May 10, 2022 Planning Commission

SO I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY IS THE PROHIBITION ON, UM, ON, ON MORE, HAVING MORE THAN ONE METER, UM, BEING REMOVED.

THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.

I KNOW THE AD, I UNDERSTAND THE ADDRESS, WHAT I'M TRYING TO FISH.

SO WE CAN, WE CAN KEEP THAT WE CAN KEEP THAT IN THERE, BUT HAVING ONE SEPARATE APP, HAVING A STEP, HAVING, UH, I GUESS NOT ALLOWING A SEPARATE ADDRESS IN INCENSE, A PROHIBITION OF HAVING A SEPARATE METER, BUT IN THIS CASE, IF IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE STATE, WE CAN SAY THAT IT'S NOT A CITY POLICY.

IT'S A PUBLIC UTILITY POS POLICY SINCE THE CITY DOES NOT OWN A PUBLIC UTILITY.

UNDERSTOOD.

IS ITS ADVANTAGE TO HAVE A SECOND MEETING, IS THAT CORRECT? BECAUSE IN ORDER FOR, TO HAVE A SECOND METER, YOU NEED A SEC, A SEPARATE ADDRESS IN 80, USE OUR ACCESSORY TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

I GUESS TO ADD TO HIS QUESTION, IS THAT HE'S ASKING, WHY ARE WE NOT ALLOWING THE SECOND, THE SECOND, UM, METERING, I GUESS MY QUESTION

[00:10:01]

SO IF THE MAIL COMES IN AND THERE'S AN ADU, OR SOMEONE'S LIVING IN THE BATH, YOU USING ONE MAILBOX, UM, MAIL RECEIVING OF MAIL IS, UH, IS, UH, UM, THE POST IS A POST OFFICE POLICY.

SO THAT'S NOT IN THE CITIES OR VIEW, BUT DID WE COME UP WITH THAT? LIKE NOT ALLOWING ANOTHER ADDRESS WHO COME UP WITH THAT, I GUESS, CAUSE NORMALLY IN ADU THEY NORMALLY HAVE AN A, OR AN A FOR A PRIMARY OR B, BUT NO, NOT IN THIS, NOT IN THIS CITY, BUT UTILITY COMPANY, UTILITY COMPANY DOES NOT LIKE THAT.

NO, THEY DON'T LIKE NB OR HALF OR A QUARTER.

THEY WANT AN ACTUAL LEGENDS.

WELL, THAT'S WHAT AN A AND B IS, RIGHT? LET'S SAY IT'S 300 8300 FEET.

THAT WOULD BE A COMPLETELY SEPARATE ADDRESS.

WHETHER IT'S A OR B, THEN HOW DO YOU, HOW DOES A CONDO DO IT? IT'S ALL 1000 AND THEN IT'S ABC THROUGH, WOULD IT BE, I'M SORRY, WOULD IT BE ABLE TO 800 AND 800 AND A HALF UNIT ONE OR TWO? YOU DON'T LIKE HALF ADDRESSES, WAIT, BUT WE'RE NOT UTILITY COMPANY.

SO I GUESS MY QUESTION COMES IN IS AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER, AND IS IT ADVANTAGE TO HAVE TWO METERING BECAUSE IT IS CHEAPER BECAUSE THEY CLOCK YOU IN AT A CERTAIN LEVEL WHEN YOU'RE USING CERTAIN UTILITY OR WATER.

SO THE WHOLE, THE ENTIRE, UM, I GUESS INTENT WHEN THE, THIS NOT ALLOWING A SEPARATE ADDRESS COMES TO PLAY IS THAT WHEN PEOPLE ARE RENTING OUT AN ADU TO, UM, TO S TO SOMEBODY THEY TRUST, UM, OUR PEOPLE ARE MORE LIKELY TO RUN OUT AN ADU TO SOMEBODY THEY TRUST.

UM, IF IT'S THE SAME ADDRESS BECAUSE OF THE UTILIZATION OF UTILITIES.

SO LEGALLY, HEY DUDE, IS IT CONSIDERED? IT DOESN'T MAKE THE PROPERTY LEGALLY TWO UNITS.

IS IT STILL A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN ADU OR IS IT, OR AN ADU IS A SECOND UNIT, BUT IT'S ACCESSORY TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

AN ADU CANNOT EXIST IF THERE IS NO PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

SO AGAIN, SO LEGALLY, WOULD THAT STILL BE JUST A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN ADU, LIKE A CASETA OR SOMETHING? YES.

BUT THE STATE MADE IT SO THAT IT CAN BE RENTED, BUT ME, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THE STATE IS NOT COMING IN TO SAY THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO ADDRESS, BUT THE CITY DID RIGHT.

IS THAT, IS THAT WHERE WE'RE COMING TO THE STATE SAYS THAT IT'S UP TO THE CITY, WHETHER OR NOT WE ISSUE A SEPARATE IF W WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO ISSUE A SEPARATE ADDRESS, UM, FOR 80 YEARS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS CODE WAS EXISTS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO ADDRESS ALREADY.

THAT'S WHY WE KIND OF HAVE TO CROSS OUT THE SECOND UTILITY.

I GET THAT PART.

I GUESS THE FIRST QUESTION IS HOW DO WE NOT COME OUT WITH, TO ADDRESS MOST CITY WHO HAS ADU NOW DO HAVE TO ADDRESS SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND METERS, BUT THEY CAN, IF THEY, YES.

THE INTENT, UM, WHEN THAT, WHEN THIS WAS FIRST ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, THE INTENT WAS TO, TO RETAIN AS MUCH LOCAL CONTROL AS POSSIBLE.

AND TO RE, TO MAINTAIN THE SINGLE FAMILY RE UM, RESIDENTIAL ZONING WITHIN THE CITY, I GUESS, BY NOT HAVING TO ADDRESS IS LOCAL CONTROL.

IT, LET'S SAY FOR EXAMPLE, A THOUSAND UNIT.

SO OPPOSITE VIEW NUMBERED, I'M LIKE UNIT ONE, UNIT TWO, IT CONDOS WELL WITH CONDOS AND WITH THE APARTMENTS, THEY ARE DIFFERENT TO BEGIN WITH.

THERE'S A LOT OF JOINT IN COMMON.

'CAUSE I KNOW RIGHT NOW IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS A LOT OF A FAIR HOUSING ACT BY, UH, COMPLAINTS BEING FILED WITH THE COMMISSION UP THERE, UH, FOR, FOR ISSUES BETWEEN THERE, THE LANDLORD IN THE MAIN HOUSE COMPARED TO THE BACK HOUSE AND ISSUES AND SEPARATING THE BILL AND, UH, AND, AND THE MAIL AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

SO I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF LEGAL ISSUES THERE TOO.

I MEAN, OPEN ON THAT SUBJECT, I GUESS MY CONCERN IS JUST REGARDING, FOR EXAMPLE, WATER, UM, WE'RE IN A DROUGHT STATE PER SE.

AND IF THEY'RE LIMITING YOU TO LIKE A THOUSAND, I DON'T KNOW, WHAT'S THE MEASUREMENT OF WATER, UH, CUBIC METER FEET.

THAT'S TOO LONG, MOST APARTMENTS, BUT WAIT, HOLD ON, HOLD LEVEL ONE SEC.

SO THEY ALLOWING YOU FOR A CERTAIN UNITS OF WATER USE

[00:15:01]

AND IF YOU'D USE, IF YOU HAVE TWO UNIT, YOU GET FINE, DON'T YOU, IF YOU USE MORE THAN SO MANY UNITS OF WATER, IS THAT, IS THAT AN ADVANTAGE ON A RESIDENT'S POINT OF VIEW IF, IF IT WERE RENTED ANYWAY? YES.

IF IT WAS, IF IT WAS RENTED, UM, AND IF THEY SIT, THEY SHARE THE SAME METER, THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO RENT IT TO SOMEBODY THAT THEY TRUST THAT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUST.

IT HAS TO DO WITH FAIRNESS, HOW MUCH IT COSTS.

UTILITY, UH, BUT, UH, B BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT IN THE CODE, BUT THE STATE DOES ALLOW, AND SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT THE CITY CAN'T, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT OR CITY CAN REQUIRE, OR HAS THE OPTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD ISSUE A SEPARATE ADDRESS BECAUSE ADDRESS SEEING IS A CITY POLICY.

JOANNE, I MEAN, IT'S A BILL, IT'S A BILL.

YOU PAY NO MATTER WHAT, LIKE, IF IT COMES $50, BUT IF NOT HAVING TWO UNITS, I BELIEVE IT MAY COST MORE FOR THE HOME OWNER AND ALSO THE RENTERS.

WELL, UM, UH, IS THAT SURE, HEY, THAT WOULDN'T BE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE LANDLORD AND THE TENANT, HOW THEY DEVISE THE, THE UTILITY BILLS.

UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT COULD BE THAT THE LANDLORD PAYS IT ALL AND THE RENT RENTER PAYS A LUMP SUM OR THAT THEY SHOW EACH OTHER, THE UTILITY BILL AND SHARE THE COSTS THAT WAY.

IT'S REALLY WHERE A PORTION OF IT.

IT WOULD BE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE LANDLORD AND TENANT, HOW THEY, I UNDERSTAND THAT UTILITY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT FAIRNESS COMES INTO PLAY.

I THINK THAT IF SOMEONE WERE TO LIVE IN THOSE UNITS, THE MAIN HOUSE, AND ALSO THE GUEST HOUSE, THE FEES THAT IS NOT IMPOSED BY US, IT'S MOST LIKELY IN PAPA, THE UTILITY COMPANY, IF YOU USE PAST CERTAIN UNITS, THE FEES WILL GO UP.

SO ANYWAY, YEAH, NO, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

I THINK I KNOW MY ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

UM, SO WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE WHO ARE RENTING A BU OR SEPARATE PROPERTIES IN THE BACK, MOST OF THE TIME, THE LANDLORD SORT OF OWNER OF A PROPERTY IN THE FRONT IS PAYING THE WATER BILL WHEN IT COMES TO ELECTRICITY.

UM, THE LANDLORD HAS OPTIONS TO REQUEST FROM EDISON, A SEPARATE METER FOR THE BACK HOUSE.

IF THAT, IF THE LANDLORD DOES NOT WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE, UM, FOR THE PROPERTY IN THE BACK FOR THE ELECTRICITY BILL OR, OR GAS BILL, UM, AND THAT ALL RELIES WITHIN THE OWNER, BECAUSE FOR EXAMPLE, A GAS METERS ARE GOING TO COST MONEY TO INPUT TO INTEGRATE THAT INTO THE ADU, BUT, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE.

AND I THINK, UM, I THINK IT'S MORE OF A, I GUESS, A, A SECURITY CAUTION THAT OUR CITY HAS TO ENSURE THAT HOW THESE 80 USER NOT JUST BEING RENTED OUT TO ANYONE IN THE STREETS.

SO I THINK THE GOOD THING IS, IS THAT THE, THE OWNER OF THE HOUSEHOLD DOES HAVE THE OPTION TO CALL EDISON AND REQUESTS, UH, FOR THEIR, UH, EXPECTOR AND ENGINEERS TO GO OUT AND INSTALL SECOND METER, IF THAT'S WHAT THE OWNER WANTS.

SO THE, THE, EXCUSE ME, THE APPLICANT YOU'RE ASKING, WELL, I'M SORRY.

SO I'M ASKING JOANNE, SO THE THEY'RE ASKING FOR SEPARATE METERS, EVERYTHING, WATER, GAS, ELECTRICITY, EVERYTHING, UM, I'M SORRY.

UM, WHO IS FIRST FOR THE ADU? IS THIS, IS IT WE'RE WE'RE ASKING FOR? NO, THEY DON'T, THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE A SITE.

CAN I JUST MENTION THE PROPOSAL THAT IS IN FRONT OF US DOES NOT HAVE ANY PROHIBITION ON THE NUMBER OF METERS? UM, THE ONLY REASON I ASKED THE QUESTION IS PURELY BECAUSE THIS, THIS VERSION AS PRESENTED DOES NOT INCLUDE THE PROHIBITION THAT WAS IN THE PRIOR ITERATION.

THE CURRENT LAW HAS THAT PROHIBITION, BUT ALSO JOANNE IS SAYING THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THEIR ADDRESS, UTILITY COMPANY MAY NOT ALLOW YOU TO HAVE A SECOND METER.

THAT'S CORRECT.

UTILITY COMPANIES DO NOT ALLOW A SECOND METER UNLESS THE CITY ISSUES A SEPARATE ADDRESS.

WE KNOW THAT FROM EDISON.

NO, NO.

SO BASICALLY THE SECOND ADDRESS IS THE CITY OF SAYING THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE, UM, WELL, THE SECOND ADDRESS IS A CITY SAYING THAT THE ADU IS AN ACCESSORY TO THIS, THE PRIMARY UNIT, UM, BECAUSE HAVING A SEPARATE ADDRESS MEANS, UM, CAN LOOK AT AS IF THE ADU IS SEPARATE FROM, FROM THE PRIMARY UNIT.

SO THAT'S ONE, AND THEN TWO, WE WANT TO PROHIBIT HAVE BE, UM, I GUESS IN ESSENCE, THE CITY MAY WANT TO PROHIBIT, UM, HA REQUIRE REQUIRING A SEPARATE METER OR ALLOWING A SEPARATE METER WITHOUT SAYING THAT A SEPARATE METER IS ALLOWED, UM, OR IS NOT ALLOWED BECAUSE A SEPARATE ADDRESS, UM, IS REQUIRED BY THE UTILITY COMPANY.

AND THE UTILITY COMPANY IS NOT OWNED BY THE CITY.

SO, SO THE STATE CAN NOT GO BACK AND SAY, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY CITY.

THE CITY IS NOT ALLOWED TO PROHIBIT HAVING A SEPARATE UTILITY

[00:20:01]

SO IF THIS CODE, IF WE ALL DECIDED THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A SECOND ADDRESS, LIKE AN A OR B, WE CAN CHANGE IT TONIGHT AS WELL.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

IF, IF THE COMMISSION VOTES FOR THAT.

ALRIGHTY, THANK YOU.

YOU KNOW, MY, YOU KNOW, TAKE ON THIS IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, YOU SPEND A LOT OF MONEY TO ADD AN ADU, WHICH THEY'RE NOT CHEAP AND, UM, MAYBE IN THE, YOU DID ORIGINALLY, UH, BUILD IT FOR A FAMILY MEMBER OR AN ELDERLY PARENT, BUT AT SOME TIME YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO HAVE MAYBE RENT IT OUT AND USE IT FOR INCOME.

AND I I'VE SEEN IT BEFORE.

I HAVE, I HAVE RENTAL INCOME.

AND WHEREAS, UH, THERE WAS A TENANT WHO, UH, WAS EVICTING AND THEN SHE JUST LET THE WATER RUN 24 7 UNTIL I GOT HER OUT AND THE BILL WAS EXORBITANT.

SO I, I, MY OPINION, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF YOU HAD, YOU KNOW, YOUR SON OR A COLLEGE STUDENT BACK THERE, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU KNOW YOUR FAMILY MEMBER, I THINK IT WOULD SAVE A LOT OF ARGUMENTS IF THEY DID HAVE SEPARATE UTILITIES AND MAKE THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT THEY THEY USE OR SPENT.

BUT ANYWAYS, BUT LET ME GET THIS RIGHT.

THE JOINT, IF WE WERE TO CHANGE THIS, IT IS POSSIBLE.

I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TO, TO, TO CHANGE THE CODE OR TO UPDATE THE CODE.

IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS A CONSENSUS AND VOTES TO MAKE THE CHANGE, BUT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD ALSO HAVE TO ACCEPT THE CHANGE.

THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE OPTION OF NOT MAKING THE CHANGE.

CORRECT.

I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE WE DO RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CHANGES, BUT THEN THEY HAD THE FINAL YES.

SAY IN TERMS OF ADOPTING THE CODE.

I GUESS I'M ON PAGE NINE OF THE CODE.

UM, I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT NUMBER B AND NUMBER 11, B AND IT'S AND ALSO ONE 11 B IS THE 16 FEET HEIGHT.

SO HOW DO WE, UH, I GUESS ONE OF THE QUESTION IS HOW DO WE ACCOMMODATE HILLSIDE AREA? AND, UM, I MEAN, CERTAIN AREA HAS A CERTAIN HEIGHTS AND HOW TO BE ACCOMMODATED.

SECOND STORY.

IT SEEMS LIKE WHICH IS I, OR ONE, ALL SECOND STORY ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTS IT'S ALLOWED, OR IT'S NOT ALLOWED OR THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT.

UM, IT'S, IT'S ONLY ALLOWED IF IT'S ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE AND IF IT'S ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE EXISTING HOUSE, IT WOULD NOT BE A LAP UNLESS, UM, UNLESS THE EXISTING HOUSE HAS A FLAT ROOF, UM, AND IT'S MODERN STYLE, UM, IT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE TO BUILD A 16 FOOT TWO STORY ATU, WHICH IS A DETACH, THE LIMIT HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR DETACHED EDU'S.

SO IF A RESIDENT'S WANTS TO, LET'S SAY, DO A TWO STORY, LIKE THE, YOU KNOW, HOW DO THEY GO ABOUT DOING THAT? IT'S IT'S IT'S BESIDES THE FACT THAT IF THEIR MAIN HOUSE DO NOT, IS NOT A SECOND STORY.

OH, BUDDY.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT FOR A SECOND UNIT REVIEW APPLICATION AND AN 80, UH, AUP APPLICATION.

SO NOW WE WILL OPEN PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL HEAR TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT.

SO IN SPEAKING AND SPEAKING WITH THE ADU, THE AUP APPLICATION IS DISCRETIONARY, UM, AN 80, BUT THE, UM, ADU IS NOT THE SECOND UNIT REVIEW REVIEW APPLICATION IS NOT DISCRETIONARY IS IT'S BASICALLY A T A ZONING CLEARANCE TYPE APPLICATION.

AND THE REASON WHY AN AUP IS REQUIRED FOR A SECOND STORY ADU IS, IS BECAUSE THE CITY REQUIRES AN AUP FULL FOR ALL SECOND FLOOR ADDITIONS.

SO IT'S NOT TREATED ANY DIFFERENTLY FROM, FROM OTHER ADDITIONS TO THE HOUSE.

SO, UM, OKAY.

SO, OKAY.

I GUESS WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT LATER OR NO, NO, A D HE TALKING ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE USE, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.

[00:25:01]

I'M SORRY.

THERE IS NO APPLICANT.

SO THE SCRIPT.

SO, UM, JUST FROM THE RESIDENTS, JUST FROM THE RESIDENTS, SO WE HAVE IT, DOESN'T SAY IF YOU'RE FOR OR AGAINST, SO WE'LL START WITH IAN PIKE.

THANK YOU, BRENDA WATSON.

AND GOOD EVENING TO COMMISSIONER AND WILL THE COMMISSION.

UM, SO IT'S INTERESTING THE CONVERSATION THAT COME UP, BECAUSE I THINK IT KIND OF APPLIES TO MY SITUATION.

SO, UH, I MEAN, I'M PROBABLY, I COULD BE IN WEST COVINA RESIDENT 37 YEARS, 34 YEARS AT THE CURRENT ADDRESS.

AND, UM, I'M HERE TO SAY, I TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR ADDING A NEW PROVISION TO THE ADU AMENDMENT ONE FOR SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, SUCH AS MY SITUATION.

AND JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT.

AND OTHERS ARE PROBABLY HAVE A SIMILAR SITUATION.

UM, BEFORE I GO THROUGH THAT, I JUST WANT TO SAY THE DISCUSSION AROUND THE METERING.

I HADN'T EVEN THOUGHT OF THAT, BUT WHAT A GREAT POINT.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT BECAUSE THE, THE COST OF WATER ELECTRIC AND EVERYTHING, UM, HAVING SEPARATE METERS, I THINK IS FANTASTIC.

AND IT CUTS A LOT OF ARGUMENTS OUT, A LOT OF ARGUMENTS THAT CAN LEAD TO NASTY SITUATIONS.

I THINK THAT'S A GREAT, UM, POINT THAT WAS RAISED, NEVER THOUGHT OF IT.

SO, UM, I HAVE A 96 YEAR OLD MOTHER-IN-LAW AND CARER THAT WOULD, UH, LIKE TO LIVE WITH US AND, UH, LEVERAGE THE IDU, THE, UH, OPPORTUNITY MY STANDALONE GARAGE, UH, AND I'LL HAVE MY STANDALONE RACK.

MY STANDALONE GARAGE IS A HUNDRED FOOT AWAY FROM MY HOUSE, SITS 20, 15 TO 20 FOOT BELOW MY HOUSE AND BACKS INTO A HILLSIDE.

AND I'VE, I'VE GOT SOME PICTURES THAT TRY AND SHARE THAT I'M ON A VERY NARROW ROAD AND YOU CANNOT PARK ON IT DUE TO SAFETY ISSUES AND THE NEED FOR FIRE TRUCKS AND UTILITIES TO HAVE UNIMPEDED ACCESS.

I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO BE IDU ON TOP OF OUR GARAGE.

AND THAT'S WHY, WHAT WAS JUST DISCUSSED THESE SO RELEVANT INSTEAD OF CONVERTING MY GARAGE, WHICH IS WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS ALLOWABLE TODAY.

IT WOULD STILL CONFORM TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS A 20 FOOT GARAGE HIVE ROOF.

UM, WHY DO I WANT TO ADD ON TOP? WE WANT TO KEEP OUR CAUSE IN THE GARAGE.

WHY IS THAT? I HAVE A SON WHO'S ALREADY HAD A CATALYTIC CONVERSE STOLEN OFF HIS CAR, NOT PLEASANT, SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS TO PUT THAT BACK ON.

UH, I WANT TO AVOID THAT HAPPENING TO US.

IT'S RAMPANT TODAY.

I EVEN BELIEVE WEST CAN BE IN A CITY, HAS WOUND ABOUT THE NUMBER OF CADILLAC CONVERTERS BEING, UH, STOLEN IS EVERYWHERE.

UM, FOR THE PRECIOUS METALS THAT RANDOM NO NEIGHBORS CAN SEE OUR GARAGE BECAUSE OF THE TREES AND THE HILLSIDE THAT THE GARAGE BACKS INTO.

I CAN PRETTY MUCH WALK OFF MY HILLSIDE NEAR ENOUGH ONTO THE ROOF OF MY CARRIAGE.

UM, SO IT WOULDN'T BURDEN ANYONE.

I EVEN TOOK THE LIBERTY OF TALKING TO MY NEIGHBOR, UH, AND THEY WOULD APPROVE IT AND SIGN ANYTHING.

IF IT WAS NECESSARY.

THIS ALLOWS ME TO CONTINUE TO PARK OUR CARS IN THE GARAGE, AVOID THEFT AND DAMAGE TO THEM, SAVES ME, WASHING THEM ALL THE TIME AND WASTING WATER AND SUPPORTS KEEPING IN WEST COVINA, BEAUTIFUL CARS VERSUS CARS ALL OVER THE PLACE.

RIGHT? I DON'T THINK IT'S PLEASANT TO SEE CARS ALL OVER THE PLACE.

IT'S MUCH NICER TO HAVE THEM TUCKED AWAY.

SO I TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND GUIDANCE.

HOPE YOU FIND THIS TO BE A REASONABLE REQUEST.

I WASN'T SURE HOW ELSE TO APPROACH THIS AND ALL THE TIMING OF THIS PLANNING SESSION WAS IDEAL.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

HI, MY NAME IS BRENDA WATSON.

I'M AT 31 50 EAST CORTEZ STREET.

I'M SORRY.

COULD YOU PULL THE MIC CLOSER SO I CAN HEAR YOU? I'M SORRY.

THERE WAS A DRIVE ON EASEMENT THAT COMES DOWN TO THE PROPERTY, TO THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, WHERE SHE HAS THE ARROW.

MY NAME IS BRENDA WATSON.

I'M AT 31 50 EAST CORTEZ STREET IN WEST COVINA.

I'VE BEEN THERE 17 YEARS.

AND THE REASON I'M HERE TONIGHT IS BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO REQUEST AN ACCEPTANCE FOR A CHANGE IN THE ZONING CODE.

UM, SHE HAS MY PROPERTY UP ON THE SCREEN.

[00:30:01]

AND THEN THE PROPERTY COMES INTO MY GARAGE.

ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, THERE'S A BIT OPEN SPACE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A 1200 SQUARE FOOT ADU THERE.

UM, BASED ON WHAT I HAVE FOUND OUT FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THE WAY THEY HAVE IT ZONE, THAT IS THE ENTRANCE OF MY PROPERTY.

AND THEY CONSIDER IT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.

WHEN ACTUALLY THE FRONT FACES CORTEZ, WHERE YOU SEE THE LITTLE CUTOUT THAT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FACES CORTEZ STREET.

SO THE GARAGE IS TO THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, WHERE THE OPEN VACANT SPACE IS WHERE I'D LIKED TO PLACE THE ADU.

THE PROPERTY IS VERY TIGHT UP INTO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY.

SO THERE'S NOT A LOT OF SPACE BEHIND THE PROPERTY.

THAT'S A CHANGE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE LIFESTYLE ADU.

THIS EASEMENT ENDS AT MY PROPERTY LINE.

THERE'S A BLOCK WALL THAT SEPARATES THE STREET BEHIND WHERE MY HOUSE SETS AS PROSPERO, I THINK AT ONE POINT YEARS AGO, BEFORE THE HOUSES WERE BUILT BEHIND MY PROPERTY AT THAT WAS ACTUALLY AN EASEMENT THAT WENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO PROSPERITY, BUT IT ENDS AT MY PROPERTY NOW.

SO WHEN YOU COME THROUGH MY GATE, WHICH IS UP AT THE FRONT OF THE EASEMENT, UM, UM, I'M THE ONLY ONE THERE.

SO NO ONE REALLY SEES MY PROPERTY UNLESS THEY'RE COMING TO SEE ME.

THAT'S A LONG DRIVEWAY THAT YOU HAVE THAT GOES ALL THE WAY UP.

IT'S ABOUT THE EASEMENTS, ABOUT 800 TO A THOUSAND FEET TO MY PROPERTY.

IS THAT A HILL THAT GOES ALL THE WAY BACK OR IS THAT, IS IT FLAT? IT'S FLAT PRETTY.

IT'S ACTUALLY KIND OF DEALT.

IT WAS NOT LIKE A SLOW RAIN.

IT'S KIND OF A DELTA THERE, BUT IT'S, I THINK IT'S STILL BECAUSE I GET A LOT OF WATER RUNOFF THERE FROM THE HOUSES BEHIND ME.

THAT ACTUALLY IS BEING ADDRESSED RIGHT NOW BY THE CITY.

SO HOLD ON.

UM, UM, PAULINA, DO YOU HAVE THE MARKER? CAN YOU POINT AND THE, THE POINTER PLEASE? JOANNA, CAN YOU POINT WHERE HER FRONTAGE OR AT LEAST RIGHT NOW SHE HAS A FLAG LOT AND HER HOUSE IS BUILT TUCKED TO THE CORNER, WHICH TO ME, I THOUGHT IT WAS THE BACK, BUT REALLY IT'S NOT.

SO WHERE IS A FRONTAGE OR AT LEAST THE CITY CONSIDERED.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE FRONTAGE DOOR.

THIS IS HER FRONT DOOR, BUT THE RED MARK IS, SO THAT WOULD BE YOU'RE DROP, READ.

THE FRONT DOOR IS RIGHT ACROSS FROM THAT FACING CORTEZ.

JOANNE, IF THAT IS THE FRONT OF HER LOT RIGHT NOW, HOW CAN SHE PASS ZONING CODE IN THE PAST? WHEN SHE BUILT HER HOUSE? WHEN THE, WHEN THE BACK YARD NEEDS TO HAVE 20 SOMETHING FEET.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT IT RIGHT NOW, NO MATTER HOW THE HOUSE IS ORIENTED, I BELIEVE HER FRONT SHOULD BE THE FRONT, WHICH IS NEXT TO THAT GRAY HOUSE.

CAN YOU POINT THAT AREA? THAT AREA RIGHT THERE? NO, NO WAY UP WHERE THERE'S A LITTLE KINK LEFT CORNER.

THAT'S ANOTHER PROPERTY.

THE DOTTED LINE, BASICALLY THE, THE, HER PROPERTY, UM, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS LEGAL NONCONFORMING.

THE EXHIBIT, HER EXISTING LOT IS THE DAUGHTER RED LINE.

A DOTTED RED LINE.

OTHERWISE IT'S FIVE FEET.

SO THE FRONT OF HER HOUSE IS WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS THAT CORRECT? TH THE FRONT OF HER, THE FRONTAGE, THE FRONT SETBACK IS TAKEN FROM THERE.

I'M HERE.

CAN SHE BUILT A HOUSE LIKE THAT? EVEN IF IT'S IN THE PAST, WE NEED TO HAVE A BACK SETBACK.

AND RIGHT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE FIVE FEET.

IT'S JUST BE THE SALTY.

IT'S MORE THAN THAT.

HOW MANY FEET IS IT YOUR BACK RIGHT NOW? YEAH, 10 FEET ON THE END BETWEEN THE END OF MY HOUSE TO THE LEFT-HAND SIDE AND MY HOUSE IN THE BACK.

IT'S CAN YOU, I'M SORRY.

POINTED TO THE BACKYARD, THE BACK SET BACK THAT AREA RIGHT THERE.

I MEAN FEET.

HOW MANY FEET? SO IT'S 10 FEET NORMALLY WEST COVINA, ESPECIALLY IN THAT AREA.

DON'T WE HAVE AT LEAST 20 SOMETHING FEET ONLY FOR SINK ONLY FOR TWO STORIES.

[00:35:01]

SO WHAT DEFINES A BACKYARD OFFENSE? NOW THERE'S A FENCE BEHIND MY HOUSE.

BUT WHERE YOU WANT TO PUT THE EDU THAT'S THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, RIGHT? THIS IS THE FRONT.

THE FRONT, THE FRONT YARD IS A FRONT SET POUCH.

SO TO CLARIFY, UM, CHAIR, IF I MAY, THIS IS THE SECTION THAT SHE, THAT MS. UM, I'M SORRY, WHAT WATSON WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE AND MAKE AN EXCEPTION FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED ON PRIVATE STREETS.

SO CAN SHE APPLY FOR A VARIANCE, DO THE PLANNING PROCESS, UM, SHE IS ABLE TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE.

SO THAT'S PROBABLY THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO DISCUSS THIS, BUT, BUT, UH, BUT YOU GAVE YOU, THAT'S A GOOD POINT AND YOU POINTED OUT, BUT THAT'S A CODE OF LOVE FOR VARIANTS DURAN.

IF THERE IS A, IF THERE IS A HARDSHIP RELATED TO THE, UM, TO THE SITE AND TYPOGRAPHY, UM, CITING OF THAT HOUSE, BASICALLY THE WAY THE PROPERTY SETS AND THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1960, I PURCHASED IT IN 2005, BUT WITH THE ZONING, THE WAY IT IS, IT'S BASICALLY RENDERED MY PROPERTY USELESS.

I CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT.

AND I PAY A LOT OF TAXES TO LIVE HERE.

WOW.

IT'S THE SIZE OF THE LOT.

I'M SORRY.

SIZES.

HOW BIG, HOW LARGE IS THE LOTS ALMOST ACRE.

THERE WAS A LOT OF SPACE ON THE GARAGE AND, AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO PLACE IT THERE.

AND SPEAKING WITH JOANNE, I CAN PLACE AN ADU RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF MY PROPERTY, IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE, WHICH DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.

I HAVE A UNIQUE SITUATION, UH, AND TO CHANGE THE COLD LIKE THAT, THAT WILL ALLOW ANYONE TO DO TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WHICH MAY NOT HAVE LIKE A SITUATION A, YOUR FACE HEARING NOW.

SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO WORK WITH OUR CITY STAFF, WHICH, UH, I KNOW THEIR HAT WILL BE HAPPY TO HELP YOU AND, AND GO THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS OF IF THAT'S AN OPTION, UH, GOING, GOING FORWARD TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

WELL, I WAS HOPING THAT I WASN'T GOING TO BE FORCED TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED, BECAUSE IT CAN BE VERY EXPENSIVE.

SO JOANNE, ARE WE, UM, HEARING, UM, THIS BECAUSE TO AVOID APPLYING FOR THE VARIANTS, OR IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO TO GO AROUND THAT? OH, NO.

LET ME TRY TO UNDERSTAND YOU FOR A LITTLE BIT.

SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE BASICALLY TRYING TO SAYING THAT EVEN IF YOU REQUEST FOR VARIANCE, WHICH WOULD COME IN FRONT OF US, AND IF THE FIVE OF US DO NOT AGREE ON YOUR PLAN, THEN YOU MAY BE BASICALLY NOT BEING ABLE TO BUILD.

CORRECT.

SO THE VARIANCE DOES PROVIDE A MECHANISM FOR SITUATIONS WHERE THERE'S A HARDSHIP AND A UNIQUE PROPERTY.

THAT THE REASONING BEHIND A VARIANCE AND WHY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ALLOWS FOR VARIANTS FOR SETBACKS AND FOR YARDS IS BECAUSE, AS JOANNE MENTIONED, WHEN YOU HAVE A HARDSHIP, EITHER BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY OR THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY, THEY'VE CREATED A VEHICLE, WHICH YOU CAN ASK FOR AN EXCEPTION.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE RESIDENT CAN ASK FOR IT.

HOWEVER, IT'S STILL UP TO FIVE PLANNING, COMMISSIONERS TO WRITE, BUT THEY'RE STILL APPROVED IT OR NOT ONES THAT HAVE TO BE MADE FOR VARIANCE.

AND AS JOANNE SAID, THEY, IT TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION JUST BASED ON THE SEVERAL FINDINGS, UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES.

WE KIND OF TELL HER YES OR NO, BECAUSE SHE HASN'T APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE FOR US TO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO VOTE ON THE MATTER.

AND I'M HEARING IS THAT SHE CAN GO AHEAD AND GET IT APPROVED, BUT IT'LL COST YOU MORE MONEY TO DO IT.

SHE'S ALREADY SPOKEN WITH JOANNE.

THEY'VE ALREADY GIVEN HER INSTRUCTIONS THAT SHE IS ALLOWED TO DO IT.

SHE WON'T BE CORRECT.

THERE'S TWO PROCESSES.

SO SHE'S TRYING TO INCLUDE IT IN THIS, UM, ORDINANCE UPDATE SO THAT THE LANGUAGE IS IN THERE THAT WOULD THEN ONCE THAT'S ADOPTED, SHE WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO APPLY.

UM, THE OTHER PROCESS IS THE VARIANCE, AND THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE APPLICATION THAT SHE WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR AND COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASK FOR THAT APPROVAL.

AND IT JUST TO TACK ONTO THAT, I THINK COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS SAID IT, WELL, THIS IS A ZONING CODE.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO PUT A CODE, WHICH APPLIES TO THE ENTIRE CITY AT THIS POINT.

UH, AND THE, IN THE COMMISSION CAN CERTAINLY CONSIDER THE, UM, THE PROPOSAL.

THERE IS THE VARIANCE PROCEDURES, SPECIFICALLY A RELIEF VALVE, BECAUSE THERE'S A RECOGNITION BY EVERYONE THAT THE ZONING CODE IS NOT ALWAYS A PERFECT FIT FOR EVERY, FOR 100% OF CIRCUMSTANCES.

[00:40:02]

UM, ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION, HOW YOU WANT TO RESOLVE THIS.

SO EXACTLY.

SO IF WE CHANGED THE COLOR CHANGING FROM THE WHOLE CITY, NOT JUST FOR HER HOUSE JUSTIFICATION FOR, I MEAN, YOU SAID UNIQUE PROPERTY IT'S SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE FOR EVERY PROPERTY.

IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT EVERYONE.

WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT CONSTITUTES A UNIQUE PROPERTY? SO I BELIEVE THE LANGUAGE THAT SHE'S PROPOSING JOANNE, AND YOU CAN GET IT, PUT IT BACK ON SCREEN.

IT WOULD BE AN EXCEPTION, UM, WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON PRIVATE STREET.

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF BOY IN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IS NO CLOSER THAN, UM, UH, A CERTAIN NUMBER OF FEET FROM THE PRIVATE STREET.

SO THERE'S NO, UM, SO THAT WILL COVER THAT BETTER.

THIS ONE.

WELL, THIS WOULD BE, THIS WOULD COME THIS WHAT ADDRESS MS. W MS. WATSON'S REQUEST, BUT I, AGAIN, IT, IT WOULD IMPACT THE ENTIRE CITY, UM, FOR OTHER, UM, OTHER PROPERTIES WITHIN, WITHIN THE ENTIRE CITY.

WELL, IF THERE WAS INCORPORATED SIZE OF THE LOT, YOU KNOW, IT'D HAVE TO BE OVER A CERTAIN SIZE.

I MEAN, SHE DEFINITELY HAS A VERY LARGE LOT THERE.

YOU CAN ADD THAT AS WELL.

THE OTHER REASON AND SPEAKING WITH JOANNE WAS THAT I CAN BUILD 800 SQUARE FEET ANYWHERE ON THE PROPERTY AND NOT COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS FAR AS GETTING APPROVAL.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BUILD 1200 SQUARE FEET BECAUSE I HAVE THE SPACE.

SO INSTEAD OF BUILDING 800 AND THAT SAME SPOT THAT I'M REQUESTING TO BUILD 1200.

SO THAT WAS A OTHER ISSUE THAT I SPOKE TO HER ABOUT.

SO SHE BUILT 800 SQUARE FEET.

SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO GET A VARIANCE.

THAT'S CORRECT.

WELL, THERE IS AN EXCEPTION THAT ANSWERS OUR QUESTION.

SORRY, I SHOULDN'T HAVE ALSO, JOANNE, I'M CURIOUS, CAN YOU PUT THAT, UH, THAT LITTLE SECTION BACK UP? SO BASICALLY THIS LITTLE SECTION WILL COVER ALL THE PEOPLE WHO BASICALLY HAVE FLAG LOT LIKE HERS, IS THAT CORRECT? IT, IT COULDN'T, IT WOULD JUST BE PRIVATE STREETS.

YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE A MIRROR.

WHAT MAYBE A HALF A DOZEN OF THOSE, THAT WOULD BE A UNIQUE SITUATION.

IT'S NOT THAT MANY, IT'S NOT THAT MANY, BUT AT LEAST IT COVERS SOME OF THE AREA THAT WE HAVE PRIVATE STREET AREA.

WHAT HAVE YOU, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING A CODE MEETING ON THURSDAY AND MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BRING UP TO MAKE IT, UM, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S GOING TO AFFECT EVERY, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, BUT THIS IS RELATED TO, THIS IS RELATED TO EDU, RIGHT? NO, I KNOW, BUT IT STILL RELATES, WE'RE CHANGING A CODE ANYWHERE IN THE CODE UPDATE.

SO WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS THAT WE TAKE THIS UP ON THURSDAY, BUT THE COMMITTEE, AND THEN THAT WAY, AND I DO THINK THAT IT'S, UM, YOUR PROPERTY IS DEFINITELY LARGE ENOUGH TO WHERE IT, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD NOT BE NOT APPROVED, BUT WE, AGAIN, WHATEVER WE DECIDE HERE AFFECTS ALL THE RESIDENTS.

SO, AND WE ARE UPDATING THE CODES, YOU KNOW, AS WE SPEAK.

SO WE'LL BE MEETING ON THURSDAY AND WE WILL DEFINITELY BRING THIS UP FOR THE COMMITTEE.

I APPRECIATE IT.

SO CAN WE MOTION TO, YOU HAVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC OR, OKAY.

HE HAD SOME QUESTIONS, SO, SURE.

UM, WELL, I ACTUALLY LIKE, UM, THE WORD IN THERE, I'M ON A PRIVATE STREET.

I PAY FOR THE ROAD TO BE TARMACKED AND EVERYTHING.

AND SO THE KEY WORD, THERE WAS UNIQUE SITUATION.

UH, THE CITY DOESN'T PAY FOR STREET LIGHTING OR ANYTHING FOR ME, I'M ON A PRIVATE ROAD AND NO ONE COMES DOWN THAT ROAD, EXCEPT THERE'S A COUPLE HOUSES ON THERE AND MY HOUSE IS AN EASEMENT FOR THOSE.

AND SO, I MEAN, TO ME, IF, IF IT'S APPROVED FOR ONE, IT SHOULD BE APPROVED FOR ANOTHER, WHETHER I'M BUILDING ON TOP OR NOT OF MY GARISH, NO ONE CAN SEE MY GATWICK AND IT'S MY ROAD IN FRONT OF THE GARAGE.

AND I JUST GIVE THE RIGHTS FOR HOUSES WAY ON DOWN TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO IT SO THAT THIS LADY'S SITUATION PLUS ME, SHE WAS WAY BETTER

[00:45:01]

AT THE MAY.

I DIDN'T KNOW.

HE COULD DO ALL THAT FANCY STUFF.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. PIKE? I KNOW WE DIDN'T ASK ANY QUESTIONS THE FIRST TIME.

DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR, DID YOU GET A CHANCE TO SEE THE PICTURES? YES.

AND OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.

I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION THOUGH.

AND, UM, YOU BASICALLY, I GUESS YOUR QUESTION IS YOUR SITUATION AND HER SITUATION IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHICH SIDE IS THE FRONT, BUT HERS, HER HOUSE IS BUILT WAY TOWARD ONE SIDE WAS SHIFT TOWARD TWO SILO PER LOT.

IT SEEMS LIKE, BUT YOUR SITUATION IS YOU WANT TO GO HIGHER.

SO IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN HER SITUATION.

WELL, SOMEWHAT SIMILAR, RIGHT? THE ROAD IS SIMILAR, BUT IT'S 27 STEPS FROM MY, UM, BROTHER-IN-LAW AND I TO CARRY A 96 YEAR OLD, MOTHER-IN-LAW UP TO OUR HOUSE TO GET READY FOR THANKSGIVING AND CHRISTMAS MUCH BETTER IF I DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT, AND IT'D BE MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE FOR US.

AND AGAIN, NO ONE WOULD SEE IT.

WE'RE NOT GOING HIGHER THAN WHAT THE ROOF IS, LIMITATION FOR A GARAGE TODAY, NOT GOING HIGHER THAN THAT.

UM, AND IT, IT JUST MAKES LIFE A LOT EASIER FOR US.

SO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.

YOU CAN ANY MORE QUESTIONS? WE'RE GOOD.

WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING NOW.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

UM, I, I CERTAINLY SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE, THAT WERE BROUGHT UP TODAY, UM, BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO SPOKE.

BUT MY, UM, MY OVERARCHING QUESTION IS THERE'S A, THERE'S A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES, NOT JUST THOSE ON PRIVATE STREETS THAT HAVE THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.

AND SO MY, MY INITIAL REACTION TO THAT IS OBVIOUSLY IF, UH, SINCE, UH, SINCE THE, THE 80 YEARS THAT WOULD BE, I GUESS, PROSPECTIVELY PUT IN FRONT YARDS, UM, WOULD BE IN MOST SITUATIONS VIEWABLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

MY QUESTION IS, UH, WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY COULD IMPOSE SOME SORT OF, UM, UH, SOME SORT OF DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT REQUIREMENT, UM, SUCH THAT, THAT, UH, THAT SUBCOMMITTEE COULD POTENTIALLY CONSIDER THOSE THINGS.

AND THAT WOULD NOT OFFEND, UH, CURRENT STATE LAW BY, BY CREATING SOME SORT OF BARRIER TO ENTRY.

AND I, I, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE MY, MY BIGGEST CONCERN ABOUT HAVING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

AND PERHAPS THAT THAT'S A QUESTION FOR ANOTHER TIME, BUT I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE THE CONCERN, BECAUSE I WOULD SAY THAT IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT AN ADU IN SOMEONE'S FRONT YARD, OBVIOUSLY, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THE STATE IS FAIRLY CLEAR THAT IT WANTS THE, IT WANTS PEOPLE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THESE THINGS, BUT ULTIMATELY, UM, THERE CERTAINLY WOULD NEED TO BE SOME SORT OF COMMUNITY STANDARD WITH REGARD TO DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT, UM, PROVIDED THAT THE STATE DOESN'T GO IN AND COMPLETELY PREEMPT US.

SO WOULD SOMETHING, UH, W WHAT'S SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF HAVING, UM, HAVING SOME SORT OF, UM, SOME SORT OF FAST TRACKED, UM, FAST TRACKED, UH, CONSIDERATION IN FRONT OF DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE, UM, OFFEND THE CURRENT STATUTORY LANGUAGE THAT IS, THAT IS SET FORTH AT THE STATE LEVEL FOR, FOR 80 YEARS FOR NON-CONFORMING LOTS.

AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY THE, THE, THE OVERARCHING QUESTION HERE, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT, THAT WE CAN DEPRIVE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY OF NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD ON THESE TYPES OF THINGS.

I UNDERSTAND THE EXCEPTION THAT WAS PROPOSED TONIGHT BY A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.

I FEEL LIKE THAT THAT IS PROBABLY AN EXCEPTION TO AN EXCEPTION, TO AN EXCEPTION, UM, AND PERHAPS THAT, THAT MERITS CONSIDERATION ON ITS OWN.

BUT MY OVERARCHING CONCERN IS FOR THE NUMBER OF LOTS.

AND I, I, I CAN SAY CONFIDENTLY, UM, IN, IN THE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO SPOKE TONIGHT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT SHE LIVES IN, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THOSE LOTS, UH, THAT FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY THAT HAVE, UH, THAT HAVE A VIEW FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

SO I, I THINK THAT'S THE OVERARCHING QUESTION.

AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS HAVE AN ANSWER OR MAYBE THAT'S JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT FOR ANOTHER TIME.

I THINK IN THIS, IN THIS SITUATION AND THE CODE

[00:50:01]

THAT YOU PUT UP EARLIER, IT'S BASICALLY SAYING PRIVATE ROAD.

SO THE LOT RIGHT NOW IN HER LAP, OR IN THAT TOOK A COKE.

JOANNE, CAN YOU BRING THAT COAT BACK UP? IT BASED SHE'S BASICALLY LANDLOCK FORESIGHT OR NOT LANDLOCKED BECAUSE SHE HAS A DRIVEWAY, BUT, UM, PHYSICALLY SHE'S FORESIGHT THAT IS NOT EXPOSED TO THE PUBLIC.

ONLY, ONLY THE DRIVEWAY.

THIS CODE IS BASICALLY FOR THAT INSTANCE THAT THEY HAVE A DRIVEWAY ONLY, AND THE LOT IS INSIDE AND THEY'RE NOT FACING THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY, OR WHAT HAVE YOU, THE HOUSE, IT WILL BE, IT WILL BE BLOCKED BY, BY THE HOUSE IN THE FRONT AND THE HOUSE, THE RIGHT TO LEFT THE BACK SEEMS LIKE SHE IS SURROUNDED BY OUR HOUSES AND SHE'S TUCKING IN THERE.

SO IT'S FOR THIS SITUATION.

THE REASON I'M SAYING THIS IS BECAUSE WHEN WE GO TO DESIGN REVIEW IS VERY SUBJECTIVE AND IT'S UP TO TWO PEOPLE.

IF THOSE TWO PEOPLE SAID NO, THEN SHE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO IT.

AND ALSO EVEN IF THE VARIANTS COME IN FRONT OF US, THERE'S FIVE OF US AND YOU NEED THREE TO VOTE.

AND IF WE SAY NO, THEN SHE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO WHAT SHE WANTED TO DO.

VERSUS IF IT'S IN THE CODE, THEN SHE BY RIGHTS HAS THE ABILITIES TO BUILD WHAT SHE WANTED TO, TO BUILD IN A SITUATIONS THAT HER LOT IS TUG INSIDE WITH A LITTLE PRIVATE DRIVEWAY THAT IS ONLY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CAN GET THROUGH AND, AND HER CAN GET THROUGH.

SO IT'S NOT REALLY FACING THE PUBLIC AND IT'S NOT PUTTING IN FRONT OF SOMEONE'S FRONT YARD BECAUSE THIS CODE IS NOT FORCED.

SOME, IT, IT, IT SAID EXCEPT AN INSTANCE WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A PRIVATE STREET.

AND YOU CAN PUT IN THERE THAT YOU CANNOT PUT IT IN THE FRONT YARD THAT YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PUBLIC, WHICH YOU CAN'T, BECAUSE THE DRIVEWAY IS THE FRONT YARD THAT THE PUBLIC CAN SEE.

THAT'S IT, NOTHING ELSE.

IF YOU LOOK THROUGH A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY, MOST OF THE TIME YOU SEE A LITTLE SLIVER OF A HOUSE AND THE REST OF THEM IS DRIVEWAY.

SO I THINK THIS COAT, IT, IT FIT WHAT YOU NEED, BECAUSE IF NOT THE OTHER, YES, SHE HAS VARIANTS THAT SHE CAN REQUEST FOR.

BUT THAT'S NO GUARANTEE FOR HER.

IF HE REJECT ALL THREE OF US SAY, WELL, FIVE OF US SAY, NO, WE DON'T AGREE TO IT.

THEN SHE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO IT AND WHERE SHE'S GOING TO PUT HER HOUSE IN.

SO FOR, WHEN YOU SAY VISIBLE FROM PUBLIC RIGHT-AWAY, IS THAT IF SOMEONE'S STANDING ON THE SIDEWALK, LOOKING INTO THE YARD? YES.

SO IF I WAS STANDING ON CORTEZ, I'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THE ADU UNIT.

NO, YOU WON'T IN HER CASE BECAUSE SHE'S NOT BUILDING BECAUSE SHE HAS A DRIVEWAY AND THEN THE HOUSE WILL BE BUILT BEHIND THE DRIVEWAY.

WELL, YES.

CAUSE HER I'LL, I'LL PULL UP HER, HER PROPERTY ON GOOGLE STREET.

OOPS.

I'LL BE ABLE TO SEE YOU FROM THE, FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY.

YOU WOULD NOT BECAUSE THAT'S CORTEZ, WHERE'S THE SIDEWALK I'LL PULL UP HER GOOGLE'S OKAY.

GOOGLE IT.

I'M 31.

I GUESS HER OPTIONS ARE ONE IS THAT, YEAH, SHE CAN GO SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT IF SUBCOMMITTEE, THE TWO PEOPLE SAY, NO, THEY CAN, SHE CAN ACTUALLY COME TO PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT THE THREE OF US OR FIVE OF US SAY NO, THEN SHE DOESN'T HAVE AN OPTION TO BUILD IN.

IF SHE WAS WALK THAT SECOND ROUTE, SHE CAN ALSO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AS WELL.

BUT IF CITY COUNCIL SAY NO, THEN REALLY SHE HAS STOPPED.

SHE CAN MAKE, LIKE THEY SAID EARLIER, 800 SQUARE FOOT WITHOUT ASKING ANYONE CITY CONSEQUENT TELL US KNOW RIGHT NOW, IF WE MAKE THIS RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CONCERT GIRL OR WRITE IT.

SO THAT, THAT IS TRUE WHEN I'M MAKING A PARTNER IN THE DECISION.

SO CORTEZ IS RIGHT ALONG HERE FOR PROPERTIES HERE.

SO THIS IS THE PRIVATE DRIVE.

SO IT'S ABOUT 600, UM, A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN 700 SQUARE.

UH, I, I SEE WHEN I THINK WHAT NICK WAS SAYING IS THAT THERE'S SO MANY, SO MANY PROPERTIES IN VARIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WILL WANT THE SAME THING.

SO, RIGHT.

I MEAN THE PROPERTY THAT'S THAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF THAT FALLS INTO THE SAME CATEGORY, CONCEIVABLY AS MADAM CHAIR SAID, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CONSIDER IT.

THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE VOTED ON TONIGHT AS PART OF THIS APPROVAL.

JOANNE, I'M SORRY.

UM, NICHOLAS HAD JUST POINTED OUT SOMETHING REGARDING THE PROPERTY IN THE FRONT CAN DO EXACTLY WHAT SHE CAN.

I BELIEVE YOU CANNOT BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE A PRIVATE DRIVER.

IS THAT CORRECT? JOANNE, CAN YOU LOOK INTO THE PROPERTY,

[00:55:01]

THIS PROPERTY? NO.

THE ONE WAY IN THE FRONT CORTEZ, THAT ONE, I MEAN, THEY HAVE A FRONTAGE, SO YOU NEED TO HAVE A DRIVEWAY OF YOUR OWN.

NO, THEY PROBABLY, THEY WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM CORTEZ, WHICH IS A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL CODE AMENDMENT NUMBER 22 DASH ZERO TWO, UM, WHICH STAFF SHOULD STATUTORY EXEMPTION.

SO YOU CANNOT, THEY WOULD NOT BE, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE A PRIVATE ROAD, IT WOULD BE VISIBLE OFF CORTEZ, BUT IT DOES NOT APPLY TO, IT WOULD NOT APPLY TO THIS PARTICULAR, THE PROPERTY IN THE FRONT, BASICALLY THIS COACHING.

AND THEY WOULD, AND, AND ASSUMING THAT THEY DON'T BUILD IN THE BACKYARD, THEY'D BE EFFECTIVELY PROHIBITED MUCH, MUCH IN THE SAME WAY.

SO THIS IS, THIS IS WHY I, I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE, THE, THE OVERARCHING DESIRE, BUT RE REALISTICALLY, UM, YOU KNOW WHAT, I THINK THAT IF, IF WE CAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY CRAFT A POLICY THAT CREATES CERTAIN PRESUMPTIONS.

UM, AND, AND REALISTICALLY ASSUMING THAT THIS DOESN'T, THAT, THAT HAVING SUCH EXCEPTIONS OR, OR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF SOME OF SOME KIND DOES NOT OFFEND THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE THAT'S CURRENTLY IN PLACE AND WHO KNOWS WHETHER IT DOES OR DOESN'T, I, REALISTICALLY, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO END UP BEING A LETTER WRITING CAMPAIGN BETWEEN US AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

IF WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, THAT, THAT HAS THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE, AND PERHAPS IT, IT UNDERMINES SOME POLICY AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT WE DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND AT THIS POINT IN TIME, BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN CONCOCTED YET.

AND SO I DON'T, I, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT TO SAY THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE SHOULD FORECLOSE OURSELVES ON THAT.

CERTAINLY NOT, BUT I DEFINITELY THINK THAT, THAT WE OUGHT TO CONSIDER THE FACT THAT IF, IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE GOING TO IMPLEMENT SUCH A POLICY, WE CERTAINLY OUGHT TO HAVE THE, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO OPINE ON THAT.

AND REALISTICALLY, IF WE CAN HAVE SOME SORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS TO GO THROUGH, AND REALISTICALLY, I'M NOT ALL THAT CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, UH, ABOUT AD HOC COMMITTEE OR ANYTHING, OR EXCUSE ME, DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE, UM, DENYING THESE THINGS.

I MEAN, REALISTICALLY I THINK, UH, THE THREE OF US HAVE BEEN ON THERE.

I CAN COUNT ON PROBABLY ONE FINGER, THE NUMBER OF DENIALS I'VE SEEN, UM, THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

AND, AND I'LL, UH, YOU KNOW, FRANKLY, I THINK, I THINK THE, THE OVERARCHING ISSUE THAT PROBABLY WOULD NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ONLY THE COUNCIL CAN ADDRESS, AND THAT WOULD BE THE, THE FEE SCHEDULE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

SO THAT APPLICANTS ARE NOT HAVING TO PAY AN ARM AND A LEG JUST TO HAVE OUR SUBCOMMITTEE, IF THAT IS HOW SOME SORT OF STATUTORY SCHEME WAS, WAS CONCOCTED, JUST TO HEAR IT.

AND I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT CAUSE THAT IS, UH, THAT CAN BE A DAUNTING TASK IN AND OF ITSELF.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE RISK, WELL, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THIS WON'T GET APPROVED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I MEAN, BUT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, MY, MY OWN, MY OWN ANECDOTES ON, ON A DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE ASIDE, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THERE WOULD, THERE WOULD BE, UM, FROM MEMBERS OF THIS COMMUNITY, SOME SORT OF AVERSION TO THAT.

THAT'S, THAT'S MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWPOINT ON THIS PUBLIC HEARINGS, CLOSED PUBLIC HEARINGS, CLOSED AND CITY STAFF.

IS THERE A, UM, IF SOMEONE NEEDED A VARIANCE AND THEY OCCURRED IN AN AFFORDED, IS ISN'T THERE A PROCESS THEY COULD GO THROUGH TO GET SOMETHING ELSE OR SOME OTHER, UH, I THINK THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A FEE WAIVER.

YEAH, EXACTLY.

OKAY, GREAT.

SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S AN OPTION.

AND, AND SO, UM, ANYONE WHO CANNOT AFFORD IT, THAT THERE, THERE IS A VARIABLE OPTIONS.

THERE ARE CITY STAFF, UM, UH, WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT, UH, IF, IF THAT'S AN ISSUE TOO, UM, SAID WITH, I'M SORRY ABOUT THE HEARING'S CLOSED, UM, YOU KNOW, ARE WE HERE TO, TO APPROVE THIS? OR, YOU KNOW, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE BOTH OF THEM HAVE VERY UNIQUE PROPERTIES, PRIVATE ROADS, YOU KNOW, WE TO TAKE THIS JUST TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, DON'T THINK THAT THERE ARE THAT MANY RESIDENTS WITH THEIR SPECIFIC.

SO, UM, BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION, UM, WITHOUT THOSE CHANGES, UM, THE CHANGES REALLY ARE IN RESPONSE TO THE LETTER FROM HCD.

UM, IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHOOSES TO MAKE ANY CHANGES, WE CAN, THEY WILL THEN BE SUBJECT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND AT THE VERY END OF THE DAY HCD.

SO, UM, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

[01:00:01]

UM, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, UH, IF, IF CITY STAFF COULD MENTION THE IDEA TO THE COMMITTEE ON, UM, ON, UM, THURSDAY.

CORRECT.

SO THAT'S MY MOTION.

I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE, UM, COURT AMENDMENT WITH THE ADDITIONS OF THE ONE ON THE SCREEN WITH THE ADDITIONS FOR THE PRIVATE LANE AND WHICH ITEM, WHICH ONE, WHICH ONE WAS IT DOING? CAN YOU PULL UP THAT SCREEN? I DIDN'T, I DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE IT IN HERE.

I DON'T THINK NO, NO, YOU DON'T HAVE IT IN THERE, BUT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT MS. WATSON'S PROPERTY? YEAH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR, UM, ADDITIONS TO, UM, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ IS MOTION.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 22 DASH 6 1 0 8 WITH AS PROPOSED BY OR RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, WILLIAMS, AYE, COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ, UH, COMMISSIONER HING.

UM, I'LL BE GOING TO VOTE ON MY MOTION SINCE THAT IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE FIRST MOTION.

OH, I GUESS I AM SORRY.

I, I, UH, VICE CHAIR LEWIS AND THEN CHAIR FOR SARAH.

AYE.

MOTION PASSES FIVE.

OH, DO YOU KNOW, CAN WE, UM, PAULINA, CAN I, I GUESS TOWARD THE END OF THE, THE CALENDAR CAN BE SCHEDULED FOR TALKING ABOUT THE GARAGE AND POSSIBLY OF HAVING A DISCUSSIONS ABOUT PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE.

UM, WE ARE GOING TO BE HAVING THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THURSDAY, AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS PART OF THE, UM, MOTION WAS TO BRING, TO HAVE THAT BE DISCUSSED AT THAT TIME.

SO THE CODE BASICALLY, UM, ON THURSDAY, WE CAN HAVE THIS CODE AMENDMENT AGAIN, CHANGE THE, OR TRY TO GET THE CHANGE.

WE WILL NOT BE MAKING A J APPROVING A CHANGE.

IT'LL BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION ON CHANGING THE DEVELOPMENT CODE.

UM, AND SO THAT IS A SUB COMMITTEE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND, UH, TWO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND TWO MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND SO IT'S, UH, LIMITED TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY AN OPEN MEETING.

SURE.

IF I MAY, UM, JUST TO CLARIFY THE, IT W IT'S A SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE, WHICH IF THE SUBCOMMITTEE CHOOSES TO MAKE THIS RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL, UM, IT WOULD BE PART OF THE LARGER, UM, DEVELOPMENT COULD UPDATE, WHICH IS NOT DUE TO BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNTIL, UM, EITHER UNTIL, UM, EITHER EARLY OR LATER ON THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR OR SOMETIME NEXT YEAR, IF THEY DECIDE TO INCORPORATE IT, THEN MAYBE WE CAN MAKE AN EXCEPTION TO APPROVE.

WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE? WELL, UM, THE ORDINANCE OR THE ZONING CHANGE WOULD NOT BE EFFECTIVE UNTIL THAT IS UPDATED OR ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO NOT UNTIL THAT WHOLE, UH, DEVELOPMENT CODE IS BEING IS BROUGHT TO THE COUNCIL AND APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY COUNCIL BE, UM, EFFECTIVE.

SO IF MS. WATSON WANTS IS ON, YOU KNOW, WOULD LIKE TO, SHE COULD APPLY FOR A VARIANCE NOW AND MOVE FORWARD WITH HER REQUEST FOR AN ADU AT THIS TIME.

SO WE WOULD HAVE TO EITHER APPROVE OR SHE WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR THE VARIANCE.

WELL, YOU WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE AND YOU'D HAVE TO WAIT, BUT WE DIDN'T ADD HER SECTIONS.

WE JUST VOTED ON THE COAT AS IS CORRECT.

WE WERE NOT ADDING THAT LITTLE SECTIONS INTO IT.

SO THE ONLY CHOICE SHE HAS RIGHT NOW IS A VARIANCE VARIANCE.

OR SHE CAN WAIT TO SEE IF, AND WHEN THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT CODE IS ADOPTED, WHICH HAS JOANNE MENTIONED PROBABLY A YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF, TWO YEARS AWAY.

SO, I MEAN, SHOULD THIS EVEN BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE US, IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO EVEN MAKE A DECISION, IT WAS A REQUEST OF THE RESIDENT TO BRING IT UP BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, WE WERE DISCUSSING THE SPECIFIC, UH, ORDINANCE.

VARIANCE PROCESS.

AND THEN THERE'S ALSO, IF THERE'S, SOMEONE'S HAVING A FINANCIAL DIFFICULTY IN PAYING THE VARIANCE, THEN THEY CAN WORK WITH STAFF, UH, FREE TO GO IN FRONT OF THE KHAN CITY CONSOLE FOR A FEVER.

[01:05:03]

WE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH YOU TOMORROW.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.

I JUST HAVE A FINAL COMMENT HERE ON THIS.

UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK, I THINK ONE OF THE INHERENT PROBLEMS WITH, UH, WITH THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE PRESENTED WITH IN TERMS OF HAVING TO, HAVING TO, UH, CONSIDER CHANGES FROM THE STATE GOVERNMENT ON HIGH, BASICALLY, UM, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WAY OF PUTTING IT AT THE END OF A BARREL OF A GUN, UM, IF WE DEVIATE FROM THOSE CHANGES, THEN WE ARE SUBJECT TO, UM, WE, WE ARE, WE ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME BARREL COMING AND EFFECTIVELY AIMING IT AT US AGAIN.

AND SO ULTIMATELY, UM, WELL, I THINK THERE'S CERTAINLY A DESIRE TO, TO CONSIDER THE, THE, THE, THE CHANGES, UM, FOR SORT OF NON-CONFORMING PROPERTIES.

I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL AND CONSIDERED IN TERMS OF HOW WE WOULD DO THAT.

AND I WOULD, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, DO I THINK A YEAR AND A HALF IS ABSURD.

YEAH, I AGREE.

I THINK THAT'S PRETTY ABSURD.

SO, I MEAN, I, BUT I DO THINK THAT THIS BODY CAN CERTAINLY TAKE IT UP WELL BEFORE THEN.

NOW I'LL CERTAINLY REQUEST THAT THAT IS DONE.

SO BEFORE THE END OF THIS MEETING, IT DEPENDS ON THE BARRELS, WHAT YOU LENS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING THROUGH AT THE END OF THE GUNBARREL.

WHAT HAVE YOU, HOWEVER, I THINK, UM, IF THE STATE HAD SET CERTAIN CRITERIA AS FOR US TO DO THE ADU, MAYBE WE SHOULD ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATIONS OF WHAT WE CAN DO TO IMPROVE THE OVERALL FOR OUR CITY.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE PARKING ISSUE.

UM, IF WE'RE TAKING ALL THE GARAGES, THAT'S BY STATE LAW, THAT WE HAVE TO ALLOW US TO CONVERT TO ADU IF THEY CHOOSE TO, BUT ALSO AT THE SAME TIME AS PLANNING COMMISSIONER AND AS PLANNING FOR THE LAND USE FOR THE ENTIRE WEST COVINA, WE SHOULD ALSO COME OUT AND SAY, HEY, LOOK, HOW CAN WE IMPROVE IT JUST BY HAVING EVERYONE CONVERTING THE GARAGES? AND NOW YOU NO LONGER CAN PARK IN THE GARAGE, THEN MAYBE WE CAN HAVE TO BE CREATIVE.

AND WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

HOW CAN WE BE CREATIVE IN, INSTEAD OF LIKE, IT DEPENDS ON WHICH LENS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING THROUGH.

YES, WE ARE PRESENTED WITH THIS SITUATIONS, NOT BY CHOICE, BUT ALSO AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT IT, LIKE IN HIS SITUATIONS, IF HE HAD A CARRIAGE GARAGE THAT HE WANTS TO PUT SOMETHING ON TOP OF IT, MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK INTO THAT.

IS IT REASONABLE IS IT, IS IT WORTHWHILE FOR THE COMMUNITIES TO HAVE THESE THINGS OR IS IT NOT, I MEAN, MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE A STUDY SESSION SO THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT.

YEAH, WELL, YEAH, BECAUSE TACTICALLY TODAY, WELL, WE VOTED ON TODAY, HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THERE PER SE.

WE WERE VOTING ON IN REGARDS TO THEIR PROPERTY.

ADU LAW HAS CHANGED AND WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THIS CHANGES FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS NOW.

SO THIS IS PROBABLY THE SEVENTH OR THE 10TH TIME THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE CODE.

BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT YES, THE SAFE PUT, SENT US A, AN ADU, I WOULDN'T SAY A PROBLEM, BUT AN ADU ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO, UH, TALK ABOUT.

AND YES, THE STATE MAY NOT THINK ABOUT ALL THE PARKING ISSUES AND ALL THE OTHER ISSUES, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT IT AND LISTEN TO SOME OF THE RESIDENT OR WHAT THEY WANT AS WELL.

WELL, I DON'T THINK THIS EVEN PERTAINS TO MS. WARD, UM, UM, WATSON, UH, SHE CAN PARK MALL, MALL, PARKING IN HER ARE LOT.

SO WHY IS THAT? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT JOANNE EXPLAINED IS THE WAY THESE ZONING CODE IS SET UP RIGHT NOW FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, ANYONE ASKING FOR TWO STORIES, THEY AUTOMATICALLY HAVE TO APPLY FOR THAT ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT.

THEY DON'T JUST GET APPROVAL FOR IT.

POINT OF ORDER.

I, I JUST, I JUST HAVE TO MENTION, I THINK WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE FAR A FOOT FROM THE DISCUSSION.

UM, AND I, I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT UNLESS WE'RE GOING TO, AGENDIZE SOMETHING WE SHOULD PROBABLY MOVE ON AND OTHERWISE STICK TO THE AGENDA.

OTHERWISE I BELIEVE WE RUN A FOUL OF STATE LAW.

SO THAT WOULD BE MY CONCERN.

WHY BRING THIS POINT OF ORDER,

[01:10:02]

THAT'S OKAY.

OR I THINK JUST STAY AT THE END.

I THINK WE HAVE YOU ON AND CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION.

WE'VE ALREADY VOTED ON THE ITEM.

IF YOU WANT TO STAY AFTER OR EMAIL JOANNE AT FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR CLARIFICATION.

THE BROWN ACT PREVENTS THEM FROM GOING TOO OFF TOPIC LIKE THAT.

SO THAT'S WHY WE STAY AFTERWARDS.

STAFF WOULD BE HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU.

ON TO NON-HEARING ITEMS. WE'LL PRESENT THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE NEXT ITEM.

SO THIS ACTION IS FINALIST APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITHIN 10 DAYS.

AND I'LL MOVE

[3. CONSIDERATION OF THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES 2022/2023 ANNUAL WORK PROGRAM ]

MADAM CHAIR, JOANNE WILL PRESENT THE REPORT.

THE ITEM FOR YOU IS THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES, ANNUAL REPORT INTO THE HEAD.

AND, UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND FIRST GO OVER THE QUAL.

UM, WHAT PROJECT QUALIFIES FOR THE ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES ORDINANCE THE, UM, UP IN THE PROJECTOR OR A LIST OF PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO EITHER, UM, CONSTRUCT OR, UM, BUILD PUBLIC ART OR, UM, AS PART OF THEIR PROJECT OR PAY THE IN LIEU FEE.

THEY IN LIEU FEE IS A FEE THAT IS PAID IN LIEU OF, OF CONSTRUCTING THE PUBLIC ART ON THE PROJECT SITE.

UM, IN THE LOOP, THE LIEU FEE PAID GOES TO A PUBLIC ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES FUND THE IN LIEU FEE CONTRIBUTION CAN BE USED FOR THE PURCHASE OR THE COMMISSION OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC ART, MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING PUBLIC ARTWORK, OUR EDUCATION PROGRAMS OR EVENTS, PLAQUES, OR SIGNAGE, UM, AND SO FORTH.

CURRENTLY THERE IS APPROXIMATELY $297,000 IN THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES FUND AND STAFF IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CITY UTILIZE THE ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES FUND TO ONE MAINTAIN THE EXISTING PUBLIC ART, UM, WHICH THE LA THE LAST PUBLIC ART THAT THE CITY COMMISSIONED WAS THE WEST CAMINO VETERANS MEMORIAL THAT'S LOCATED IN THE CIVIC CENTER COURTYARD.

UM, IT WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 2016 AND WHEN IT WAS, UM, BROUGHT, UM, WHEN IT WAS FIRST CONSTRUCTED, THE, THE, UM, THE CITY'S ART CONSULTANT RECOMMENDED THAT THE, THAT THE MEMO WAS GIVEN A VETERANS MEMORIAL UNDERGROWTH MAINTENANCE SERVICES EVERY TWO TO THREE YEARS, WHICH INCLUDES, UM, CLEANING AND POLISHING AND WAXING OF THE, THE STEEL THAT THE MEMORIAL IS MADE UP OF IN THIS HAS NOT BEEN DONE THE LAST TIME.

THE VETERANS THOUGH WHAT'S COMING TO VETERANS MEMORIAL WAS SERVICED.

IT WAS A YEAR AFTER IT WAS, UM, IT WAS CONSTRUCTED.

THEIR STAFF HAD FOUND SOME RUSTING THAT HA THAT WAS, THAT W THAT WAS FIXED IN 2017.

BUT SINCE THEN WE HAVE NOT DONE ANY SERVICE MAINTENANCE TO THE VET WHAT'S COULD WE KNOW VETERANS MEMORIAL? UM, ANOTHER ASPECT OF THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS TO COMMISSION FUTURE.

UM, OUR WORK IN THE CITY AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THIS PLANNING COMMISSION IDENTIFY A LOCATION OF THE FEATURE ARTWORK.

UM, ONE OF THE LOCATIONS THAT CAME UP WAS THE ORANGEWOOD PARK SKATE PARK, UM, TO, TO COMMISSION A MURAL AT THE SKATE PARKS SINCE THE SKATE PARK HAS BEEN RECENTLY, UM, BEEN HAVING, I BELIEVE GRAFFITI PROBLEMS. SO, UM, HISTORICALLY MURALS HAVE, HAVE, UM, I GUESS PREVENTED, UM, CERTAIN, UM, UNDESIRABLE GRAFFITI FROM, FROM BEING DONE.

AND WITH THIS ALSO AT THE CREATION OF AN ART IN PUBLIC PLACES, SUBCOMMITTEE, WHICH WOULD THEN MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL ON THE,

[01:15:01]

THE ARTWORK, THE ART WORK IN ITSELF, UM, THE SUBCOMMITTEE WOULD BE MADE UP OF ONE MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ONE MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL, ONE MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY AND SENIOR SERVICES COMMISSION, AND ALSO ONE STAFF MEMBER, UM, WITH THIS, UM, STAFF CONCLUDES THIS PRESENTATION.

IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS, UM, STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER, THANK YOU FOR THE STUFF.

OR DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I, I DON'T SEE IT.

THE IN LIEU FEE OF HOW MUCH IS IT, THE FEES? IT, UM, THE IN LIEU FEE THAT'S BEEN COLLECTED IS, IS THE TOTAL IN THE ARTS AND PUBLIC PLACES FUND IS $297,000.

SO WHAT'S BEEN COLLECTED ALREADY, BUT IT'S HOW MUCH IS THE FEE IF THE DEVELOPER WERE TO, SO THE FEE IS BASED ON THE VALUATION AND THE PROJECT.

AND IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF PROJECT.

SO THERE YOU GO.

UM, FOR, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT UP THERE, BUT THE IN LOOFY IS POINT 0.5%.

IF IT IS A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AND 1%, IF IT IS A NON-RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, AND IT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF THE VALUE, THE TOTAL VALUATION OF THE PROJECT.

WELL, AT 5% FOR RESIDENTIAL AND 1% FOR COMMERCIAL THAT'S CORRECT.

PLAYING FIVE HALF A PERCENT.

HALF A PERCENT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'M SURE.

A GOOD CHAIRS THAT HE OR THE RESTROOM AND YOU STEPPED OUT.

SO ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC LIKE TO SPEAK, UM, ON THIS DISCUSSION, UH, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION REGARDING THIS MATTER COMMISSIONER LYNN SMITH, THIS PLANNER? NO.

SO, UM, LET'S SEE EMOTION IN ORDER TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE ART AND PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM FOR 2020 TO BE ADOPTED.

I GUESS I HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE WE ADOPT THE RESOLUTION IS, UH, WHAT WAS THE OLD PERCENTAGE THAT WAS COLLECTED IS NOT CHANGING? UM, THIS, THE TWO, THE TWO, 200 SOMETHING THOUSAND DOLLARS IS THE F, UH, IS, IS A MONEY.

THE FUND THAT HAS BEEN COLLECTED, UM, FROM MANY DIFFERENT PROJECTS.

SO SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THIS, THE CITY CREATING THIS PUBLIC, UH, ART IN PLACES ORDINANCE, UM, WE FINALLY HAVE COME TO A PLACE WHERE WE'VE COLLECTED THROUGH VARIOUS PROJECTS THAT CHOSE TO NOT PLACE PUBLIC ART ON THEIR PROJECT AND INSTEAD PAY THE IN LOOFY.

UM, SO NOW WE HAVE THAT 297,000 THAT THE CITY HAS COLLECTED A PART OF THAT, UM, DID GO W THERE WAS ADDITIONAL FUNDS IN THERE THAT DID GO TOWARDS PAYING A MAJORITY PORTION OF THE WEST COVINA VETERANS MEMORIAL.

SO THAT WAS COMMISSIONED THROUGH THIS, UM, ARDEN PROGRAM.

SO THERE'S A MOTION ALREADY IN ORDERS AT THIS TIME.

DO WE PULL THE COMMISSION? WAS THERE A MOTION? IS THERE A SECOND OR A SECOND? OKAY.

UM, COMMISSIONER.

OH, SO EMOTION BY CHAIR BISSERA AND THEN A SECOND BY GUTIERREZ, UM, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 22 DASH 6 1 0 9.

COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. I, UH, COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ, COMMISSIONER HANG I, UH, VICE CHAIR LEWIS, AND THEN CHAIR VISCERA.

AYE.

MOTION PASSES.

UH, I, I WOULD ACTUALLY ASK THAT, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A RECONSIDERATION OF THAT BECAUSE, UH, THE RESOLUTION 22 DASH 6 1 0 9, I BELIEVE REFERS TO THE ITEM, THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

[01:20:01]

I APOLOGIZE.

I WOULD MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND, UH, AND, UH, I AM VERY CERTAIN THAT WE CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT ACTUALLY ACCURATE CONGRATULATIONS TO THE ATTORNEY.

UH, THERE'S NO RESOLUTION, NO EMOTION TO APPROVE THE ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT MOTION.

UH, THAT'S MY MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION LOUIS IS A SECOND.

WELL, SO THERE'S BEEN A FIRST, A SECOND A VOLT.

I THINK THE, YOU HAVE TO CLARIFY THE VOTE THAT JUST OCCURRED AND FIX IT TO CLARIFY THAT.

SO TO BE CLEAR, THE FIRST VOTE, UH, JUST WAS, THERE WAS A CLERICAL ERROR.

SO I BELIEVE THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION IS CORRECTING EVERYBODY'S UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S BEING VOTED ON.

SO JUST TO BE THOROUGH A SECOND VOTE MAKES SENSE.

SO, UH, COMMISSIONER LEWIS, COULD YOU REPEL? I AM, I'M ASKING US TO RECONSIDER THE, THE MOTION THAT WE VOTED ON THAT ADOPTED THE, UH, I BELIEVE RESOLUTION NUMBER, UH, WHAT WAS IT? 22 DASH 61 0 9.

AND INSTEAD, UM, WE ARE APPROVING THE ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

I WILL SECOND THAT, UH, SO JUST TO CLARIFY, WE'RE GONNA VOTE VOID OUT THE FIRST, UH, VOTE, CORRECT.

SO WE HAVE A THIRD EMOTION BY VICE CHAIR LEWIS, THE SECOND BAGGY CHAIRS AND COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. I COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ, COMMISSIONER SHARING.

I VICE CHAIR, NICK OR LEWIS, OUR CHAIR BESERA AYE.

MOTION PASSES.

WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR, FALLING IN WHO PRESENTS THE STAFF REPORT.

[4. FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FILING OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN]

UH, I WILL BE PRESENTING THE STAFF REPORT.

UM, SO THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS THE ANNUAL, UH, APPROVAL FROM THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION AGENCY, WHICH IS OUR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.

YOU GUYS HAVE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND YOUR APPROVAL TONIGHT IS FOR CONFORMANCEY, UM, WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN.

AND SO THIS IS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT OR CIP PROJECT LIST.

THAT IS PART OF THE BUDGET THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE APPROVED, UM, AS PART OF THE BUDGET, UH, IN JUNE WHEN IT'S TAKEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL.

UM, SO THE PROJECTS FOR, UM, THE CIP PROJECTS, FIRST FISCAL YEAR 20 TO 23 INCLUDE, UH, BUILDING AND FACILITIES, UH, CITY HALL, PARKING, LOT RESURFACING CITY HALL ENTRY SIGNS, A POLICE BUILDING REPAIRS, UH, FIRE STATION WHEN REPLACEMENT CITY YARD RENOVATIONS IMPROVEMENTS TO OUR SPORTS PLEX, UH, IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CITY YARD ROOF.

UM, GENERAL CIP PROJECTS INCLUDE CITY SIGNAGE.

THOSE ARE THE ENTRY AND WAVE FINDING SIGNAGES THAT WELCOME, UH, VISITORS AND RESIDENTS TO THE, TO THE CITY DIGITAL AERIAL DATA ACQUISITION, UH, REPAIRS TO THE BKK DETENTION BASIN.

AND IT ALSO INCLUDES A VARIETY OF CIP PROJECTS FOR OUR LOCAL PARKS, UM, INCLUDING, UH, RESTROOM IMPROVEMENTS, UH, DRINKING FOUNTAIN, PICNIC AREA IMPROVEMENTS.

UM, IT ALSO LISTS THE SKATE PARK MURAL THAT YOU GUYS, UH, INCLUDED AS PART OF THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES RIGHT NOW, UM, SECURITY CAMERAS AND LIGHTING RESURFACING OF SOME OF OUR, UH, TENNIS AND BASKETBALL COURTS, UM, AND ALSO INCLUDES SEWER STREET AND TRAFFIC, UH, IMPROVEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THEN THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

I GUESS I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE SPREADSHEETS AND IT LOOKS LIKE, UM, PAULINA, I GUESS, UM, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, ALL THAT IMPROVEMENTS, TOTALING $94 MILLION AND FULL FISCAL YEAR 2023, WE'RE LOOKING AT 17 MILLION, ALMOST 18 MILLION, AND THEN 24 IS ALMOST 18 MILLION.

OH YES.

SO WITH ALL THAT IMPROVEMENTS, AND THEN 25 IS FIVE MILLIONS AND 26 IS 5 MILLION AND THEN 27 IS 2 MILLION, CORRECT.

ARE THESE FUNDED ALREADY THROUGH ALL THE TAXES? THERE'S A VARIETY OF FUNDING SOURCES FOR THE CIP PROJECTS.

PART OF THAT IS THE AMERICAN RECOVERY FUNDS THAT WE RECEIVED AT ONE TIME.

AND THIS IS, UH, I THINK WE GOT OUR SECOND PAYMENT

[01:25:01]

THIS YEAR.

UM, AND THAT'S W YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE RECEIVING THAT ON AN ONGOING BASIS MOVING FORWARD.

IT ALSO INCLUDES, UM, FUNDS FROM OUR CITYWIDE LIGHTENING AND, UH, MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS THAT GO TOWARDS PAYING FOR THE SEWER IMPROVEMENT, UH, STRAIGHTENED GAS TAX MONEY.

SO IT'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT, UH, FUNDING SOURCES, INCLUDING GENERAL FUND MONIES, BUT TOTAL WITHIN THE FIVE YEARS, WE'RE PLANNING TO SPEND ABOUT A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR WHILE THE PROJECT THAT YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN ANY PRIOR YEARS, OH, FOR THE SIX YEARS ENDING, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY, UH, ANY QUESTIONS.

I THINK THE ONLY CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE, UM, THERE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I GUESS I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND, AND I, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM CLEAR ON THIS.

IS, ARE THE TRAFFIC RELATED, UM, FUNDING, ALLOCATIONS, UM, NOT AVAILABLE FOR OTHER PURPOSES? ARE THEY ONLY, SO LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, I, I SEE THERE'S A PROPOSAL FOR A TRAFFIC SIGNAL ON CAMERON IN CITRUS.

AND I, YOU KNOW, MY, MY ONLY THING IS I NOTICED THAT IN THE LAST FISCAL YEAR, OUR CITY YARD DOES NOT HAVE FUNDING FOR ITS BACKUP GENERATOR.

AND WE'RE NOT FULLY FUNDING THE FIRE STATION ONE REPLACEMENT, FRANKLY.

I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT THAT TRAFFIC LIGHT IS THAT IMPORTANT.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING, IS THERE A WAY TO CHANGE THAT? IT DEPENDS ON THE FUNDING SOURCE.

SOME FUNDING SOURCES ARE RESTRICTED AND HAVE TO GO TO SPECIFIC USES FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT I'M LOOKING FOR, WHICH APPEARS TO BE FULLY FUNDED.

AND THAT'S THE CAMERON INNER SUMMARY.

WELL, THAT'S UNDER STREETS.

I MAY NOT TRAFFIC UNDER, YEAH.

JUST FOR LIGHTS OR CAMERAS ON CITRUS IN CAMERON.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT, BUT IT IS A DANGEROUS INTERSECTION WHEN THE KIDS ARE OUT AFTER HIGH SCHOOL.

I MEAN, AFTER HIGH SCHOOL, WHEN THEY'RE OUT OF CLASS, IT'S A VERY HIGH TRAFFIC CONGESTION RIGHT THERE.

THEY ALL, SELF-HEAL STUDENTS, IT'S WESTBOUND FOR FISCAL YEAR, UH, 20, 23.

THAT'S.

THAT'S WHAT IT INDICATES.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CAMERA BRANCA.

TRAFFIC SINGLE.

NO, NOT CAMERON.

RANKA I'M TALKING ABOUT CAMERON.

SO IT'S, UH, 2, 3 0 1 0.

WELL, THE GOOD NEWS IS FIRE STATION ONE AND CITY YARD.

ISN'T THAT CUR CURRENTLY BEING, UH, IT'S WORKING ITS BIDDING PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

WE ARE GOING THROUGH THE SURPLUS LAND.

DR.

ZACHARY.

SO THAT'S THE GOOD NEWS.

SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO SAVE SOME MONEY IN THERE, BUT THESE ARE STREET MONEY IT'S FROM TAX THAT THE STREET MONEY, RIGHT FROM THE TAX FUNDING ROAD, MAINTENANCE.

SORRY, I'M LOOKING FOR THE FUNDING.

YOU DON'T ALSO EXTEND THAT LISTED ON THIS SHEET HERE.

I REMEMBER SEEING THIS FIVE, SIX YEARS AGO AND IT HASN'T BEEN BUILT YET, SO I, I DON'T KNOW.

IT JUST GETS CARRIES ON, BUT IT SAYS IT'S FUNDED.

I SAW THIS FIVE YEARS AGO TO, OH, IT WASN'T, IT WASN'T FUNDED IN PRIOR YEARS.

IT IS ACTIVELY FUNNY.

SO IT WAS AT THE WORK OF WHAT AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, IT'S A LONG TIME AND WORK.

SO I DON'T KNOW.

SO IT IS, THAT IS FUNDED AND IT IS RESTRICTED FUNDS.

SO IT'S NOT, WE CAN'T REALLOCATE THAT FOR OTHER THAN TRANSIT USES.

THAT'S TOO BAD.

THAT'S PROBABLY A GRAM, RIGHT.

ALMOST NEW PROVE AS IT IS, I GUESS.

AND I'LL SECOND.

UH, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. I COMMISSIONED GUTIERREZ COMMISSIONER HANG.

SO THE MOTION, UH, BY COMMISSIONER VICE CHAIR LEWIS AND A SECOND BUGGY, UH, COMMISSIONER GUITARS TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 22 DASH 61 0 9.

[01:30:01]

I HAVE VICE CHAIR LEWIS AND THEN CHAIR WAS SARAH AYE.

MOTION PASSES FIVE OH, COMMISSION REPORTS, COMMENTS, MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TONIGHT,

[ELECTION OF OFFICERS]

THE DANIEL REORGANIZATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION EMOTION IS AN ORDER, UH, TO NOT, UH, TO NOMINATE VICE CHAIRPERSON, NICHOLAS LEWIS, AS CHAIRPERSON OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WE HAVE.

W I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? GET THE FIRST.

SO I, UH, I THINK, UH, I'LL I'LL FIRST AND THEN WE'LL DO THE CHAIRS US VICE-CHAIR SEPARATELY.

WE CAN DO THAT OR COMBINE.

AND I'LL, I'LL NOMINATE MYSELF AS VICE CHAIR.

I'LL SECOND.

SO IS THAT ONE COMBINED MOTION? YES.

IT'S AN MAN.

I THINK IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO, YEAH.

TO, UH, YOUR CHAIRWOMAN VOCERA'S MOTION, RIGHT? OH, I WAS GOING TO SAY, IS THERE A MOTION FOR VICE-CHAIR, BUT THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE INITIATIVE.

DO YOU WANT MAKING A MOTION TO YES.

AND I AGREED WITH THAT AMENDMENT.

UH, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. OKAY.

I HAVE A MOTION BY CAMPUS, SARAH SECONDED BY BRAND-NEW TERRORISTS TO NOMINATE, UM, COMMISSIONER LEWIS TO CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ TO VICE CHAIR.

WE'RE DOING THE MOTION TOGETHER.

WRITE SO, UM, SO FOR, FOR SOME CONTINUITY, I WAS, UH, I WAS GOING TO, UH, NOMINATE, UH, UM, CURRENT VICE CHAIR, UH, BRIAN GUTIERREZ, UM, AND, UH, SHELBY WILLIAMS, UH, IF SHE'LL ACCEPT FOR, UH, FOR THE, UH, DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE, SHE ACCEPTS.

AYE.

COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ, COMMISSIONER HANG I, UH, VICE CHAIR, LEWIS AND CHAIR.

BISSERA AYE.

MOTION PASSES.

SO I THINK NOW WE SWITCH CHAIRS OR WE DON'T HAVE TO SWITCH CHAIRS.

IT'S ACTUALLY SWITCHED CHAIRS, BUT THAT'S FINE.

BUT YOU TAKE OVER, ALL RIGHT.

YOU HAVE YOUR YOU'RE THE NEELEY ELECT, SO YOU HAVE TO

[APPOINTMENT OF NEW SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS]

SO IS THERE, UM, DOES THERE NEED TO BE A MOTION ON THAT? IT, MY SCRIPT, DOESN'T SAY IF I MAY, I'M ALSO AN ALTAR ALTERNATE.

UH, ANY SHEENA OR, SORRY, COMMISSIONER HANG OR NOW COMMISSIONER VISCERA.

THE OTHER ONE THAT YOU WANT TO SERVE AS THE ALTER ALTERNATE.

SURE.

SO I'LL, I'LL NOMINATE, UH, COMMISSIONER VISCERA AS THE ALTERNATE.

I DON'T BELIEVE A MOTION IS NECESSARY WITH THAT APPOINTMENT.

WITH THEIR ACCEPTANCE, WOULD YOU SAY? OKAY, SO I'LL, I'LL, I'LL MOVE FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF, UH, COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ AND COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS AS THE PRIMARY MEMBERS OF THE DESIGN REVIEW SUB COMMITTEE WITH COMMISSIONER BESERA AS THE, UM, IT AS THE ALTERNATE.

SO I'M SORRY.

I WASN'T CLEAR.

I DON'T THINK EMOTION IS REQUIRED, SO, OKAY.

I, I MISUNDERSTOOD YOU.

ANY, UH, ITEMS TO REPORT TO THE COMMISSION? YES.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, PAULINA ANY, UH,

[5. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT]

UM, THANK YOU.

AND CONGRATULATIONS.

THE NEXT DEVELOPMENTS OF COMMITTING AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER IS THIS THURSDAY.

UM, AND SO WE WILL BE MEETING WITH THE, UH, FOUR MEMBERS OF THAT SUBCOMMITTEE.

UM, ALSO WANTED TO PROVIDE A UPDATE ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT AS WE, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSED TODAY, THE LETTER WE RECEIVED FROM HCD REGARDING THEIR ADU ORDINANCE, UM, WE RECEIVED A LETTER LIKE THAT ON OUR HOUSING ELEMENT.

AND I THINK WE BROUGHT THAT BEFORE YOU GUYS, UM, WE ARE WORKING WITH OUR CONSULTANT AND ARE LOOKING TO FINALIZE THOSE, UH, RESPONSES TO THE LETTER AND LOOKING TO HAVE A TOWN OR HOSTING A TOWN HALL MEETING THE WEEK OF THE 23RD OF MAY 23RD TO GO OVER THOSE, UH, RESPONSES.

SO WE WILL BE FINALIZING A DATE AND ADVERTISING IT, AND WE'LL LET YOU KNOW, INFORM THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.

JUST, UH, JUST CURIOUS, UNLESS ANYONE ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW, ANY QUESTIONS? UM, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD WAS PERTAINING TO, I THINK THERE, THERE, THERE WAS AN INDICATION THAT DUE TO THE FACT THAT ONLY, I THINK FIVE CITIES HAD HAD A

[01:35:01]

TIMELY, UPDATED THEIR HOUSING ELEMENT, THAT THERE MAY BE, UM, SOME LEGISLATION THAT HAS PASSED OR MAYBE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE MECHANISM BY WHICH THERE IS AN EXTENSION SO THAT, UM, OUR HOUSING ELEMENT ISN'T SUBJECT TO AN ATTACK.

UM, IS THERE ANY UPDATE ON THAT? NO, OF THE MOMENT, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY REPORT BACK ON THAT.

PAULINA, ANY, UH, ACTIONS, UH, YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ABOUT, UH, YES.

ALL RIGHT.

FAIR ENOUGH.

UM, THANK YOU, PAULINA, UM,

[6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION]

UM, THE, UH, PROJECT, THE GROVE AT MERCER SAID, UM, THE 39 TOWN HOMES THAT WAS APPROVED AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WILL BE, UH, TAKEN TO THE, UH, MAY 17TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR APPROVAL.

AND THAT IT'S ALL FOR TODAY.

ANY QUESTIONS SEEING NONE, UH, SINCE THERE'S NO OTHER BUSINESS TO CONSIDER IT, THIS MEETING THE MEETING IS I THINK THE PUBLIC ALSO WANTS TO HAVE SOME SAY IN IT PUBLIC HEARING AT THE END, CAUSE SHE STAYED TILL THE END.

UH, WE CAN ADJOURN THE MEETING AND ONCE THE MEETING'S ADJOURNED, THEN ACTUALLY I WAS GOING TO SAY IF, IF THERE, IF THERE ISN'T AN, AN OPTION, UH, I, I DID, UH, I DID WANT TO, UH, PROPOSE LOOKING AT A POTENTIAL, UH, ORDINANCE CHANGE FOR PURPOSES OF ADDRESSING SOME OF THE EXCEPTIONS UNDER, UNDER 80 USE.

UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UM, WE NEED TO DIRECT STAFF TO POTENTIALLY BRING BACK.

UM, SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT, UM, THAT WE'RE, WE'RE DOING ON THE FLY.

AND I REALLY THINK THAT THAT'S THE, THE MAIN ISSUE THAT I SEE HERE IS, UM, WE, WE NEED TO DO THIS IN A CONSIDERED MANNER SO THAT WE'RE NOT IN A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE SUBJECT TO POTENTIAL SUIT DOWN THE LINE.

AND THAT WOULD BE MY BIGGEST CONCERN.

SO, UM, IF, IF THERE'S CONSENSUS, MAYBE, HOPEFULLY WE CAN, UH, WE CAN KIND OF MOVE THAT ALONG.

THAT'D BE MY REFERENCE.

I LIKE A MOTIONS TO HAVE A DISCUSSIONS OR, UM, I THINK SO LONG AS WE SCHEDULED ON THE COMMON DIRECTION FROM THE CHAIRS SUFFICIENT.

I, I, THERE THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS OR ANYTHING.

SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S CONSENSUS.

SEEING THERE'S NO OTHER BUSINESS, NO OTHER ITEMS ANYONE WANTS TO BRING UP.

UM, I WILL GO AHEAD AND ADJOURN THE MEETING TONIGHT.