
sort
of
as
guidelines.
I
don't
know
if
they're,
so
I
guess
my
question
is:
are
there
guidelines
that
would
be
established
that
that
a
developer
would
have
to
meet
along
the
lines
of
what's
written
here
before
us?
F
H
Yeah,
that's
a
great
comprehensive
question
jim
and
we
did
cover
some
of
this
at
our
first
meeting,
but
I'll
I'll
revisit
just
to
recontextualize
that,
because
that
is
a
really
good
point
to
understand
how
these
recommendations
are
going
to
be
used.
So
you,
you
have
very
clearly
articulated
the
overall
structure,
and
so
I'm
not
going
to
reiterate
that
that
piece
of
it,
what
I
will
do
is
provide
a
little
bit
of
context
so
in
terms
of
the
amenities
you're,
absolutely
right.
H
The
amenities
are
kind
of
groupings
of
you
know
of
what
we
would
under
a
traditional
model
in
a
more
normal
discretionary
model.
Consider
conditions
of
approval.
So
those
of
you
who
have
been
here
through
project
approvals,
you'll
see
these
projects,
maybe
come
to
the
committee
and
the
committee
says:
well,
I
think
you
ought
to
do
better,
for
you
know
for
energy,
so
you
know
make
make
sure
the
building
is
solar,
make
sure
the
building
is
net
zero.
H
That's
going
to
be
our
recommendation
and
then,
ultimately,
those
recommendations
get
carried
forward
into
some
type
of
recommendation
for
a
condition
of
approval
on
the
project.
Once
it's
approved
now,
conditions
of
approval
have
somewhat
limited
by
law
extent
they
get
they.
They
can't
be
as
expansive
as
some
of
the
asks
that
we
have
in
our
community
amenities.
H
H
Instead
of
into
a
process
planning
process
into
the
community,
actually
building
out,
you
know,
parks
or
trails,
or
you
know,
adding
to
you,
know
energy,
resiliency
or
building
out
our
alternative
transportation
infrastructure,
those
kinds
of
things,
and
so
when,
when
a
project
comes
forward,
the
number
and
types
of
those
amenities
is
in
part
related
to
the
tier
they
fall
into.
So
I'm
showing
you
a
page
out
of
the
gateway
area
plan
and
you
can
see
under
the
base
here
which
is
allowed
in
any
district
any
of
the
four
districts.
H
H
H
Now,
once
you
get
into
the
second
tier
and
again,
these
are
allowed
within
any
of
the
the
neighborhoods
as
bonus
tier
one.
What
the
developer
is
getting
out
of
this
is
the
streamlining,
so
they
would
be
going
through
a
ministerial
process
and
the
community
amenity
amenities.
The
community
benefits
here
would
be
required,
and
so
one
of
the
things
that
they
get
out
of
it
as
you'll
see
here
is
slightly
larger
footprint,
bigger
height
and
there's
a
minimum
residential
density.
So
it's
a
little
bit
of
trade-off.
H
H
The
intersection
of
the
private
and
public
sphere
and
have
less
of
an
interest
in
what
the
uses
are
that
are
going
on
inside
of
the
buildings
will
still
have
some
limitations
you
won't
have
to
have.
You
won't
be
able
to
have
a
heavy
industrial
use,
for
example,
in
one
of
these
new
buildings
you
would
have
to
have
you
know
other
uses
that
are
compatible,
but
for
the
most
part
you
know
we're
playing
a
laissez-faire
approach
to
uses
and
and
then
that
project
would
then
be
required
to
select.
Amongst
these.
H
You
know
community
benefits
that
could
go
above
and
beyond
just
straight
nexus
and
or
proportionality,
because
we're
giving
them
something
instead
and
those
those
specific
community
amenities
could
be
things
like
net
zero
building.
Now
the
way
the
community
amenities
are
gonna
be
packaged.
This
was
a
concern
at
one
of
the
other
committee
meetings.
H
Is
that
well,
everybody's,
just
gonna
rush
to
the
bottom
they're
gonna
pick
the
cheapest
community
amenities
and
we're
gonna
end
up
not
with
all
this
aspirational
stuff
that
we
want,
but
we're
just
going
to
end
up
with
the
you
know
the
the
stuff
around
the
fringes.
The
document
actually
describes
how
the
amenities
will
be
organized
into
tiers.
Some
things
are
going
to
be,
you
know
higher
value
amenities
than
others,
and
the
developers
will
have
to
select
from
within
that
range.
You
know
groupings
and
then
an
idea
that
has
come
up
since
that
time.
H
How
do
we,
you
know
guide
that
a
little
bit,
and
so
what
we'll
be
doing
is
amongst
the
amenities
within
the
tiers,
creating
packages
and
so
that
the
developers
can
come
in
and
select
a
package
deal.
That
has
amenities
within
the
entire
range
of
different
levels
of
community
amenities
and
then
once
those
are
gone,
then
you
know
that
the
developers,
the
subsequent
developers
would
have
to
pick
new
packages
with
other
amenity
packages.
So
we're
not
end
up
with
a
top
lot
on
every
single
corner.
H
We're
gonna
with
tot
lots
dispersed
in
you
know
reasonable
proportion
throughout
the
district
and
then
once
we
feel,
like
we've
satisfied
the
tot
lot
requirement
for
this
community.
Then
those
packages
won't
be
available
anymore,
so
that's
kind
of
how
the
process
works,
where
the
amenities
fall
in
and
how
your
decisions
on
policy
will
help
to
guide.
Yes,
we
want
to
have
this
community
amenity
program,
and
I
saw
some
of
the
recommendations
probably
are
more
like
amenities
that
we
want
to
put
into
those
amenities
list,
and
we
can.
H
H
And
again
it's
it's.
You
know
the
way
this
is
structured.
The
maximum
building
height
gets
higher,
with
the
assumption
that
you
know
developers
are
going
to
want
to
maximize
their
density,
but
the
minimum
building
height.
You
know
caps
out
at
three
stories
here,
and
so
there
may
be
other
other
things
that
the
the
developer
is
trying
to
do
on
their
property
that
one
that
they
want
to
get
into
that
higher
tier
community
benefit
program
for
okay,.
I
I
No
sorry
yeah,
I
wanted
to
there,
you
go
yeah,
so
the
community
benefits
bonus.
Tier
four
sorry
go
the
other
way,
I'm
just
trying
to
get
an
understanding
of
where
these
things
can
actually
be
applied,
because
I
don't
think
I
had
this.
You
know
the
land
use
designation,
the
different
districts.
So
when
I
see
like
the
community
benefits
bonus
tier
four,
it
says
optional
for
the
gateway
barrel
district,
but
not
permitted
for
the
hub,
the
corridor,
the
gateway
neighborhood.
So
does
that
mean
that
say
I
can't
go
and
do
all
these.
I
H
You
you
absolutely
are
yeah,
that's
exactly
right.
Eight
story,
buildings
were
only
allowed
as
an
optional
in
the
gateway
barrel
district,
the
gateway
neighborhood,
which
is
intended
to
be
a
transition
district,
would
only
allow
for
five
and,
in
fact,
if
you
look
at
many
of
these
many
of
the
properties
in
that
transition
neighborhood
many
of
those
properties
aren't
even
going
to
qualify
for
five-story
buildings,
because
the
lots
are
too
small.
J
I
F
I
Honor
all
right,
so
I
guess
you
know,
maybe
the
place
to
start
is
going
through
the
the
list
that
was
in
our
packet.
It
looks
like
michael
jim
and
I
put
a
few
comments
in.
I
don't
know
mike
if
you
had
a
chance
to
look
through
it
before
the
meeting
and
if
you
had
any
opinions
about
it.
If
not,
we
can
go
through
this.
You
know
the
stuff
that
we
had
commented
on.
I
you
know
the
stuff
that
I
thought
was
fine.
C
H
J
Hello
staff
and
committee
members:
this
is
jake
becker.
I
am
actually
also
a
member
of
rga
part
of
the
proposed
gateway
district
in
one
of
dublin
cottages,
a
long
time,
business,
co-owner
and
a
carpenter,
and
I'm
following
up
on
the
energy
committee's
previous
discussion
on
solar
shading,
and
I
wanted
to
encourage
the
community
to
work
with
staff
to
develop
language
for
objective
design
standards
through
form-based
codes.
J
Form-Based
codes
can
define
structures,
siding
setbacks
and
step
backs
of
new
infill
and
existing
neighborhoods
neighborhoods
may
present
unique
situations,
but
the
desired
end
results
will
be
the
same,
preserving
solar
right-of-ways
that
would
be.
This
would
ultimately
be
the
goal
and
by
preserving
the
solar
shading.
J
It
can
also
help
with
the
cities
working
towards
zero
net
and
anyway,
just
gives
you
a
little
bit
of
a
seed
planted
there,
but
the
main
emphasis
is
on
working
with
objective
design
standards
and
also
building
that
into
farm-based
codes,
which
will
be
developed
in
the
process
of
this
and
can
strengthen
the
language
that
way.
Thank
you
appreciate
your
time.
J
E
Even
you
know
so
anyway.
Hopefully
david
can
bring
that
forth
pretty
soon.
The
other
thing
would
be
some
of
the
other
groups.
The
other
committees
have
been
using
they've,
been
going
to
a
special
meeting
to
allow
themselves
to
have
more
time
to
deal
with
this
I
mean
it's
such
an
elaborate
process.
That's
obviously
you
would
never
have
enough
time,
especially
with
the
constraints
that
we're
working
with.
But
you
know
a
subcommittee
is
one
option.
E
A
special
meeting
would
be
another
option
and
you
you
know
that
the
two
of
the
other
committees
have
have
already
moved
in
that
direction,
so
that
definitely
helps
free
them
up
some
extra
time
to
work
through
the
template
that
you
guys
are
looking
at
and
trying
to
figure
out.
What
are
we
going
to
do
with
all
this
and
what
can
we
make
out
of
it
anyway?
Thank
you
and
again,
I
appreciate
all
of
what
you
do
and
I
look
forward
to
some
well
thought
through
recommendations.
Thank
you.
So
much.
K
Hi
oona
hi.
Thank
you
una
smith.
I
am
right
now
here
on
behalf
of
the
humboldt
county
association
of
governments,
which
is
the
regional
transportation
planning
agency,
and
our
overall
comments
on
the
whole
gist
of
the
gateway
plan
is
that
the
intention
of
this
plan
is
very
much
in
alignment
with
our
20-year
regional
transportation
plan.
K
It
also
seeks
to
use
land
with
higher
values
than
car
storage
and
higher
speed
car
driving.
We
also
believe
that
this
will
help
our
region
have
cities
that
are
more
fiscally
healthy
and
can
stay
solvent.
So
we
appreciate
that
part
and
support
the
plan
in
that
and
then
for
the
particular
policies.
I
have
just
four
comments
that
are
transportation,
but
I'm
I'm
I'm
trying
to
minimize
them
to
the
ones
that
are
more
energy
committee
related
and
one
is.
L
Hi
patricia
hello
yeah,
my
name
is
patricia
kambianica
and
I
have
spoken
with
you
before
about
solar,
shading
and
jim
and
chris
actually
said
a
lot
of
what
I
wanted
to
say.
I
just
kind
of
want
to
wanted
to
reiterate
some
of
the
the
the
same
concerns
or
that
they
had
so
I
know
I
was
was
hoping
that
we
could.
I
know
we're
trying
to
get
away
from
the
natural
gas
usage
with
the
new
development
and
turn
towards
a
more
you
know.
L
Electric
focus
I'd
like
to
have
there
be
more
wordage
and
a
little
bit
more
clarity
on
that,
and
also
maybe
a
more
focus
on
the
eb
charging
stations
as
well,
and
then
I
would
also
really
like
to
see
a
3d
modeling
come
out
soon.
It's
a
little
disconcerting.
It
hasn't
come
out
yet.
I
know
it
was
supposed
to
come
out
with
the
draft
the
release
of
the
the
draft
of
the
gateway
area
plan.
L
I
think
you,
this
is
a
great
committee,
I'm
I'm
really
impressed
by
your
knowledge,
and
so
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
I'd
like
to
see
you
guys
be
able
to
put
some
of
those
recommendations
in
your
own
language
and
so
there's
no
misinterpretation
of
what
your
goals
and
what
you
would
like
to
see
with
this
gateway
plan.
Thank
you
all
right.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
letting
me
speak
tonight.
B
K
So
this
has
nothing
to
do
with
my
job.
I
read
the
planning
commission
comments
and
also
responding
to
a
comment
you
just
heard
and
I've
seen
planning
commissioners
written
comment
saying
very
few
arcadians
or
hardly
any
arcadians
want
tall
buildings
and
very
few
arcadians
want
eight-story
buildings.
I
don't
know
how
I
don't
know
if
we
know
that-
and
I
am
a
resident
who
am
who
is
not
against
eight-story
buildings.
I
am
open
to
a
plan
that
allows
eight-story
buildings
in
context
of
other
amenities
we
might
get
for
it.
I
E
H
Yeah
I've
got
the
compiled
table
here
if
that'll
be
helpful
for
going
through.
One
of
the
original
sort
of
ideas
was
that,
where
there
was
a
lot
of
overlap,
then
you
would
be
able
to
discuss
those,
because
you
only
have
four.
I
guess
it's
up
to
your
discretion,
whether
you
want
to
just
jump
into
these
four
policy
areas
and
discuss
them
all.
Or
do
you
want
to
go
through
some
more
rigorous
vetting
process?
For
you
know
finding
those
points
for
discussion.
F
That's
the
new
development
is
going
to
be
it's
going
to
be
placed.
There
is
obviously
you
know,
obviously
a
necessity,
but
I
think
that
the
two
things-
and
maybe
maybe
you
could
say
that
for
that
new
infrastructure
that
that
it
will
just
be
taken
into
account,
but
the
fact
that
there
is
a
real
emphasis
here
and
I'm
focusing
more
on
on
the
electrical
demand
than
the
wastewater.
F
Given
that
this
is
the
energy
committee,
that's
kind
of
a
little
more
of
our
focus,
but
that
the
the
the
the
push-
and
I
think
even
you
know
it-
shows
up
kind
of
in
the
amenities
here
for
electrification
right
and
that
there's
a
there
are.
There
are
goals
within
the
city
and
we,
the
energy
committee,
has
been
working
on
this
for
quite
some
time,
moving
toward
electrification
in
our
building.
So
you
know,
and
and
hopefully,
eventually
retiring
the
natural
gas
system.
F
That
aren't
may
not
be
new
new
new
new
development,
but
they
may
be
converting
to
all
electric
or
to
electric
transportation
things
like
that.
So
I
think
that
was
the
one
thing
that
that
I
don't
necessarily
see
articulated.
But
again
it
may
just
be
captured
when
somebody
is,
you
know
going
through
the
process
of
the
design
for
these
new,
these
new
facilities
that
it's
just
part
of
the
process
that
they
take
into
account
the
fact
that
things
are
going
to
be
all
electric
and
there's
going
to
be
electric
electrified
transportation.
D
One
point
that
I
was
trying
to
make
is
is
that
this
is
going
to
the
development
of
infrastructure
is,
is
going
to
need
to
be
phased
and
planned
in
that
way.
It's
not
always
going
to
happen
at
one
time,
and
so
I
think
we
need
some
kind
of
a
time
horizon
there
in
the
planning
that
we
do
for
for
putting
in
additional
infrastructure.
F
H
Okay,
so
what
what
I'm
going
to
do
just
process
wise?
What
I'm
going
to
do
is
sort
of
capture
all
of
these
we'll
capture
the
discussion
changes,
modifications
that
come
through
the
discussion.
Again
words
missing
them
now
is
probably
not
the
best
use
of
our
time.
We
can
take
your
general
concepts
and
go
back
and
work
submit
them
as
at
the
staff
level.
But
then,
when,
when
you
get
to
a
point,
you
say
as
a
body,
you
say:
look,
let's
take
a
vote
on
this
either.
H
You
know
you're
all
going
in
different
directions:
you're
not
going
to
be
able
to
come
together
on
a
recommendation
or
you
come
together
on
a
recommendation.
You
take
a
straw
poll
vote
and
then
we
can
move
on
and
then
I'll
know
that
that
ultimately
is
going
to
be
included
in
your
your
formal
action
on
this.
So
we'll
identify
those
changes.
C
D
Oh,
that
what
I
was
saying
is
that
the
increased
infrastructure
is
not
going
to
all
happen
at
one
time,
so
we
should
have
a
time
horizon
of
of
and
a
process
for,
phasing
it
in.
As
as
we
need
to
add
additional
infrastructure,
some
of
it
would
make
the
most
sense
to
put
in
near
the
beginning
of
the
process
and
other
is-
is
expanded
as
we
do
additional
development
over
the
time
horizon
of
the
gateway
development.
H
Yeah-
and
so
just
so
I'm
clear,
maybe
so
the
the
committee
is
too
michael.
Are
you
suggesting
that
that
be
voiced
in
policy
or
that
we
actually
outline
a
timeline
in
this
policy
document,
because
I
would,
I
would
think
that
the
the
former
is
is
doable.
I
would
think
that
the
latter
would
probably
not
be
effective.
D
D
I
F
H
At
some
point
you
will
yeah
and
if
you
want
to
you
can
do
it
item
by
item.
You
know
it
sounds
like
there's.
There's
pretty
close
alignment
on
these
proposed
changes,
I'm
sort
of
getting
the
warm
fuzzies.
So
you
could
probably
move
on
from
that.
If
you
get
to
a
point
where
you're
like
we
definitely
want
to
lock
this
in,
you
can
make
that
one
by
one
vote
or
if
you're,
just
you
know
scattered
to
the
winds,
there's
no
way
that
you're
going
to
come
together.
H
I
would
recommend,
as
a
point
of
order,
that
someone
take
a
motion
and
you
go
through
those
procedural
steps
to
to
resolve
the
fact
that
you're
not
coming
together.
Basically,
but
it
sounds
like
on
this
one,
you
came
together,
we
can
go
on
to
the
next
one
and
maybe,
if
you
get
through
the
next
one
you
wind
up
getting
through
all
of
them,
then
you
can
just
come
back
and
vote
for
them
on.
I
F
F
H
Some
of
that
will
get.
You
know
overtaken
if
we
adopt
a
local
all-electric
ordinance,
but
even
the
all-electric
isn't
going
to
require
that
they're
net
zero,
for
example,
so
we'll
have
incremental
amenities
that
are
associated
with
that
once
we
get
to
the
point.
This
is
a
good
good
area.
Where
you
know
we
would
have
those
package
deals
once
we
get
to
the
point
where
the
state
has
surpassed
us
and
if
we
can't
think
of
other
feasible
energy
efficiency
improvements
or
energy
generation
improvements
that
would
tie
to
that
net
zero
requirement.
H
D
I
Yeah
I
was
kind
of
curious
to
you
know.
I
didn't
have
the
context
of
this
in
the
plan,
so
it
might
have
just
been
pulled
out
of
a
section
that
was
mainly
on
water.
I
feel,
like
the
you
know.
What
was
just
said
about
you
know
you
can't
build
an
energy
inefficient
building
in
california
is
going
to
be
the
same
with
water.
F
H
Yeah
I'll
just
I'll
just
say
real
quickly,
then
you
know
what
this
is.
What
the
idea
is
here
since
it's
mentioned
in
in
the
staff
report
and
jim.
You
can
correct
me
if
I
misstep
here,
because
I
I
only
been
presented
with
the
information
one
time
well
two
times,
but
my
understanding
just
super
high
level
synopsis
is
that
you
know
cal
is
working
on.
Cal
berkeley
is
working
on
a
sort
of
the
legal
framework
and
then
a
programmatic
pilot
project
that
essentially
would
take
a
group
of
buildings.
H
In
a
you
know,
project
level
or
in
a
a
group
of
a
building's
level,
but
the
the
legal
framework
is
being
developed
right
now,
and
so
that
could
be
an
amenity
that
you
know
look
if
some
project
will
come
in
and
you
know
build
that
out
that
that
microgrid
and
you
know,
offer
those
amenities
enter
into
that
legal
agreement
amongst
the
various.
You
know,
participants
in
that
project
that
could
be.
You
know
a
great
community
amenity
that
we're
you
know
it.
H
It
takes
additional,
you
know
money
to
build
out
and
it's
not
likely
to
ever
be
or
not
my
lifetime
anyway,
part
of
the
california.
You
know
codes
so
that
we
can
stair
step.
You
know,
I
think
we
can
start
with
the
easy
stuff
that
we
can
get
now.
You
know
net
zero
buildings
and
then
we
can
stair
step
into
you
know
more
more
complicated,
more
more
expensive
things
that
will
ultimately,
you
know,
benefit
the
project
overall.
H
F
David,
I
I
just,
I
think
you
did
it.
You
did
a
good
job,
I
think
articulating.
You
know
kind
of,
I
think
the
basic
concept
for
the
ecobloc.
I
think
one
thing
that
has
happened,
though,
is
that
they,
you
were
talking
about
sort
of
the
legal
structure
and
they
wanted
to
to
be
able
to
create
a
situation
where
there
was
kind
of
community,
solar
or
solar
on
some
roofs
that
could
be
shared.
F
You
know
we
worked
with
pg
e
and
that
that
micro
grid
is
is
capable
of
of
islanding
and
serving
multiple
facilities
at
the
end
of
the
line
there,
that
are
multiple
pg
e
accounts.
So
when
the
switch
opens,
it's
still
a
bunch
of
pg
e
still
owns
and
operates
the
distribution
line
and
is
still
serving
multiple
customers.
F
You
know,
except
for
under
this
microgrid
tariff,
where
you're
doing
it,
because
you've
you're,
islanded
and
you're
just
providing
resilience
to
critical
facilities.
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
people
that
would
like
to
see
what
you're
just
what
you
know,
what
what
the
ecobloc
original
concept
was
and-
and
we
may
get
there,
but
there's
you
know
it's.
It
was
a
big
step
just
for
pg
e
to
do
what
we've
done
at
the
airport
and
so
kind
of
the
ecobloc
would
be.
H
Good
point-
and
it
may
be
easier
to
do
you
know
with
some
like
on
a
project
level
than
it
would
be
on
a
you
know,
on
a
multiple
project
level,
and
so,
if
you
had,
you
know
a
building
that
had
you
know
multiple
pg
e
connections,
but
it
was
all
within
the
same
building.
There
could
be
some
sharing
that
happens
there,
but
I,
I
totally
agree.
J
I
F
Yeah,
I
don't
know,
were
these
your
comments,
michael,
I
think
they
probably
were.
I
don't
know
if
you
were
suggesting
different
language.
I
I
do
see
what
you're
saying
that
this
there.
This
is
maybe
a
little
bit
redundant
with
the
one
above
that
that
was
about
water
and
if
we
added,
if
we
added
energy
to
it,
but.
H
I'll
I'll
just
say
from
the
staff
perspective,
I
mean
I
I
totally
agree.
I
mean
in
some
areas
we
have
very
expensive,
it's
almost
ex
cost,
prohibitive
to
underground
because
of
water
table
and
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
so
you
know.
I
think
that
this
makes
a
lot
of
sense
as
a
recommendation
to
add
as
a
and
or
that
we
would
do
undergrounding
where
it's
you
know,
feasible
and
otherwise
work
to
improve
the
above
ground
infrastructure.
H
F
The
the
one
place,
I
think,
we're
underground
nina's
being
discussed
as
as
a
you
know,
perhaps
worth
the
cost
is
in
terms
of
you
know
where
there's
really
serious
fire
danger
and
and
if
you
underground
the
line,
you
remove
the
fire
danger
for
for
all
practical
purposes.
But
I
don't,
I
don't
think
there's
a
huge
issue
in
in
the
gateway
area
of
you
know:
towering
trees,
where
branches
are
falling
on
lines
and
starting
fires.
It
does
that
doesn't
really
seem
like
that's.
That's
that's
an
issue
so.
I
C
And
david,
you
had
made
a
comment
just
in
your
kind
of
suggestion,
about
doing
it
when
feasible
what
what
sort
of
criteria
would
kind
of
determine
whether
or
not
it's
I
mean
whether
or
not
it's
feasible.
You
mentioned
water
table
and
certainly
cost,
but
you
know
whether,
whether
you
or
anybody
else
on
the
committee,
if
anyone's
able
to
and
who
knows
more
about
it,
I
don't
really
know
that
much
about
it
and
speak
more
to
that.
H
The
way
that
I've
described
it
before
is
you
know,
I
would
like
to
drive
a
ferrari,
but
I
drive
a
toyota
because
it's
just
infeasible
for
me
to
to
drive
a
ferrari,
and
so
we
can
want
a
ferrari
level
of
development
out
of
this
this
you
know
this
planning
process
and-
and
many
people
have
actually
said
hey.
Why
are
you
having
these
amenities?
H
The
project
should
just
be
delivering
all
of
those
things
to
us
anyway,
but
what
we've
seen
over
time
through
the
projects
through
several
projects
that
have
been
proposed
and
approved
in
arcata,
is
that
as
they
wound
through
our
process
and
had
conditions
of
approval
overlaid
from
you
know
each
of
the
various
committees
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
They
become
overburdened
and
then
they're
never
built
out,
because
it's
not
you
know,
the
developer
is
saying
all
along.
Yes
I'll.
H
Take
that
yes
I'll
take
it
because
they
just
want
to
get
an
approval
and
then
once
I
get
the
approval,
they
go
to
sit
down
and
pencil
it
out.
It
doesn't
pencil
anymore,
and
so,
if
we
create
a
plan
that
says
we
want
a
ferrari
and
all
we
can
afford
is
a
toyota.
All
the
market
will
bear
as
a
toyota
we're
not
going
to
get
a
toyota
and
we're
not
going
to
get
a
ferrari
because
the
ferrari
it
is
cost
and
feasible,
and
the
toyota
we're
saying
we
don't
want
it.
H
Now
I
I
don't
have
specifics
for
you
on
what
the
additional
cost
would
be
for
for
undergrounding,
but
what
I
can
tell
you
is
that
we
had
an
undergrounding
district.
In
fact,
we
I
think
just
increased
the
size
of
it
near
to
near
the
downtown
in
and
around
the
downtown
and
we've
continuously,
you
know
generated
money
into
that
that
fund.
That
is,
you
know,
for
that
purpose,
and
it's
it's
even
it's
match
funds.
H
H
That
would
be
great
from
an
aesthetic
point
of
view,
from
a
public
safety
point
of
view
and
from
a
you
know,
a
land
utilization
point
of
view,
but
yeah,
that's
that's
kind
of
what
I
mean
when
I
say
feasible,
we'll
have
to
you
know,
assess,
does
undergrounding
actually
pencil
for
projects
and,
if
not
you
know,
maybe
they
contribute
to
a
fund
and
then,
ultimately
you
know
when
we
have
enough
money,
we
can
underground.
You
know
that
could
be
a
way
of
going
about
it
as
well.
F
It's
like
well
yeah.
I
would
love.
I
mean,
I
think
underground
is
wonderful
as
well,
but
at
some
point
it's
like
okay,
if
I
can
have
you
know,
bike
bike
paths
and
and
a
bunch
of
other
things
you
know
and-
and
you
add
them
all
up
or
I
can
have
undergrounding-
I'm
gonna
say
you
know
what
I'll
take
I
can
deal
with
the
wires.
You
know
they're
they're
they're
everywhere
we
go,
let's
just
live
with
the
wires
and
let's
get
all
these
other
things,
because
that's
that'll
make
a
greater.
F
H
D
And
be
be
done
with
electric
heat
pumps,
I
mean,
even
if
it's
all
electric,
if
you're
doing
it
with
with
electric
resistance-
that's
not
very
appealing.
It
may
not
even
be
possible
under
title
24,
but
I
think
we
should
be
explicit
about
that
and
for
for
cooking
induction
seems
to
work
the
best
some
rest.
F
H
You
know,
keep
that
in
its
own
lane
that
if
you
try
and
bake
it
into
this,
you
know
in
the
event
that
it
moves
forward
before
the
the
gateway
moves
forward
before
the
all-electric
ordinance.
I
think
that
you
know
we.
We
won't
have
the
same
level
of
transparency
and
vetting
in
in
this
document
for
those
items.
H
D
F
F
But
since
we
don't
know
what
exactly
what
that's
going
to
look
like
yet
I
don't
know
that
that
that's
much
different
than
what
michael
just
said,
but
I
guess
the
only
the
only
the
only
risk
there
is
if
we
don't
ever
end
up
with
it
with
an
ordinance,
then
we're
referring
to
something
here
that
that
would
never
exist.
So
that's.
H
F
H
I
I
F
I
D
That's
that's
why
I
was
suggesting
either
having
it
as
amenity
or
I
I
guess
what
we've
been
doing
as
a
city
is:
if
somebody
does
it
themselves,
then
that's
we
can
make
it
beneficial
for
them
to
do
so,
even
though,
and
if
they
don't
do
it,
then
we
charge
them
for
for
discharging
high
strength,
waste.
Sorry.
H
The
fee
structure
for
high
waste
is
really
set
up
as
a
disincentive
to
using
it.
We
really
try
and
encourage
folks
to
you
know
to
get
their
own
pre-treatment,
and
so
any
user
who
has
high
waist
high-strength
waste
rather
periodically,
may
find
it
advantageous
to.
You
know:
go
ahead
and
pay
that
that
that
additional
fee
or
for
waste
disposal,
but
anybody
who's
doing
it
regularly,
is
going
to
find
that
you
know
it's
more
cost
effective
to
do
pre-treatment.
H
So
we
can
I'll
I'll
work
with
I'll.
Add
tentatively
right
now
that
we'll
add
these
in
the
list
of
community
amenities
and
then
I'll
work
with
with
es
to
to
make
sure
that
you
know
I'm
on
target
with
that
and
emily
bimby.
I
don't
know
if
you
have
insights
into
that
or
morgan
that
you
could
weigh
in
on
now.
I
Right
so
I
put
a
comment
here
and
you
know
I
know
you
don't
want
wordsmithing
david,
but
I
just
there's
it's
vehicles,
trucks,
transit,
bicycles
and
pedestrians,
and
I
see
those
lists
and
I
want
to
flip
them
that
it's
in
you
know
what
what
are
we
trying
to
prioritize?
Let's
put
them
around
the
list
rather
than
you
know
vehicles.
So
that's
you
know,
that's
that's
my
only
wordsmithing
comment.
I
H
No,
I
think
that's
that's
a
really
good
point
we
did
intend.
I
mean
that
is.
That
is
the
stated
intent
of
this.
You
know
we
recognize
you
know
single
passenger
vehicles.
Vehicles
of
all
types
are
not
disappearing
tomorrow,
no
matter
how
hard
we
wish
them
to
be
we're
not
going
to
suddenly
have
a
world-class.
H
You
know
transit
system,
no
matter
how
hard
we
wish
it
to
be,
but
if
we
don't
start
building
out
that
infrastructure
now,
if
we
don't
emphasize
it
and
encourage
it
in
this
policy
document,
we're
just
never
going
to
have
it,
and
so
that
is
clearly
the
emphasis
of
this
plan.
So
thank
you
for
that.
We'll
look
for
look
for
that
throughout
oops.
H
H
H
I
I
F
I
H
The
you
know
the
policy
discussion
around
this,
and
I
I
am
not
sure
it
seems
to
me
that
what
dilu
who
put
this
table
together
was
trying
to
indicate
that
there
was
this.
This
comment
last
time
that
is
embedded
in
this
particular
change
here,
and
I
do
think
that
that's
a
you
know
point
of
clarification.
The
committee
needs
to
make.
I
know
there
was
one
committee
member
who
was
particularly
interested
in
seeing
this
change.
H
The
reality
is
that
you
know
we
can't
you
know
we
can
emphasize
class
four,
but
they're
going
to
be
certain
areas
where
you
know
it's
impossible
to
put
a
class
for
you
know
without
you
know
significantly
disrupting
other.
You
know
components
of
the
gateway,
and
so
we
can.
We
can
dig
into
that
more
detail,
but
unfortunately,
that
committee
member
isn't
here
today,
but.
I
H
Yeah,
so
it's
it's
shown
how
it
could
be
incorporated
here.
This
isn't
actually
changed
at
this
point.
I
think
that
you
know
ultimately
again.
If
the
committee
wanted
to
make
this
change,
I
think
the
council
would
have
to
weigh
you
know
where
those
potential
conflicts
between
adding
a
class
for-
and
you
know
the
other.
H
You
know
policy
areas
that
we're
trying
to
balance.
I
mean
if,
for
example,
you
know
you
know,
class
four
lanes
were
added
to
k
street.
You
know
we
have
a
proposed
bike
lane
on
k
street.
If
all
of
those
became
you
know
separated
bike
lanes,
it
could
significantly
impact
you
know,
other.
You
know
amenities
that
we're
trying
to
you
know
derive
out
of
out
of
improvements
to
k
street
such
as
you
know,
wider
sidewalks.
H
You
know
efficient,
vehicular
traffic,
throughput
and
those
kinds
of
other
things,
and
so
you
know
that
that
would
be
in
a
policy
direction
that
I
think
you
know
in
isolation
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
I
think
we'd
all
agree
with,
but
you
know
in
in
totality
they're
gonna
be
many
areas
where
there
are
conflicts,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
to
try
and
do
in
advance
is
if
we
see
those
potential
conflicts
that
we
resolve
them
ahead
of
time.
H
I
don't
believe
there
is
exact
that
exact
language
currently
and
let
me
read
to
you
what
the
what
the
existing
language
reads,
but
I
think
we
I
think
we
can
get
there.
I
think
we
can
with
a
couple
of
easy
changes.
We
can
get
there
so
right
now,
let's
see
ga7b
says
well,
of
course
this
is
a
super
long
one,
but
in
that
section
it
says.
H
And
so
perhaps
they,
you
know,
buy
a
package
of
amenities
that
you
know
includes.
You
know
indoor
bike
parking
and
bike
lockers
and
also
contributes
to
you
know
the
trail
system,
and
then
the
city
would
use
those
funds
to
build
out
that
class,
2
or
class
4
trail
and
really
what
this
says
is
that
existing
class
two
bicycle
facilities
may
be
converted
to
class
four,
and
so
we
would
we.
You
know
this
is.
H
This
is
talking
about
areas
where
you
have
an
existing
bike
facility,
and
I
think
that
you
know
to
get
this
in
a
little
more
detail.
We
could
add
language.
Like
you
know,
class
four
bike
lanes
are
are
preferred
when
you
know
when
practical-
and
you
know
you
know
not
in
conflict
with
other,
you
know,
plan
amenities,
and
so
you
know
existing
class.
H
Two
standard
bike
lanes
may
be
converted
or
should
be
converted
where
you
know,
where
feasible
or
something
to
that
extent,
and
that
would
emphasize
the
class
four
a
little
bit
more.
Give
a
nod
towards.
You
know
wanting
to
have
those
those
better
bike
lanes,
but
also
recognize
that
you
know
they're
not
they're,
not
possible
in
all
situations.
C
If
that
bullet
point
e
is
already
in
the
language,
I
think
that's
fine,
I
mean
there,
it
is
right
there
talking
about
switching
class,
two
to
class
four,
and
just
like
you
said,
going
back
to
the
idea
of
you
know,
there's
certain
things
you
might
want,
but
you
can't
necessarily
have
everything
I
I
think
this
is
fine.
The
way
it
is
unfortunately
well,
I
think
it's
fine
the
way
it
is.
D
F
Right
I
mean
yeah
if
one
development
has
a
class
four,
for
you
know
for
a
half
a
block
and
then
you
know
that's
it
it's
sort
of
like
it's
not
very
valuable,
but
if,
but
if
there's
a
class
four
lane
that
goes,
you
know
for
10
or
12
blocks,
it's
a
main
through
fare
that
gets
used
regularly.
That
would
be
of
much
more
value.
H
Now
this
also
just
kind
of
you
know
think
through
this
a
little
bit.
You
know
the
you
know,
there's
still
some
oversight
and
review
of
these.
You
know
we're
going
to
have
policies
that
you
we
have
to.
You
know
balance
as
we
go
forward
and
I
think
these
kinds
of
discussions
are
are
important.
I
also
think
that
you
know
where
there's
a
you
know:
programmatic
decision,
the
committees
are
going
to
be
able
to.
You
know,
weigh
in
on
these.
H
You
know
over
time
and
staff
will,
you
know,
certainly
be
checking
in
you
know
and
reporting
back
on
monitoring
how
these
are
rolling
out
and
finding
out.
You
know.
Where
do
we
need
to?
You
know,
make
minor
tweaks
to
improve
our
understanding.
You
know
recognizing
that,
yes,
we
want
to
try
and
get
to
class.
For
I
mean
policy.
Language
is
always
going
to
be
a
little.
You
know,
there's
going
to
be
some
interpretation
and
what
we
think
we're
saying
now.
H
D
F
Well,
I
I'm
I
mean
I
I
understand
what
you're
saying
michael,
but
I
don't
really
see
where
the
where
the
wording
in
this
I
mean
I
don't
even
see
it
doesn't
say
anything
about
bulb
outs
or
anything.
It
just
does
create
maintain
a
balanced
transportation
system,
with
choice
of
bus,
transit,
bicycle
and
pedestrian,
as
well
as
private
automobile
mode,
reduce
the
percentage
of
strips
that
are
made
by
automobiles
and
provide
the
community
with
and
the
opportunity
facility
to
divert
trips
from
automobile
deals
to
other
modes.
I
don't.
D
F
D
That's,
although
it
might
not
have
been
best
to
put
it
in
this
section,
because
I
I've
noticed
that
when
I'm
bicycling
that
sometimes
I
feel
like,
I
have
to
dodge
ball
balls
for
sure
to
make
it
safer
for
pedestrians.
And
so
I
feel
like
I'm
more
danger
from
the
bulb
outs
than
if
they
weren't
there
and
then.
J
H
Yeah,
I
think
you
know
I
could
certainly
carry
this
comment
forward
to
the
transportation
safety
committee
for
their
consideration.
I
think
that
there
are
definitely
you
know
there.
There
are
those
trade-offs
I
mean,
I'm
thinking
of
you
know
when
you're
coming
down
h
street,
for
example,
just
past
what
is
it
11th,
as
you're
crossing
into
you
know
the
plaza
for
the
first
time.
You
know
you
basically
merge,
there's
a
right-hand
turn
lane
and
the
bikes
have
to
merge
the
bike
lane
merges
over.
H
I
personally
feel
safe
doing
that,
but
you
know
I'm
a
daily
commuter.
I
can
imagine
a
lot
of
people
who
would
be
terrified
of
having
to
cross
into
traffic
like
that
which
gets
back
to
the
discussion
about
class
or
bike
lanes.
I
guess,
but
you
know
there's
just
it
would
be
impossible
without
you
know,
shutting
down
traffic
and-
and
you
know
making
it
so
that
you
couldn't
have
a
right-hand
turn
at
11th
street.
It
would
be
impossible
to.
You
know,
create
a
class
for
lane
in
that
situation.
H
I
I
So
yeah
planned
enhanced
transatlantic
move
on
from
now
on.
I
think
we'll
move
on
to
that
one.
So
non-motorized
campus
layouts
and
my
comment
was
on
here
and
yeah.
This
is
my
one
of
my
another
one
of
my
little
sticking
points
like
we
should
have
more
paid
parking,
not
just
in
the
gateway
district.
I
would
just
say
free
parking
is
never
free,
so
we
shouldn't
make
it
free,
but
I
won't.
I
won't
go
too
far
into
that,
but.
D
I
And
then
the
other
thing
is
like
you
know,
I
work
at
cal
poly
and
if
you
get
a
parking
ticket
and
you
pay
it,
it
doesn't
go
to
the
you
know
the
people
who
gave
you
the
ticket
it
goes
into
our
alternative
transportation
fund.
So
you
know
utilizing
those
funds
from
parking
to
get
fewer
cars
on
the
street.
H
H
Not
just
you
know,
one
project
as
a
means
of
trying
to
like
you
know,
support
alternative
transportation
systems
from
that
node,
and
then
you
know,
certainly
you
know
we
have
policies
that
that
look
to,
even
if
you
live
in
an
apartment,
building
that
the
parking
isn't
necessarily
free
and
part
of
that
parking.
We
want
to
see.
Decoupling
of
you
know,
rent
for
parking
versus
rent
for
for
living,
and
that
makes
it
such
that
you
know.
H
If
the
committee
wants
to
recommend
this
policy
going
forward,
we
could
bring
it
forward
and
then
it
would.
You
know
we'd
ultimately
create
a
policy
that
did
the
most
that
it
can
do,
given
the
constraints
that
we
have,
but
we'll
try
and
get
creative,
I
mean.
Maybe
the
existing
structure
can't
create
that
sort
of
fun,
but
maybe
we
just
need
to
increase
the
cost
of
the
parking
tickets,
and
then
you
know
make
it
such
that
that
increased
increment
goes
into
trail,
fun.
I
It
seems
like
that
would
be
something
that
would
be
appropriate
to
be
outside
of
this
particular
document
right,
it's
kind
of
like
the
electrification
policy.
That
would
just
be
the
general
parking
policy
kind
of
thing
that
would
be
incorporated
into
the
whole
city
and
not
just
the
gay
area,
so
yeah.
D
H
I
D
Yeah,
what
I
was
saying
is
that
I,
like
the
grids,
the
grid
streets
of
arcato,
a
lot
and
intentionally
live
in
an
area
of
town
that
has
grid
streets
so
and
I've
seen
some
things
that
are
claimed
to
be
advanced
that
are
do
not
do
not
have
through
streets,
and
I
think
that
are
inferior
to
to
red
streets.
Even
if
the
grid
streets
are
made
narrower
than
they
have
traditionally
been
made.
H
H
So
there's
there's
ample
opportunity
to
provide
some.
You
know
you
know
bike
ped
facilities
through
that
block
through
that
development,
I
don't
think
we
would
necessarily
want
to
see
you
know
a
new
street
created
through
there.
That
would
be
a
mid
block
street
anyway,
but
just
using
it
for
an
example,
but
it
is
possible
to
you
know,
design
it
so
that
it
has
an
alleyway.
H
H
You
know
a
wetland
and
so
there's
there's
lots
of
reasons,
lots
of
rationale
for
for
not
completing
the
grid
there,
but
there
are
non-motorized
access
points,
trails
that
we
could
have
through
there
and
or
you
know,
walking
streets
if
you
will
so
that's
that's
kind
of
where
we
left
it
on
the
policy
level.
We
want
to
try
and
complete
streets
where
we
can
recognizing
that
they
may
not
be
complete
for
all
modes.
I
So
yeah
we've
got
incentivize
active
transportation.
We
support
this
michael
sports,
those,
I
think
all
of
us
do
and
then
my
comment
yeah
like
this
is
again
one
of
these
things
of
like
with
bike
parking.
It
just
you
know,
there's
a
difference
between
just
putting
like
a
bike,
rack
out
in
front
of
a
building
and
actually
putting
something:
that's
covered
insecure
and
then
you
know
also
thinking
about
e-bikes
there's
so
many
e-bikes,
I
see
everywhere
so
having
parking
for
that
and
again
secure
parking.
So
that
way
people
feel
safe.
I
H
F
No
actually
that
last
so
the
last,
if
you
scroll
all
the
way
down
this,
this
was
a
comment
that
that
I
made-
and
I
added
it
here
because
there
wasn't
the
the
chapter
two
community
benefit.
I
think
this
is
probably
where
where
it
belongs,
but
there
was
no
section
above
for
that
for
that
there
was
no
section
in
the
table
for
that
section
in
the
plan
and-
and
so
this
was
trying
to
address-
I
think-
and
I
think
it's
in
our
notes,
at
the
top,
but
anyway
certainly
the
last
meeting.
F
We
had
some
of
the
folks
that
spoke
today.
Some
of
the
public
commenters
spoke
at
that
last
meeting
about
their
concern
about
solar
shading,
and
so
I
I
and
I've
actually
talked
with
jim
becker
since
then,
and-
and
I
think
the
committee
is
my
recollection
anyway
was
was
receptive
to
you-
know-
sort
of
the
issue
of
solar
shading
and
it's
something
that
we've
addressed
as
a
committee.
F
F
That's
that's
just
how
that
how
it's
designed,
but
if
we're
putting
up
new
buildings
next
to
existing
buildings,
and
especially
if
we're
putting
up
larger,
larger
multi-story
buildings
in
close
proximity
to
you
know,
let's
say
residences,
then
you
know
for
people
that
have
have
have
lived
there
and
and
maybe
have
solar
on
the
roof.
Maybe
they
don't?
Maybe
they
would
like
to
have
solar
on
their
roof,
which
is
something
that
you
know.
F
We've
been
encouraging
to
then
put
a
very
tall
building
across
the
street
that
that
you
know
is
on
their
satisfied
and
blocks
blocks
the
sun
from
their
from
their
space
and
and
and
makes
it
impossible
for
them
to
put
a
use
solar
put
up
solar.
You
know
I
I
I
that
would
that
concerns
me
and-
and
I
guess
I
was
trying
I
was
reaching
for
sort
of
I.
I
went
back
and
looked
at
there's
a
solar,
shade,
control
act
which
doesn't
which
does
not
address
new
new
development
or
new
structures.
F
F
Maybe
that's
too,
maybe
that's
too
blunt
of
a
of
a
of
a
policy,
maybe
not
I'm
not
sure,
but
but
at
the
very
least
it
could.
It
could
bring
the
issue
to
the
fore
and
and
stress
the
importance
of
addressing
solar
shading
on
on
existing
structures
and
there's
there
and
there's
actually
a
there's,
also
a
a
solar
easement
code
in
in
the
civil
code.
F
I
don't
know
that
that
would
be
appropriate,
but
that's
you
know
where
somebody
actually,
where
a
new
property
ends
up,
I
think
establishing
an
easement
for
for
an
adjacent
property
that
that
somebody
can't,
I
guess,
modify
that.
I
guess
it's
for
modifying
the
property,
I'm
not
quite
sure
how
that
works,
or
maybe
it
would
be
on
a
piece
of
property
now
that
if
it's
then
developed
later,
it
would
create
an
easement
that
someone
who
came
in
to
develop
it
later
couldn't
couldn't.
You
know
basically
develop
into
that.
F
F
F
You
know
back
of
the
envelope
look
at
okay,
if
I
have,
if
I'm
in
a
home
on
you
know,
on
on
on
the
north
side
of
the
street,
and
and
there's
and
my
house
is
you
know,
my
roof
is
15
feet
up
and
I
want
solar
access
on
my
roof
and
there's
a
building.
You
know
on
across
a
24-foot
street.
You
know
sort
of
standard
two-lane
street
and
I
you
know
I
kind
of
looked
at.
I
think
I
was
assuming
maybe
15-foot
setbacks.
F
It
looked
to
me
like
this.
The
building
across
the
street
could
be,
I
want
to
say,
40
feet
tall
or
so
before.
It
would
start
to
at
least
at
solar
noon.
On
the
on
the
shortest
day
of
the
year.
I
didn't
look
at
a
bunch
of
other
hours.
I
didn't
look
between
10
and
2.
I
just
looked
at
solar
noon,
which
is
when
the
sun
is
highest,
but
I
looked
at
it
on
on
the
on
the
shortest
day
of
the
year.
F
So
it's
when
it's
the
lowest
in
the
sky
and
it
appeared
to
me
that
you
could
probably
have
about
a
40-foot
building
across
the
street
and
not
shade
the
roof
of
a
structure
that
has
a
you
know:
a
15-foot
roof
on
the
other
side.
Now,
if
you
started
building
above
that,
you'd
start
shading
the
roof,
but
all
you'd
have
to
do
is
have
you
know
that
sort
of
stair-step
setback
for
the
building
across
the
street?
F
So
I
I
think
you
know
I
I
think
if,
if
you
do
have
somebody
looking
at
this
with
some
modeling,
I
mean
the
thing
about
the
modeling.
Is
we're
not
talking
about
any
specific
projects
here
right,
we're
talking
about
a
gateway
plan,
so
we
don't
really
have
a
specific
structure
in
a
specific
adjacent
structure.
F
F
At
this
point,
it
really
does
start
to
create
some
serious
shading,
but
if
we
have
a
setback
that
says
okay,
it
could
be
three
stories
or
four
stories,
and
then
the
next
story
has
to
have
a
setback
of
additional,
say,
25
feet
or
something,
and
then
it
could
go
up.
Another
story:
you
could
see
something
where
you
have
a
stair
step
thing
or
you
might
have
a
six
or
seven
story.
Building
that
actually
doesn't
create
a
shade
problem
on
on
on
a
structure
on
the
adjacent
street.
F
I
H
I
think
that
that
is
definitely
the
the
purpose
of
the
setbacks.
It's
not
really
articulated
anywhere
in
policy.
I
think
the
the
language
that
you
provided,
you
know
there
may
need
to
be.
You
know
a
little
work
done
on
on
this
language.
The
solar
shading
act
or
excuse
me
the
solar
control
act.
Has
you
know
I've
done
a
little
bit
of
research
into
it
and,
to
be
honest
with
you,
I'm
not
exactly
sure.
H
You
know
how
you
calculate
that
ten
percent,
for
example,
is
it
ten
percent
on
any
given
day?
Is
it
ten
percent
over
the
year?
You
know
what
what
is
the
ten
percent,
because
I
think
if
it's
ten
percent
over
the
year
you're
going
to
find
that
you
know
you
could
probably
build
a
six-story
building
right
up
on
the
street
frontage
and
and
make
the
10
of
the
year.
But
having
said
that,
I
think
everything
you
said
is
definitely
the
intent
behind
the
plan.
H
I
think
we
can
find
some
language
that
sort
of
emphasizes
that
and
the
intent
is
that,
with
the
form
based
code,
we'd
be
able
to
establish
those
standards
in
more
detail,
and
it
may
be
that
some
areas
have
you
know
more.
You
know
bigger
bigger
street
side
setback
than
others.
You
know
if
you're
on
the
south
side
of
the
block,
you
know
because
we
do
have
a
lot
of
regularity.
Even
though
we're
not
looking
at
a
specific
project,
we
have
a
lot
of
regularity
throughout
the
district.
H
We
they're
all
50
foot
wide,
sorry
street
rights
of
way.
Typically,
the
setback
and
the
frontage
is
is
pretty
similar
to
the
you
know.
The
buildings
on
the
north
buildings
on
the
north
are
going
to
have
more
of
a
shading
problem
than
you
know,
buildings
on
the
south.
You
know,
except,
as
you
stated
earlier,
with
respect
to
you,
know
new
buildings
that
are
being
built.
You
know
in
conjunction
with
those
buildings
to
the
south,
and
so
I
think
that
you
know,
through
the
forum
based
code,
we
really
can
create
a
set
of
standards.
H
That's
very
sensitive
to
that
and
we
do
have
a
couple
of
buildings
that
in
the
3d
gis
model,
that
is
still
in
the
administrative
draft
form
right
now
that
we
can
demonstrate
that
with,
and
so
I'm
I'm
real
hopeful
that
you
know
in
the
next
month
or
so
we'll
be
able
to
bring
that
out.
Sure
community
share
it
with
the
energy
committee
and
you'll
be
able
to
take
a
look
at
what
you
know
what's
being
proposed
and
how
those
you
know
affect
existing
development
as
well
as
propose
new
development.
H
So
yeah,
I
definitely
I
I
think.
If
the
the
committee
is
behind
that
I
mean
I
think
the
staff's
intention
was
to
you
know,
to
bring
forward
some
language
that
emphasized
the
solar
shading
aspect
of
it
and
create
a
policy
around
that.
So
we
can
certainly
do
that
and
would
appreciate
the
support
of
the
committee.
H
C
One
thing
that
one
one
thing
that
I
I
just
wanted
to
throw
out
there
is,
I
think,
the
idea
yeah
of
putting
something
in
the
policy
about
solar
shading
is
a
good
idea.
Especially
there's
been
a
lot
of
discussion
about
it.
I
mean
one
of
the
concerns
I
have,
though,
is
in
terms
of
trade-offs
so
and
david.
You
kind
of
touched
on
this,
like
you
know
whether
this
regulation
would
go
through
the
solar
control
act
or
not.
C
Who
knows,
but
that
obviously
is
a
clear
precedent,
and
you
know
when
you,
as
you
mentioned,
the
thresholds
of
that
act
are
not
very
clear,
like
10
percent
of
what,
but
here's
the
point
that
I
want
to
make
is
being
conscious
of
the
trade-offs,
especially
with
the
idea
that
you
know
don't
even
know
if
this
would
come
into
play.
But
a
concern
of
mine
is
that
you
know
by
adding
another
story
to
a
building.
You
know
you
get
a
potential
benefit
of
added
housing
units
assuming
it
was
housing.
This
is
a
hypothetical
example.
C
C
So
there's
the
trade-off
is:
is
it
better
to
have
housing
units,
or
is
it
better
to
shade
that
one
roof
by
an
extra
one
or
two
percent?
And
I
don't
have
the
right
answer
to
that?
But
I
I'm
I'd
like
to
see
that
discussion
take
place
in
some
way,
shape
or
form-
I
mean-
maybe
not
here
now,
but
that
that's
kind
of
the
idea
that
concerns
me
with
the
building
heights.
These
trade-offs
and
not
adequately
kind
of
digging.
D
One
other
aspect
of
this
is:
is
that
we're
looking
into
from
a
consulting
company?
Is
a
solar
that's
being
installed
on
the
sides
of
the
building,
so
that,
even
if
a
tall
building
is
blocking
a
building
on
the
side
or
behind
it
that
that
energy?
That's
that's,
hitting
the
building
could
actually
be
absorbed
and
be
used
to
produce
electricity,
and
that
could
be
a
possible
amenity
to
offset
the
shading
that
that
that
building
is
creating.
I
Concern
than
the
solar
panels
you
know
just
given
that
california's
got
lots
of
solar
on
the
grid.
Right
now
I
mean
I
know
we
get
our
energy
from
humble
bay,
but
you
know,
assuming
that
the
energy
coming
to
your
house
is
renewable,
regardless
of
whether
you
have
solar
in
your
house
or
not
the
bigger
concern,
I
would
think
you
know
as
a
resident.
You
know
I'm
not
affected,
I'm
not
near
the
gateway
community
but,
like
I
would
be
more
concerned
about.
You
know
big
building
coming
and
just
like
shading,
my
house,
so
those
are.
I
D
I
It
they
definitely
do
support
tall
buildings
and
that's
you
know,
kind
of
what
I
was
saying
earlier
that
that
table
that
was
like
made
it
really
clear
that
eight
stories
is
only
in
a
specific
part
of
the
the
area
and
not
you
know
you
couldn't.
Just
put
you
know,
grids
of
eight-story
buildings
all
throughout
the
gateway
plan.
It's
only
in
one
specific
area
if
you
do
a
whole
extra
lot
of
stuff.
So
I
don't
know
at
that
point.
H
H
I
think
that's
you
know
you
know
not
not
a
realistic
expectation,
but
I
do
think
that
we
can
limit
the
the
shading
that
does
provide
you
know
meaningful
solar
gain.
You
know
to
buildings
existing
buildings
in
particular,
because
they're,
not
you
know,
designed
necessarily
to
you,
know,
reflect
on
other
buildings
that
aren't
there.
Yet.
H
What
I've
seen
in
in
you
know
in
practice
is
even
in
the
the
larger
buildings,
the
plaza
point,
for
example,
or
the
the
soro
place
that
was
recently
built,
the
mitigations
included
in
the
design
for
those
buildings
really
does
ameliorate
the
the
impact
of
you
know:
solar
shading,
on
adjacent
buildings
and
again
it's
not
to
say
that
they
aren't.
You
know
at
some
points
shaded
and
then
from
what
I've
seen
in
the
the
shading
analysis
and
the
the
3d
gis.
H
You
know
you
can
set
thresholds
for
you
know
for
how
many
hours
a
given
area
is
is
in
shadow,
given
the
design,
that's
that's
been
modeled,
and
you
know
the
you
know
having
a
typical
two-hour
threshold,
you
know
results
in
in
fairly
limited
areas
of
you
know,
buildings
being
shaded
in
in
the
winter,
and
then
we
also
have
to
take
into
consideration
both
in
terms
of
solar
heat
gain,
but
also
in
terms
of
solar
generation.
During
the
winter.
H
H
H
F
Well,
I
I
think
I
mean
I
guess
it
sounded
to
me
like
the
time
frame
on
this,
that
that
david
was
hoping
we
would
kind
of
get
through
and
make
a
decision.
I
I
think
before
our
next
since
we're
meeting
every
other
month
now
kind
of,
like
you
were
looking
for
for
feedback
within
a
month
or
so
david
is
that.
Did
I
get
that
right?
You.
H
H
At
some
point,
the
council
is
really
gonna
set
the
tone
for
what
the
timeline
is
that
that
we're
you
know
trying
to
march
toward
the
committee
should
definitely
not
feel
rushed.
I
feel
like
there's
been
a
good
discussion.
I
feel
like
all
of
these
policies
are
generally
you
know,
there's
there's
not
been
any
counter.
You
know
countervailing
opinions.
H
If
you
took
action
tonight,
I
have
a
set
of
recommendations
I
can
carry
forward.
If
the
committee
wanted
to
you
know,
set
a
you
know
subcommittee
as
some
you
know,
committee
member
community
members
had
suggested,
or
you
wish
to
take
this
up
at
a
special
meeting
or
any
of
those
options
moving
forward
or
still
an
option.
H
H
H
C
F
Fans-
I
I
I
would
agree
with
mike
and
I
think
given
what
david
said
I
mean
if
we
I'm
not
sure
when
I'm
just
thinking
about
that.
You
know
committee
members,
I
guess
it's
mainly
gwellin
and
karise,
because
george
needed
to
recuse
himself.
So
you
know
if
they
get
a
chance
to
see
kind
of
what
we
came
up
with
I
mean
we
are
we
already
we
did
have
we
had
a
discussion
with
them
prior,
so
they
they
made
some
comments
to
me.
F
I
don't
think
there
was
anything
we
revisited
a
couple
of
things.
There
wasn't
anything
I
I
think
was
controversial
really
or
anything,
but
if
they
had
if
they
had
some
additional
input,
it
sounds
like
you
know.
We
would
there's
still
a
chance
for
us
to
to
add
some
more
input.
You
know,
and-
and
we
might,
we
might
end
up
with
coming
up
with
some
other
ideas
or
something
between
now
and
you
know
the
next
time
we
meet
or
if
we
decide
we
want
it
but
yeah,
I
I
don't.
F
I'm
not
sure
you
know
the
idea
of
establishing
the
subcommittee.
I
mean
that's
that
that
if
there
were,
if
there
was
a
group
of
people
who
wanted
to
take
on,
you,
know
some
additional
research
and
and
recommendations
or
whatever,
but
anyway
I'll.
I
agree
with
mike
that
I'm
I'm
I
I
would
be
happy
to
to
vote
on
on
what
we've
accomplished
tonight,
at
least
as
one
milestone
and
then
wherever
we
go
from,
there
can
can
kind
of
play
itself
out.
I
H
Yep,
absolutely
I
took
notes
you
viewed
them.
You
moved
on
that
action
and
approved
it.
So
I
appreciate
that
I'll
take
a
look
at
the
solar
easements
and
if
I
find
information
I'll
pass
that
back
through
the
liaison,
if
there's
ways
that
we
can
incorporate
those,
I
suspect
those
happen
when
you
do
a
subdivision,
but
I'll
look
into
it.
B
David,
can
you
can?
I
just
ask
you
one
question
about
whether
the
committee
wants
to
have
a
special
meeting
in
august
or
whether
that
would
be
something
of
interest,
because
that
was
something
that
emily
benve
had
to
leave
the
meeting
tonight.
But
she
wanted
me
to
make
sure
bring
that
up.
That
was
an
option
was
to
community
development,
could
compile
energy
related
aspects
of
various
general
plan
sections
or
include
public
facilities,
infrastructure
transportation,
design
for
review?
I'm
not
sure.
If
that's
something
david,
you
are
needing
for
your
process
or.
H
No,
I
don't
think
so
and
I
think,
in
terms
of
a
special
meeting,
you
might
have
a
hard
time
picking
a
date
right
now
that
you
know
that
that
everyone
could
attend.
So,
if
I'm,
you
know,
I
think,
the
committee.
If
they
want
to
have
a
special
meeting,
they
absolutely
should
you
might
try
and
send
out
a
poll
after
the
fact
and
see
if
there's
interest,
but
you
know,
I
think
that
you
know
based
on
on
you
know
what
you've
accomplished
today
and
sort
of
your
next
steps.
H
B
F
C
F
I
F
J
I
F
I
appreciate
that
michael,
I
think
I
I
I
would
agree.
I
think
I
mean
I
think.
If
there's
I
don't,
I
think,
having
a
special
meeting
just
to
me
if
we
don't
really
have
some
good
direction
as
to
what
we're
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish.
It's-
probably
not
a
good
use
of
our
time
or
anybody's
time,
but
this
this
is
a.
This
is
a
really
big
deal
for
the
city
and
it's
gonna
and
it
has
real
significant
impacts
for
for
many
years
into
the
future.
F
So
I
think
if
we
do
find,
there's
some
you
know
some
decision
points
or
points
for
where
we
could
have
additional
input
and
comment,
for
instance,
if
they
you
know
they
come
back
with
things
and
and
we
can
kind
of
we
have
a
yeah
anyway.
I
I
would
support
you
know
some
dedicated
meeting
at
an
appropriate
time,
but.
I
I
I
J
F
Fun
it
was,
it
was
fun.
I
I
left
feeling
I
I
left
feeling
hopeful
about
our
future,
because
there
was
a
bunch
of
engaged,
lively,
young,
young
people
sharing
their
ideas,
and
I
think
I
think
my
biggest
message
was
we
need
you,
you
can
you
you
can
make
there's
a
lot
of
problems
in
our
world.
We
need
you,
you
can
make
a
difference.
Please
please,
too,.
I
F
I
F
F
We
we
had
a
grand
opening
on
june,
the
first
21st
22nd,
I'm
forgetting
exactly
which
day
it
was
now,
but
anyway
it
was
right
around
the
solstice.
That
was
an
amazing
weather
week
here
on
the
north
coast,
that
it
was.
We
had
just
beautiful,
sunny,
clear
weather
from
we
get
up
in
the
morning
and
all
day
long,
so
it
was
really
quite
nice.
F
We
had
a
lot
of
people
come
from
out
of
the
area
we
had
energy
commissioners,
we
had
public
utilities,
commissioners,
we
had
peter
clower
from
kaiso
a
large
group
contingency
from
pg
e
that
were
involved
in
the
project,
well,
probably
close
to
a
dozen
pg
e
folks,
and
it
was
just
it
was
a
great
celebration.
We
had
a
bunch
of
events
around
around
it.
I
had
a
party
at
mendenhall
studios
at
our
kinetic
clubhouse,
the
night
after
the
celebration,
so
everything
went
really
well.
F
We
we
actually
islanded
the
microgrid
and
were
islanded
for
the
whole
day.
So
while
we
were
doing
the
celebration,
we
were
running
on
battery
and
solar
power
and
and
yeah
so
the
the
facility.
Now
it's
been,
we've
been
participating
in
the
wholesale
market
so
for
normal
grid
connected
operations.
Since
just
before
christmas
and
we've
been,
we
now
have
full
permission
to
operate
and
have
been
able
to
operate
in
island
mode.
So
we
only
do
that
if
there's
a
if
there's
a
grid
outage,
so
it
actually
has
happened.
F
And
then,
when
the
grid
comes
back,
it
it
automatically
reconnects
and
is
actually
capable-
and
it's
done
this
already
unannounced
just
to
seamlessly
transition
from
grid
connected
to
island
and
then
from
island
mode
back
to
to
grid
connected
which
is
really
it's
a
pretty.
Not
not.
Every
microgrid
can
do
that.
It's
a
lot
more
complicated
to
do
that
and
more
difficult.
F
I
J
A
I
B
Yeah,
I
have
really
just
short
updates
the
on
the
climate
action
plan.
The
county
is
in
process
of
putting
together
an
rfp
for
the
sql
analysis
and
developing
the
public
outreach
and
engagement
strategy
and
then
on.
The
city
of
arcata
is
continuing
to
work
with
our
cea
on
decarbonizing,
the
arcade
community
center
on
the
city's
parks
building
over
near
the
community
center
and
the
sports
complex.
B
I
Awesome
thanks
for
that
all
right.
So
that
brings
us
to
the
long
thought.
Future
meetings
agenda.
Item,
item
10.,
so
do
we
want
to
have
a
special
meeting
in
august,
sounds
like
we
do
not,
but
george
missed
a
lot
of
that
conversation.
So
you
know
recap
briefly,
is
that
there
was
some
potential
for
a
special
meeting
in
august
to
I
guess,
further
refine
our
recommendations
for
the
area
plan
policy,
the
yeah
policies
and
the
within
it,
and
I
think
we
got
through
a
good
chunk
of
them.
We
felt
good
about
it.
I
And
so
that
brings
us
to
item
b,
the
september
19th,
regular
meeting,
and
so
when
I
was
reading
the
mean
minutes
for
this
meeting.
I
had
made
the
motion
to
meet
a
meeting
today
for
this
meeting,
but
we
did
not
do
that.
So
I
guess
I
have
a
question
of.
If
we
is
it
planned
to
be
in
person
september
19th,
I.