Planning Commission Regular Meeting

consent calendar has the minutes of the Planning Commission of April 15 on it, Could I have a motion to accept?

Wait.

Are there any changes?

Before we go into that, could we go into public communications before we jump

to it?

Sure. Yes. Thank you.

Do we have any slips?

I don't think there's any slips submitted and I see someone. I see people filling them

out. Someone is quickly filling one out. OK. Is there anyone online? No.

OK Yeah, I see no one online.

Okay, Larry Stanko, would you come forward?

Good evening. Good evening. All the smiling faces hope everyone's well. I have only one comment that was actually in the paper with a cartoon with a door coming out on the arcade coming out outwardly and if that is the way things should be, should all the other doors and the rest of the arcade be changed so they're outward also, because if the excuse is fire code and fire code isn't grandfathered then they should all be brought up to fire code because it's the way it should be not the way it was 10 20 30 40 50 60.

A hundred years ago, because quite frankly the door folding up is dangerous to people in the arcade on bicycles and walkers and runners and anybody else wandering down the arcade. And it shortens the distance between walking, and quite honestly it's no different than the bench dimension-wise. It opens up and forces you to walk out, and if nobody sees it or they open it up somebody's going to get smacked in the face.

So please, how that got approved I don't know. It

sounds like code compliance to me. What do you think Lucas?

We can take into consideration maybe after this what's the address?

It's the mountain home. It's the freezer, walk-in freezer building. In the

back? Are you

talking about the door

in the front?

In the front. I believe the door opens outward. I may be wrong but I believe that's the case and I'm just saying that consistency or mistakes. Anyway thank you very much and I appreciate it. Thank

you. Okay Now, can we do the minutes? There's more. OK. We won't close yet.

Good evening, thank you. My name is Nate Mitchell. I own the property at the corner of East Ojai Avenue and Bryant Street. And I have an application in for the DRP but I haven't had an opportunity to attend a meeting in person so I just wanted to introduce myself eventually. I'll come before you and have an opportunity to discuss a project but just kind of laying the groundwork I really wanted to open up say how I got introduced to Ojai and why I kind of fell in love the first time I came up here. My wife is a hospital executive and one of her co-workers recommended that if she ever needed to get away for some rest, relaxation, rejuvenation come up to Ojai. And so one day we did and it was just before my son was turning two. We took him to Libbey Park he slid down the little grass mound on the cardboard Thank you.

And I felt at home, I felt the letdown. I felt the sense of calmness and then I was inspired enough to move forward and buy a parcel of land. So I'm really excited to be here. This is my first opportunity to participate publicly and obviously get an opportunity to meet you. I've been engaged with the planning staff for quite some time now so again thank you Nate Mitchell and look forward to the hearing tonight.

Thank You Nate. Is that the empty parcel of land? Okay, well we look forward to your plans. Back to the minutes of... Now I'm closing. I am closing the public comments. The minutes of the April 15th meeting if there are no changes?

I move to approve the minutes of April 15th.

I'll second that.

Could we have a roll call, please?

Murphy. Yes. Chesley.

Yes.

Rice-Schmidt.

Yes

Stewart.

Yes

OK, moving on to the first discussion item of the evening which is to review and discuss the city of Ojai draft multifamily and mixed use objective design standards. That's a mouthful. Take it away Lucas.

Yes, thank you. Okay so Good evening Planning Commission community everybody online The item before you tonight is really kind of a discussion review For most of you this is kind of your first time seeing it So I wanted to kind of unpack some pieces and there's a lot of stuff in the packet for for you to digest over the next Probably couple of meetings as we work through this process I wanted to first talk about just what objective standards are and what they mean to this community.

At this point, for instance, objective standards would be something like that doesn't create any sort of a may or a could versus a shall and a must or something that has a number assigned to it like the height limitation is 25 feet The setback is 10 feet. This is not the first time this body has had this conversation. It isn't kind of the first time for most of you here tonight, so I've reintroduced a couple of cities that we've done some research on large and medium size.

There are other cities out there now that I'm looking at online that have objective standards. We're a little bit behind the curve on this 2024 is when we were supposed to have this really kind of packaged up and adopted through what is going to end up being an ordinance, and not necessarily a resolution. So it will be codified within our zoning code and our regulations.

In the packet itself, you'll find a couple of different cities. The city of Temecula as well as the city of Gilroy. City of Temecula has a very robust objective standards packet in which they work from where it hits a lot of different buttons within the information that I sent to you. Within that information I sent to you is also something that I thought was very interesting which is Two pieces, actually. The first is there is...

There was a Planning Commission Academy that was done by League of Cities in 2023 and it still holds true today. It hasn't been an update to it, so the information that was done at that time in terms of the objective design standards is a really good benchmark and it's certainly something you should be looking at as a way in which like for instance when I'm bringing forward a draft kind of use that as a litmus test to the draft that you're reviewing and not only that but Use the city as kind of a benchmark to what makes sense for Ojai. You've got two examples, Gilroy which is basically a 13-page high level but still objective standard way of thinking and then you have a very detailed Tecuya example which is more than or close to 100 pages and very much in depth but Temecula is also a growing community.

Gilroy is kind of a growing community up in the Bay Area. Ojai is not necessarily either one, but I think what you should recognize is that regardless the objective design standard should be something that when you look at it from the standpoint of are these the types of design standards that we as a community see fit to move forward on? And when I say design standards, you could be as detailed as saying oh we're following a Spanish theme. We're following an unmodern theme right?

Having those pieces built into the objective design standards helps to inform the applicants that come forward so they're not necessarily kind of scratching their head in terms of what makes sense from an objective design standard standpoint because if we don't have any which we do not at the moment Then it's just like for instance with multifamily or with mixed-use, then there are no real standards that we can use and fall back on. And I will say this in looking at some of the standards that have changed over time through state law More and more they're turning to the objective design standards that the city has in place. So having these in place helps us have a leg up, which is what really every community is moving towards—really kind of required to move towards.

Lastly I'll say—and then we can start having discussion and go back and forth—but We have a program within our housing element that requires us to do this. I know that I identified in the last meeting that we were to have this done by the end of 2024 when I submitted our annual progress report as I'm required to do, as every city is required to do. One of their comments was what's the progress on... So I put that we're in progress of getting these objective design standards codified. They said, what's the progress? And I said, we've had a couple of meetings. We're massaging it. We've had a turnover in the commission. So I said, we're starting not necessarily over, but we're just building on what we already have. So it was enough for now.

What I don't want to do and I don''t think this commission or this community wants to do is be in the bad graces of HCD. They are not as gummy as they used to be. They have quite a bit of pull versus what they used to have 10 or 15 years ago. So, let's stay in the good graces. Let's follow our housing element program, Program 15 which is also one of the attachments that was included in here and let's start the conversation now.

I'll just start it with attachment A actually has our multifamily and mixed-use objective design standards. It's kind of covered in a 19 page document that outlines definitions, it has site design standards There's some figures that give you kind of an understanding and a pretty good makeup of what you can expect. It's giving examples of normal lots versus corner lots, some enhanced paving driveway examples. And then obviously we've got some building design standards—building form, massing, The interesting thing is, top to bottom what this is looking to do is provide not only the baseline for what site plan, what an elevation, what massing potentially looks like. But it also covers at the very end some information as it relates to, for instance, bicycle parking and having those standards built in.

So it's trying to cover the array. It's not as detailed as what you have seen with Tecuya, but it's not as broadly stroked as what you saw and are seeing with Gilroy. I will say that I did today or last week look into Solvang because I thought Solvag is I'm not going to say it's comparable, but it certainly has some similarities. They actually have a codified—they codified theirs in 2025 and looking at it they actually went through and each zone that it would apply to they had specific objective design standards applicable to that

versus… How big is Solvang?

How big is Solvang? I think it's $13,000. It's either $13 or $15,000 somewhere right around there. Gilroy is almost $60,000 and then Temecula is over $100,000 Anyway, with that I open it up for questions comments as we go through this. The information here is We'll admit it's dense, but in order for us to sort through this, it needs to be dense first before we kind of... And not only that, but if there are communities that you want me to look into I can certainly do that as well. If there is...

If we're looking for a comparable city that you are aware of and you want me to look into it, I can certainly do that. That's the reason why I looked at Temecula and Gilroy and even Solvang at one point.

Okay. Anyone volunteering here to step forth with their questions? Okay. Go ahead.

Yeah, I mean... I kind of wanted to speak, I guess a little bit broadly about this first maybe. Sure. I started... I was going through everything and I remember this conversation did come up Maybe just before I entered the commission last year or something. But yeah, I think it was one that I came and watched and there was discussion about these other cities and how these things apply in reference.

And I think that's some really important research. Because you know, I started going through this as a designer. You know, I started looking through this. What does it mean to offer these things? What does it mean to show these types of images? What does it mean to like, yeah have these as like the diagrams that are standards. half an inch, there's lots of reasons to go into this stuff.

And I have opinions on it but what I was also wondering and made me think that would be important to talk about was like so we're looking at other places of how they sort of approach the problem of creating objective design standards Here we are in Ojai. This is Ojai, like what is the—like because I think we're at a really interesting place here right? Because like a week ago for maybe the second time in six months we were in T Magazine you know like come to Ojai like check it out you know and So there's going to be a new group of people excited to think about what can happen in Ojai again. And these things that are also becoming important around multi-families and projects that have already been approved, maybe it would have been nice if these things were already in place before those things had come to the table, right?

But those could potentially continue to come. So it's really like this formidable moment to me about what this document could mean, will mean for the future. And it just made me think a lot about... I'm an architect, I'm a designer. We have a planner, we have someone who's done design and a community member who knows the community and the development of this town for a long time.

But I still sort of feel a little bit like, well what is the design language of Ojai? What does the design language of Ojai want to be? And quickly looking at a bunch of these things. You know, I had opinions but I was kind of like, you know, where's the advisory board? And I know we're kind of doing that but we're also doing that as a planning commission, right? We're dealing with all kinds of things But who's, who's looking at design in Ojai like a larger scale? And it's interesting because it's sort of a part of the second half of tonight's meeting too. Right? Because there's all these we have once again sort of like the design standards kind of on the table right and so I think you know I kind of wanted for me something that I feel like would be really important to talk about Or think about that I'd like to talk about and think about is the potential for.

a design advisory board that's looking, it's like giving some of the like this lays out the things we need to look at. And it could like in a little more from like designers eyes so like local architects and landscape architects who live here right? I think that would be important but a variety of people that are have been here for awhile or haven't been here for awhile And, you know, we do some charrettes. We look at like well what does it mean? I mean there's sort of code reasons to have enhanced paving the driveways.

What does that mean? And what are we really, you know, are we just saying okay enhanced and then the next you know it's like a rainbow paving. And over here it's like you know very careful like little pavers and it's like I'm not saying diversity or like you know a gradient of design isn't a good thing but it's sort of like It's forcing a thing in a way that then creates the necessity for design to happen without giving any sort of parameters for what that actual design is.

And so, um... That to me was like I've like you know Had specific feelings which I think won't surprise you about sort of like just the site design To start with, you know and how car access and where parking is and like okay wait, but like this is actually This is I don't you know, I don't think I necessarily agree with this or something You know, and that's fine. We can go through those things right? But at the same time That's sort of just me and I I would just be really interested in us.

Like it's an opportunity, I just see it as like a real opportunity and so I'm curious how we can expand that opportunity and take the research and the work that you guys have already done and layer on like a really thoughtful Design approach talking to you know, there's People who've had You know have been doing being an architect for you know 50 years and they might be super modern There may people who are here that have been doing like really a lot of mission revival stuff I think having those voices together is also going to be the best way to understand how to even approach You know This kind of layer of things.

So let me just, as we're having this conversation turn to legal as it relates to a board or you call it a board or a committee? Yeah. Is this something that would be embedded into the objective design standards process? No. Or are you talking about helping it to be created?

I mean that's how I was thinking about

it. OK,

rather than I'm not trying to add a layer of like review because my understanding and as Katrina was like laying out the last time it's like the point is is like. And it's ministerial. The point is you go here's my thing. OK, check the boxes approved. You know what that's like?

It's pretty substantial. That's huge. And what we're seeing more and more. I mean one of the most recent Senate bills that then I'm working through right now Has objective design standards in there and the whole process is ministerial if they meet every right single and check everything They'll never come to us Exactly. Yeah, I mean, I'm I'm trying to figure out a way for it to come before this body. I'm just not seeing it So

well now I guess that's my point is like maybe in some ways that's okay but maybe we just have to like Now in 2026, 2027 it's like you know a new world than when this stuff was made. Ojai is totally different. It's like on the map in a whole different way. How do we preserve what it is? Like look forward a little bit and create sort of something that's rich that people can take into that isn't You know, it doesn't have to be like blinders on you know It's not like it needs to be like Santa Barbara. Everything has to be stuck or whatever but there's some clear like someone like Some real people who have a long experience in design and making things beautiful are like coming together and figuring out okay, how do we You know, because the things like what are the things we love?

Well they were like kind of one person. Like historically still it's like one person and kind of their architect and their money like took all the kind of mishmash and sort of like clarified it right. Like that was kind of the early sort of Ojai like found the thing they liked and then like made the rest sort of replicated to a certain

degree right.

You know, it was it happened long enough ago that it feels old and it feels authentic you know it was actually just still is like a pastiche on top of a bunch of stuff but we love it and that's okay. You know, or sort of east side of Ojai where this gentleman is now going to be thinking about things. Like how does it impact what that

is? Is the area—I mean, to be fair, it's the area that has been discussed on multiple occasions, right? Yeah. How does everybody else—where is everybody else on that? I'm kind of curious.

I completely agree. I feel like we do need some architectural design guidance. I know at one point, many years ago, we had a consultant come in to talk to us about form-based codes. And I actually think that form-based codes would be really good right now, because then we wouldn't have to say you have to build Spanish style. You know, you have to build craftsmen or it has to be modern on this side of town. It could be really still anything as long as the form was right and if we dictated what the form was marching down the east end, I think that would go a long way in Helping guide people as they come in to the vision that the city has.

So I'm a proponent of form-based codes for objective design standards.

Yeah, I think it's kind of what this is sort of trying to be in a way. It's like how much glazing? How tall can the glazing be? When's an offset? How big is the offset? How does the offset relate? Is there like a fence has to happen to create a buffer zone and all those sorts of

things. But this is standard old style zoning. But it's not form-based codes, because form-based codes is actually by parcel. I mean you're looking at every parcel and it's like these parcels are going to be two story. They're going to have balconies. It lays out everything by parcel and you can have different regions but this is old school. I mean, it can work. But I think there's other types of standards that can be applied here that would work well in Ojai so we can guide—it won't be as mishmash. This has me a little nervous to be honest.

Yeah, I mean I thought it was interesting what you said about the, I forget which one but that they were, or maybe it was Tecuya. That it was like by zone they sort of had like an objective design center. Oh yeah,

Solvang. They've done a by

zone. Solvang. By zone, I think that, which is what you're saying, it's like okay how do we think about But and it goes into the whole, the fabric of the city right? Like where's single story to two-story to like you know parking lots in the front to parking lots in the back commercial to residential to multi use multifamily. What are those sort of forms? Yeah the

interesting thing about the objective design standards that they only apply to multifamily at least the way in which yeah Like, we're meeting the minimum standard of it only applying to multifamily and then mixed use. So if it's commercial only these standards don't apply.

But I think—but we're also talking about this in item three and I think it sort of might relate in that sense.

Yeah. If you're looking—if we're looking to go beyond that, All we're looking for is the baseline. If we want to take it a step further, that can certainly be discussed and considered as well. Like even going as far as like single family and even commercial, even industrial to a certain degree. Darren am I wrong in that? Help me out with the legal aspect of this.

The objective standards are really meant to provide that guiding principle, and it'd be very strict and very intentional.

Right? So the majority of the housing laws that require objective standards are going to require them as it relates to multi-family and mixed use if you want to go beyond that with your so what that means is that you still have the ability to have discretion in your standards as it relates to commercial and other other developments. If you want to go beyond the kind of floor like Lucas is talking about, we can discuss that in terms of what it might look like to have objective standards that would apply to commercial and maybe even single family.

Some newer housing laws that create ministerial approaches for single-family residences in certain affordability contexts, but generally speaking we're talking about multifamily and mixed use.

So I wonder if we can get a map of where those are, like the potential building sites are or what parcels could potentially be intensified. Because that, I think that would help us kind of visualize any standards that we approve, how that applies in real life to us here

I think it's applicable in the sense that like we don't Zoning is also gonna Continue to evolve, you know And so we're still making let's say there was a decision at some point that hey Like we are okay with the idea of like a setback You know multi-use Sort of element to the downtown core where there's like living above all of a sudden now that would like need to fall under these objective standards And it would be impacting commercial directly.

Sure.

My turn, huh? There's a lot here and and a lot to absorb I was thinking and I agree with actually a lot of what was Said, and I would like to know more about the comment. This is kind of the old-fashioned Way because I do think that the devils in the details in the city I was thinking earlier in the day, and your comment really brought it back to me that there's kind of two identities to the town. There's this economic identity which is roughly 50% of the budget is fueled by tourism, the arcade look and feel.

What's been done with the El Roblar and a lot of times people move here for the rural Identity, and then they try to execute on the economic identity. We just heard someone voice that And it's interesting and I have always felt you know as somebody who's lived here for for a few years The important thing is to have one foot in each of those identities. That's the key and so then that kind of leads into the design we have No clarity, I think on which one of those identities we want to serve here a little bit.

Are we going to go all Mission Revival? Or are we going to allow some American rural look to go forward on things? And it makes me think that the work to do here is actually to be very, very narrow and be very reductionist. and take one little step where we can succeed at something, where we know we can write these standards quite narrow. And then branch them out from there. We know that the mission revival piece is huge here and we know the American rural piece is huge here. So when I look through the documents and I see this kind of – there's a lot of materials we're going to allow. I think as I looked it was something like we have six or seven materials compared to two or three in Temecula.

I think we can steal a lot of what Temecula's work is, actually. I thought there was a lot of good in that. Those kind of things make me nervous a little bit and it makes me think if we try to stretch too far too early that we're going to miss both of these identities. You know Gilroy is in my view not a particularly attractive town. Temecula has turned an unattractive town into kind of a destination through having the good design and having a group of people come together and say hey This is kind of our identity. I think those are kind of my main comments. There's a lot of vague language in here that doesn't meet that standard of what you spoke to earlier, which was we need measurements, not statements that say it can't be ornate or it can be ornate or things like that.

I think those are kind of my main pieces. The only other comment I have is that it would be interesting as a guideline To pick three or four of the existing buildings in town that we really love as we build these standards and ask ourselves, could those buildings be built today under these standards? And if so, they're kind of a real life personification of what we're seeking to do. And I think that's kind of a tangible way of looking at this and might be helpful for the community.

Yeah, I think a strong precedent study would be like a first step you know to understand what sort of what, parse out a little bit what we believe to be the more, you know, I don't know. More attractive, less attractive? The good from the bad, I guess as it were. As like a starting point for the conversation because it's important to see those things. What do we like about this? What don't we like about that or what's advisable about this direction and what's not about this other direction for sure.

I think we could go in zones, not C1 zone but we do have a downtown plan for the arcade plaza and the downtown area and that's supposed to be Mission Revival. But the East End doesn't have that and I don't think we want that Personally, I don't think that. You know, I think having some design licenses is healthy and good but I think it's really more about the scale you know and placement all that more than the architecture you know specifying a certain design other than the downtown.

I get a little nervous about the idea We would start dictating too much. Somewhere in here, I came across a statement that we like variety. That's to be honored and looked for. And I would not want to see us come down and say this area is going to be all one kind of architecture I mean, I love the downtown. That's a given. But as we extend out east and west, I'd like some flexibility there for people to come in with their own ideas about how

Yeah, but I think in your statement is exactly this kind of conversation which is Why? Do people love the downtown right? I think that's like a really important thing to ask ourselves because we it's hard to say we love something and then But we don't want that same thing to happen Maybe somewhere else and I don't think we're saying like just like I said just spread mission revival. I think I Think the point about let's just like be a little bit more open Thoughtful and like concise with the number of options, you know Not saying there's only one option but maybe not saying there's eight options or six options You know just with a material for example. I think that that's Maybe like the buffer zone there. I mean I guess I think about it. It's a tough thing to replicate, right?

But you—I think about some larger cities and you have these neighborhoods that feel very similar. Like it feels like a singular thing, you know? Row houses or whatever. But then when you're there, it's like they're all different, you know? But there's a consistency The windows don't all align and like the brickwork or the woodwork isn't all the same. And it might be a woodhouse, but there's a kind of consistency that makes it feel I don't know like it makes it feel like a place you know? And I think that's what we like about downtown. I mean there's different forms happening, but there's some something that's consistent that in this case is the opposite. It's like form Moving down, you know.

I think it goes back to bulk and scale of the place. The arches could be, it could be a wooden trellis. If it was the same scale and the doors still were repetitive going down the arcade people would still love it even if it wasn't Mission Revival but we have Mission Revival so and we want to protect that. The Meade and Requa, it's so beautiful but I can see something else going You know, on the east end that has that pedestrian scale you want to draw pedestrians out there.

So I guess I really don't think it's about the architectural style itself but the bulk and scale And having the pedestrian be the primary focus on drawing people down. So anyway, I think bulk and scale is very important to this whole discussion because if they can go up by right a certain number of floors You know, it's going to be really critical that we get that bulk and scale right by the setbacks. If I just gave an example

for instance from multifamily we have a two-story maximum however through density bonus through affordable housing depending on the affordability rates by which they operate they could go as high as five so We want to talk about massing and bulking like you just talked about look no further than that Right.

Is it legal for us to put limits there and keep the bulk and the size? Similar

we can dictate setbacks, so we can dictate ways in which you know your how the bulk relates to the street

And the height

Yeah

The height is probably not as much, but I think you're talking about the bulk and the mass so it doesn't necessarily... It's not five stories ten feet from. Exactly. Right. Instead it steps back or something like that.

Twenty-five feet and then you step back, you get a patio. Which is, you know, yeah.

The only comment I would offer on the mass and kind of the style piece I agree with the comment that the citizen is concern number one. I also think there is a massive opportunity here to create an identity for a town through the style of the architecture. I'm not necessarily afraid of that, I don't want it to look generic but I think of places around the world, Ea in Greece and many other cities who've gone all-in on styles and there's kind of two different ways of looking at that for sure.

And that's why I think it comes down to, before we identify all these styles and everything, what's the identity of the town that we want to serve? Do you want to serve the identity of an American rural town with some Spanish architecture in the middle of town? Or do we want something that's slightly larger to that? And that is a, you know, a larger community question. It's not one that we solve necessarily here but I do think that shepherding it toward that identity... You know the worst case scenario would be that we end up with a little snippet of some old stuff in the middle of the city And then on the boundaries, things that you could go through the design buffet and choose 10 or 12 different materials, 5 or 12 different styles. A couple of different look-and-feel type things and you kind of land nowhere near where we would want you to land or you would be serving a different identity.

The town organically has different identities. Westside feels different than Eastside. The middle of town feels different. People tend to go and live and play in the areas of town that meet that identity, that matches why they're here. And I think back in my design career you would never put pen to paper without knowing what's the identity that we're serving here?

Directionally where are we going with this a little bit?

Well, I do think we have some guidance. Well, I think we should look to our land use element one because there is some discussion about our town in there and what we want it to look like and feel like. So I think our general plan which is what it's supposed to do is the map of our you know, the guide map guide. What is it? Would we blueprint blueprint for our future?

The land use element. I think we need to look at that as we you know do this because this is our implementation document, but those are our goals there. And I think what you're looking for is somewhat in there, in the land use element. So I think we need to... This has to be consistent with the land use element anyway. So I think we should actually take a look at the land use element and say what are, you know, with what we're doing here does it comply with, does it follow the guidance of the land use element?

That's a good point absolutely

I mean, is that kind of the north star of where all this eventually leads to? Again, just going to that larger question of what identity does the city

serve. I mean it is the planning tool. It's the tool in which the city leans on for guidance into the future. It is the reason why you see the design the way in which the city is today and in fact Even though the land use element itself hasn't been updated since 1997, when you read through it, it still rings true today. And you look at everything around it and you're like yeah this makes sense. You look at the land use policies that are built into it, it makes sense even today right? So I'm not looking at policies—I mean we're looking at policies on the regular regarding projects that come forward and we're like yeah there's consistency there. Or hey, you need to do this because really we're finding through one of these policies that you're bending it in a certain direction.

It gives really good guidance for existing and future development, period. But it also rings true to what you see today. And that's part of what I think you're kind of teasing towards which is there's more than one design flavor that exists. You're kinda getting there in the discussion and that kinda makes sense in terms of how this community has developed over the years, right? I mean over the last hundred plus years.

Well if you go, you know, you mentioned the articles that have been written just after whatever 12 years of being here. You know, I've seen The New York Times circle around a few times and pick your favorite design mag and our business has been by and large in most every one of them And one thing you see is just kind of a constant, kind of like this identity tripod. One part rich hippies, one part old valley, great little spot and then one part kind of this mission revival authentic little town.

That's why I just think a lot about those identities, and I think that's a key piece to nail before anything goes down. And like you said, maybe it sits in the larger document that I don't know.

It's a good start to look at that.

If we're looking at a foundation and you're trying to find what we're calling kind of the identity, I think that is where you can start and then branch out from there.

Can some of that bake into the document that you are?

Well, we'll have to identify consistency with it when it goes forward as an ordinance. So absolutely. Absolutely. It will live within the ordinance.

We have two cards that would now like to speak on this subject. So is it OK to open up public comments in the middle of a discussion? Well, it's not