[00:00:05]
OKAY.[Call to Order]
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS CALLED TO ORDER.WE WILL NOW TAKE A MOMENT, UH, FOR SILENT PRAYER OR MEDIATION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THIS MEETING, UH, IN, IN CONDEMNING THE WAR OVER IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND SENDING MY PRAYERS TO THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL.
AND THEN WE WERE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY PLANNING MANAGER JOANNE BURNS.
OKAY, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND START WITH THE FLAGS LOOP.
PUT YOUR RIGHT HAND OVER YOUR HEART.
READY TO BEGIN? I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES.
UNITED OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC.
ONE NATION, NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY.
UH, PAULINA, CAN YOU CALL ROW CALL PLEASE? YES.
UM, WILL THE VICE CHAIR WILLIAMS PRESENT AND CHAIR GUTIERREZ HERE.
AND THEN, UH, TO NOTE THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER ER JUST WALKED IN.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE APPROVAL MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING TONIGHT.WE HAVE MINUTES AND THE REGULAR MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 26TH, 2023 OF THE REGULAR MEETING.
DOES ANYONE HAVE A AMENDMENTS OR CORRECTIONS TO THESE MINUTES? SEE, NONE.
THESE MINUTES ARE APPROVED AS AMENDED.
WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ORAL COMMUNICATIONS.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TODAY? SO, OKAY.
[CONSENT CALENDAR]
MOVE ON TO, WE'LL CLOSE THAT AND MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR TONIGHT.WE HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
DO I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 DASH 6 1 3 2 OF THE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION? SURE.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST PULL IT FOR A QUICK COMMENT PRIOR TO, UH, TO TAKING A VOTE.
UM, SO WHAT I MOVE THAT TO, UH, WHEN I TO, UH, WHATEVER IT'S CALLED.
SO IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IF YOU'RE, YOU'RE PULLING THE ITEM FOR CONSENT CALENDAR AND THEN TO GO AHEAD AND ALLOW COMMENT AT THIS TIME.
UM, NO, THIS WOULD BE FOR FOR COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
UM, WE'LL NOW OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND WE'LL START OFF WITH COMMISSIONER LEWIS.
UM, YOU KNOW, I, I WANTED TO PULL THIS SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE I, UH, I DISSENTED ON THIS VOTE LAST, UH, AT LAST MEETING.
AND I, I, I, I THINK IT'S A BIT TROUBLING THAT WE WOULD TAKE THIS TACK SO EARLY ON IN THIS PROCESS.
UM, I'VE BEEN A COMMISSIONER IN WEST COVINA FOR 14 YEARS.
I HAVE NEVER SEEN A SINGLE INSTANCE WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS NOT GIVEN A BUSINESS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REMEDIATE A VIOLATION OF ITS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
THIS COMMISSION HAS DECIDED THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE THE EXCEPTION TO THAT RULE.
AND THAT PART TROUBLES ME A BIT, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMEONE'S LIVELIHOOD.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SMALL BUSINESS.
UM, ULTIMATELY, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND
[00:05:01]
AND I I CERTAINLY AGREE THAT IF THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE BEING VIOLATED, UM, WERE, UH, PERVASIVE AND ONGOING, AND WERE NOT REMEDIATED, THAT THE REVOCATION OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND THE A'S, UH, IN ACCORDANCE THEREWITH WOULD BE PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE.BUT I THINK IT'S A LITTLE PREMATURE, UH, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THIS COMMISSION.
AND, AND I, I WILL SAY I BELIEVE THAT EVERYONE, UH, EVERYONE ON THIS COMMISSION HAS PROVIDED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, UH, RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES DEFERENCE EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN ON HERE.
AND SO I, I FIND THAT TROUBLING.
AND WITH THAT, I WILL, I WILL MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM, BUT I WILL BE VOTING NO.
UM, VICE CHAIR WILLIAMS, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? I HAVE NO COMMENTS.
UH, AND, AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR THE VOTE, IT'S BEING, THIS IS THE VOTE IS FOR, UH, UH, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
UM, SO IT'S IS NOT A, A REVISITING OF THE ITEM THIS TIME.
THIS IS JUST APPROVING THE MINUTES.
IT IS, IT'S, WELL, IT'S, NO, IT IS, IT'S, IT'S APPROVAL OF, OF WHAT THE COMMISSION DID.
IT'S, IT IS NOT A RE-VOTE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO ALL, ALL THIS VOTE WOULD BE SAYING IS THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED.
UH, COMMISSIONER PASSERO, ANY COMMENTS? NO, BUT ALSO THAT, THAT ITEM IS GONNA GO BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AS WELL, SO THANK YOU.
UM, CAN YOU CLARIFY IT? WILL THIS BE GOING TO CITY COUNCIL? UM, IT, IT WILL ONLY GO TO CITY COUNCIL IF IT WAS APPEALED.
SO THEY, THEY DO HAVE 10 DAYS TO APPEALS.
AFTER, AFTER THIS ACTION IS TAKEN IS 10 DAYS TO APPEAL.
UM, SO IF COMMISSIONER LEWIS IS THINKING ABOUT PULLING IT, UM, CITY ATTORNEY, CAN YOU CLARIFY TO SEE IF THAT, THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT IT'S NOT A V VOTE? YEAH, I, I THINK I'VE CONFUSED THE, THE, THE, I THINK I'VE CONFUSED THE ISSUE.
SO THE, THE CODE REQUIRES THAT THE RESOLUTION RETURN TO THE COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL.
SO I, I, I THINK FOR SIM FOR SIMPLICITY, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO, FOR YOUR VOTES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH, WITH YOUR CONSCIENCE, ESSENTIALLY ON THE, ON THE, TO WHETHER REVOKE OR NOT TO REVOKE AT THIS TIME.
SO, COMMISSIONER LEWIS, COULD YOU, COULD YOU PLEASE, UH, RESTATE YOUR MOTION FOR THE RECORD? I, I, I SAID THAT I WOULD MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS, UH, SET FORTH.
I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THE POINT.
AND, AND TO BE CLEAR, THAT MOTION IS FOR, UM, MOTION TO CONSENT CALENDAR IS ADOPTION MOTION TO ADOPT THE REVOCATION, WHICH I INDICATED I WILL VOTE NO ON.
SO, SO IN THAT YOU JUST WANTED TO OPEN, YOU JUST WANTED TO OPEN DISCUSSION, RIGHT? NOT POOL IT? ABSOLUTELY.
SO YOU JUST WANTED DISCUSSION.
SO A YES VOTE IS ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, REVOKING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NUMBER 15 DASH ZERO FIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT 15 DASH ZERO NINE.
THAT WOULD BE A YES BOAT WOULD BE ADOPTION OF THAT RESOLUTION.
AND SO I'LL, I'LL JUST SAY THAT GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, UH, BASED UPON THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE CITY AND, AND THE WEST VENA POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE AMOUNT OF SHOOTINGS AND VIOLENCE THAT WERE OCCURRING AT THE PROPERTY, UH, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY THE DISCONNECTION OF C C T C C T V CAMERAS, UH, TO SOMEHOW, UH, NOT NOT BE IN COOPERATION WITH OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT, UH, DEPARTMENT AND OTHER PARTNERS IN THE COMMUNITY TO FIGHT CRIME.
THE OWNER UNDER HIS OWN TEST SWORN TESTIMONY, HE ADMITTED TO DISCONNECTING THAT C C T V COVERAGE AFTER, UH, UH, A SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT RAID, WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RESCUE, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
AND WITH THAT SAID, I'LL, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
SO IF PAULINA COULD DO ROLL CALL.
SO, UM, WHAT WAS THE, WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOUR SECOND MOTION? SECOND.
IT'S TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
[00:10:01]
ALL NICK DID WAS OPEN DISCUSSION 'CAUSE HE WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT ON, ON THE RECORD.AND SO THE MOTION STANDS FOR TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
SO APPROVING THE CONSENT CALENDAR IS MOVING FORWARD WITH REVOCATION OF THE, UM, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN THE A U P FOR REBEL YELL.
WHICH IS A VOTE THAT YOU GUYS DID AT THE LAST MEETING.
SO WE'RE GONNA APPROVE IT AGAIN.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING? SO I HAVE A MOTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER LEWIS IS SECOND BY CHAIR GUTIERREZ, UH, COMMISSIONER HANG.
UM, AYE, I, I ALSO WANNA ADD THAT IT'S NOT FINAL IN TERMS OF, IN A SENSE THAT THEY CAN APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL WITHIN 10 DAY.
EVEN THOUGH WE MADE IT A DECISIONS.
AND AS MENTIONED, UH, THIS MOTION YOU SAID AYE? YES.
SO I DON'T HAVE THIS IN MY DOCUMENT, BUT, UH, DO YOU WANNA CITY ATTORNEY, CAN YOU READ THIS, THE LEGAL STATEMENT ABOUT THE APPEAL PROCESS OR WHAT, WHATEVER SAID DISCLAIMER IS, I I CAN GO AHEAD AND READ IT OR JOANNE, GO AHEAD.
UM, PER SECTION 26 DASH 2 97 0.18 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION MAY BE APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY ANY INTERESTED PARTY WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE APPROVAL OF THE WRITTEN DECISION.
THE APPEAL MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE IN WRITING AND MUST BE, MUST INCLUDE SPECIFIC REASONS FOR THE APPEAL.
JUST, UH, REAL QUICK AHEAD FOR THE RECORD, THE APPELLANT MUST PAY THE APPEAL COST CORRECT? TO, TO GET IT IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL? THAT IS CORRECT.
ACCORDING TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE ON REVOCATIONS, THE, THE, THE PARTY THAT IS APPEALING WOULD HAVE TO PAY, WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE APPEAL FEE, UM, AND ALSO A PORTION OF HALF THE ESTIMATED COST YES.
OF PREPARING THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD.
SO PUT GATHERING ALL THE DOCUMENTS TOGETHER.
[3. PRECISE PLAN NO. 20-02]
NOW MOVE ON TO PUBLIC HEARINGS.TONIGHT WE HAVE THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND WE'LL START OFF WITH PERC WITH NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS THE PRECISE PLAN NUMBER 20 DASH ZERO TWO PROJECTS ASSISTANT WITH A COMMUNITY PLAN, GENERAL PLAN OR ZONING.
THE APPLICANT IS MARK GABA, WHICH IS LOCATED AT PARCEL NUMBER 8 4 7 4 DASH ZERO NINE DASH 0 0 9, A PARKING LOT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE WALNUT CREEK PARKWAY BETWEEN SOUTH VINCENT AVENUE AND SOUTH PANDORA AVENUE.
UH, PAULINA, WHO WILL DO THE STAFF REPORT, UM, OUR PLANNING MANAGER, JOE AND BURNS WILL BE PROVIDING THE PRESENTATION.
THIS ITEM IS A CON, UM, GOOD, I'M SORRY.
GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND ALSO MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THIS ITEM IS A CONTINUED ITEM FROM A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM THAT WAS LAST HEARD ON SEPTEMBER 12TH.
AND AT THAT TIME, THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROVIDED THE APPLICANT DIRECTION TO REVISE THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF, OF THE PROJECT, UH, TO ADD MEDITERRANEAN ELEMENTS SO THAT THE DESIGN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COLONIES ARCHITECTURE.
THE COLONY IS LOCATED RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM, FROM THE PROJECT SITE.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO PROVIDED STAFF DIRECTION TO UPDATE THE RESOLUTION TO ADD TO DIRECT THE APPLICANT, OR REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO ADD A C C T V SYSTEM, UM, THAT IS LISTED UNDER CONDITION FIVE.
UM, IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IN THE PLANNING DIVISION, CONDITION FIVE T UH, AND TO, UH, INSTALL LIGHTING ALONG THE FRONT AND TO ENSURE THAT THE LIGHTING IS CONTROLLED BY THE APARTMENT MANAGEMENT AND THAT IS LISTED IN CONDITION FIVE U AND ALSO TO PROHIBIT STORAGE ON THE OUTSIDE PATIO AND OR BALCONY AREAS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF OUTDOOR PATIO
[00:15:01]
FURNITURE.THE APPLICANT HAS REVISED THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF THE PROJECT AND STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE REVISED DESIGN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S, UM, DIRECTION.
UM, JUST JUST A BRIEF, UM, SUMMARY OF WHAT THE PROJECT IS ABOUT.
UH, IT, IT IS TO CONSTRUCT A 51 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING.
IT'S THREE STORIES WITH SUBTERRANEAN PARKING WOULD PROVIDE FOR 84 PARKING SPACES, AND THE LOT SIZE IS 42,672 SQUARE FEET.
THE, THE LANDSCAPING IN THE SITE, IN THE SITE PLAN IN, IN LAW CONFIGURATION HAS NOT CHANGED.
THE ONLY THING THAT HAS CHANGED IS PER THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OR DIRECTION IS THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE.
SO ON THE, ON THE PROJECTOR IS, IS A COMPARISON OF THE NEW DESIGN TO THE PREVIOUS DESIGN.
THE MEDITERRANEAN ELEMENTS ARE, UH, ARE, ARE VISIBLE AND INCLUDE THE WHITE STUCCO WALLS, PORCELAIN TILES, WROUGHT IRON BALCONY RAILINGS, S ROOF TILES ON THE CORNES AND ARCHED ELEMENTS.
THE HEIGHT, SIZE NUMBER OF UNITS AND FLOOR PLAN HAS NOT CHANGED.
THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGED IS THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF THE BUILDING, AND IT IS TO MATCH OR BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COLONY.
HERE IS THE RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED DESIGN.
WITH THIS STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING PRECISE PLAN NUMBER 20 DASH ZERO TWO STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO HAVE ANY.
GREAT, THANK YOU FOR THE STAFF REPORT.
DOES ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UM, JOANNE, I I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION THOUGH.
UM, REGARDING THE TWO, UM, PICTURES THAT YOU PUT UP EARLIER, UM, LAST WEEK, I REMEMBER SEEING THERE'S A LOT OF WALL SPACES IN THE FRONTAGE OF THE STREET, BUT NOW IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S LANDSCAPE IS THAT PARTICULAR LAND, THE LANDSCAPE IN FRONT OF THE WALLS.
CAN YOU TAKE A LOOK AND PULL THOSE TWO PICTURES BACK UP PLEASE? THE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPE AND PROPOSED LANDSCAPING IS STILL THE SAME.
IT THAT HAS NOT CHANGED THE SAME FLOOR PLAN.
UM, AND SITE PLAN IS, IS BEING USED.
UH, THIS IS THE RENDERING, THE RENDERING SHOWS LANDSCAPING SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS SHOWN AT AT THE LAST HEARING.
SO THIS WAS THE LANDSCAPING THAT WAS SHOWN AT THE LAST HEARING IN, UM, WITHIN, WITHIN THE RENDERING ITSELF.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT REFLECT, IT'S NOT REFLECTIVE OF, OF ANY PROPOSED CHANGES OR, I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THIS.
IF THE BUILDING CURRENTLY IS BUILT ON THE PROPERTY LINE, THESE LANDSCAPING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, OR AT LEAST, AT LEAST THESE NEW PICTURES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, WILL IT BE PLANTED BY THIS CITY? BECAUSE THE BUILDING CURRENTLY REGARDING EVEN THE WALLS ARE ON THE PROPERTY LINE? NO.
SO WHEN, WHEN PROJECTS ARE, ARE PROPOSED, UM, IN, IN CONSTRUCTED PART OF THAT, THE REQUIREMENT IS, IS PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENTS THAT INCLUDES LANDSCAPING AND THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, AND ALSO INSTALLATION OF CITY TREES.
SO BASICALLY AFTER THIS IS CITY PARKWAY.
IN TERMS OF THE LANDSCAPE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, AT RIGHT NOW, FRONT, THE FRONTAGE OF THIS PORTION IS IT'S MAIN, IT'S, IT WILL BE CITY MAINTENANCE AFTERWARD.
SO A PORTION OF IT IS GONNA BE IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, UM, IN THE, IN THE, IN THE PARKWAY PORTION.
UM, AND THEN A PORTION, A PORTION OF THAT LANDSCAPING IS,
[00:20:01]
IS ALONG PLANTER AREAS ALONG THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.CAN YOU PULL UP THE SITE PLAN THEN TO SEE WHERE I HAVE IT UP.
SO THE, THERE'S, THERE'S LANDSCAPING PLANTERS ALONG, ALONG THE FRONT.
SO THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE, THIS IN THESE AREAS.
SO THE LITTLE POCKET AREA BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK? YES.
AND THAT PORTION IS BEING MAINTAINED BECAUSE I GUESS MY CONCERN IS THERE'S A LOT OF WALLS IN THAT AREA AND, AND IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, GRAFFITI PRO.
SO IF THERE ARE PLANTERS THERE THAT'S CONSTANTLY THERE, THEN POTENTIALLY WE WON'T, HOPEFULLY WE WON'T SEE GRAFFITI ON THOSE WALLS.
CAN YOU BRING UP THE BUILDINGS BETWEEN THE TWO? UM, AGAIN, PLEASE? THE FIRST ONE, THE FIRST PICTURE.
SO WHAT I'M ASKING IS, RIGHT NOW THE FRONTAGE OF THE STREET, THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE ARE PLANTER WALLS OR THERE'S WALLS.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ABOUT FIVE FEET.
IN THIS AMP ARE, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THIS RIGHT HERE? CORRECT.
THOSE, THOSE BLOCK THOSE WALLS? CORRECT.
AND WHAT, SORRY, WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION? I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THE PLANTER RIGHT THERE.
'CAUSE IF I, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY LAST WEEK, THE PRO, THE BUILDINGS IS PRACTICALLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO BETWEEN THIS PICTURES RIGHT HERE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IT UP ON THE SCREEN, THERE'S A LOT OF WALL WITH NO PLANTS.
BUT IF THE CITY IS PLANTING THOSE PLANTS, I'M HOPING THAT IT WOULD BLOCK THOSE WALLS.
SO THIS WAY WE DON'T HAVE, HOW, HOW DO WE PERMIT GRAFFITI FROM HAPPENING? BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF, SO YEAH, YOUR CONCERN IS NOT LEAVING A LOT OF LINK WALL SPACE FOR GRAFFITI OR TO ENCOURAGE GRAFFITI.
YOU WANT TO SEE WHERE WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S PLANTS THAT, UM, CREATES A BARRIER FOR THAT.
NOW WE'RE OPEN PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE'LL HEAR TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT.
GOOD EVENING, UH, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HAVING ME BACK TODAY.
IT WAS VERY FUN THE FIRST TIME.
HOPEFULLY WE COULD GET IT RIGHT.
UM, WE'VE DONE SO MANY VARIATIONS OF THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COULD KEEP WITHIN THE HEIGHT AND, UM, BASICALLY, UM, MEET THE, UH, CODE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN, WHICH WE HAVE HAD FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
UM, THE ACCOMMODATION FOR THE MEDITERRANEAN LOOK AND THE REDESIGN WAS VOLUNTARY ON OUR BEHALF BECAUSE WE DID MEET EVERY, UM, ITEM THAT WAS REQUIRED IN YOUR SPECIFIC PLAN.
UM, WE DID FOLLOW THE CODE, SO I DID WANT TO MENTION THAT I DO HAVE, SO THAT YOU COULD GET A CLOSEUP.
THEY WERE ON THE VERY BOTTOM, SO MANY COPIES THE PRINTER, UM, GAVE ME, GAVE ME EVERYTHING THAT WE DID.
SO MY APOLOGIES, BECAUSE THEY'RE FRESH, HOT OFF THE PRESS.
UM, OUR ARCHITECT WENT ON VACATION WHEN HE GOT BACK, HE SAW WHAT HIS OTHER ARCHITECT DID.
HE DIDN'T LIKE IT, SO THEN HE REDEFINED IT.
AND TO ANSWER, UH, COMMISSIONER HANGS, UH, QUESTION REGARDING THE LANDSCAPING.
YES, WE WOULD PROVIDE THE LANDSCAPING.
AND AS YOU COULD SEE, WE DID ADD MORE LANDSCAPING TO OUR AREA AS WELL.
THE TREES ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE MATURE.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE GOING TO BE LARGER.
UM, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, THEY'RE, THEY WILL BE A BIGGER GALLON, UM, TREE.
SO THAT WAY YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, A PLUSH, UM, UH, LANDSCAPING.
THE OTHER THING ALSO IS THAT, UM, WE WERE, UH, THERE WAS A SUGGESTION ABOUT MAKING THE WINDOWS LARGER.
[00:25:01]
AND THEN WE WILL HAVE ALL THE SPECIFICS, UH, IN OUR, UM, CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS ONCE, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY WE GET YOUR APPROVAL TO PROCEED.SO WE CAN GIVE YOU THE EXACT, BUT THIS, HERE, YOUR SPECIFIC PLAN REQUIRES US TO HAVE A STOOP TYPE, UM, UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE DID.
BUT WHAT WE DID DO, WHICH I THINK WE ACCOMPLISHED, UM, WAS TO CREATE MORE, UM, YOU KNOW, PUT MORE LANDSCAPING, MAKE IT PLUSHER SO YOU DON'T SEE ALL, IT BREAKS UP SOME OF THE MASSING.
AND WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THE, OF THE PROJECT.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE AND WITH THE CHANGES WE'RE VERY HAPPY TO, YOU KNOW, YOU COMBINE HAVE THIS, YOU, YOU COMBINE ALL THREE.
I THINK IT'S ALTOGETHER IT'S A GOOD COMBINATION.
IT BRINGS IT UP TO THE NEW, UM, THE NEW DAY.
AND THEN ALSO IT COMPLIMENTS THE AREA.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR, YOU COULD DRIVE BY AND SHOW YOUR FAMILY THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD A HAND IN THAT AND WE'RE VERY HAPPY FOR THAT.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? DOES THAT IN THE COMMISSION HAVE QUESTIONS? GO AHEAD.
NO, I JUST, I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT.
THERE WAS ALSO A COMMENT ABOUT, UH, WASHER DRYER IN THE UNITS.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL BE AN AMENITY WITHIN THE UNITS, ALL OF THAT.
NOW, WILL YOU BE OPEN TO INSTALLING A, A FLOCK CAMERA FOR THE LOCATION? WELL, WE HAVE THE C C T V THAT WE AGREED TO.
OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, ALL THOSE SECURITY, UM, ITEMS ARE IN OUR BEST INTEREST AS WELL.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S MAINTAINED PROPERLY.
SO DEFINITELY, I THINK FLOCK IS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY THOUGH.
CAN WE HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
UM, THE PICTURE THAT YOU JUST, OR THE, UH, PLAN THAT YOU HAD JUST YES.
UM, SUBMITTED TO US IN THE ONE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT, IT LOOKS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
SO THIS IS THE ONE THAT WE WILL BE YES.
DESIGNED IN THE BUILDINGS SUBMITTING OKAY.
'CAUSE THEY DO LOOK DIFFERENT.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE? PARDON ME? CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE, SARAH? YES.
UH, WHAT WE'VE DONE IS THAT WE ADDED MORE LANDSCAPING.
THERE WAS ALSO A COMMENT REGARDING THE RAILING.
WE CHANGED, UM, THE, UM, THE PARAPET THAT'S ON THE TOP OF THE BUILDING AND WE, YOU KNOW, UH, PUT THE TILE, UM, THE TERRACOTTA.
UH, SO WE DID CHANGE A LOT OF THE MATERIALS, BUT WE MADE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE KEPT WITHIN THE HEIGHT.
THAT WAS OUR BIGGEST CHALLENGE BECAUSE IF WE WOULD'VE GONE OVER THE HEIGHT, THEN IT WOULD'VE TRIGGERED SOMETHING ELSE.
AND GOD KNOWS WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THIS GETS BUILT.
BUT WE DID INCORPORATE ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE.
AND WHEN DO YOU EXPECT TO BREAK GROUND? AS SOON AS WE CAN.
WE'RE GONNA START, IF WE GET APPROVAL TODAY, WE WILL GO AT RISK AND START OUR CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS.
HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNITY'S SUPPORTIVE OF IT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GET THROUGH THE APPEAL PORTION OF IT, AND THEN WE CAN GET STARTED.
I MEAN, THE ECONOMY'S SO CRAZY THAT IF YOU DON'T DO THAT, THINGS CAN CHANGE.
OKAY, ANY MORE QUESTIONS? OKAY.
TESTIMONY IN FAVOR? ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR HERE? ANY TESTIMONY AGAIN? SO OPPOSED? OKAY.
WE'LL NOW CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION.
I WILL NOW OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
UH, I WILL MOTION TO APPROVE PRECISE PLAN NUMBER 20 DASH OH TWO, UH, SPECIFICALLY RESOLUTION NUMBER TWO THREE DASH 6 1 30, UH, PERTAINING TO THAT PRECISE PLAN, UM, AS, UH, AS AMENDED FOR THIS MEETING.
SO I HAVE A MOTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER LEWIS AND SECONDED BY CHAIR GUTIERREZ.
UM, WELL, BEFORE I, UM, I VOTE ON IT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, BECAUSE THE PACKAGE THAT WE RECEIVED LOOKS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE THAT WE JUST GOT HANDED IN, AND WE ARE APPROVING THE ONE THAT WE'RE, I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED FOR TONIGHT.
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR IMPROVING ALL THE, UM, THE BUILDING.
[00:30:01]
LOOK SO MUCH BETTER.AYE, UH, COMMISSIONER BECERRA.
THIS ACTION IS FINAL UNLESS APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITHIN 10 DAYS.
IT'S A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SHE WANTS YOU TO GO TO ANOTHER MEETING.
[4. PRECISE PLAN NO. 23-06]
WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO, UH, PRECISE PLAN NUMBER 23 DASH SIX CATEGORY EXCEPTION, UH, WITH THE APPLICANT.ENVISION MOTORS LOCATED AT 2 0 5 NORTH CITRUS AVENUE.
AND WE'LL CALL ON THE APPLICANT THE VICE PRESIDENT.
YEAH, I THINK WE'RE
WE'RE GONNA OPEN UP A STAFF REPORT FIRST.
THIS IS PRECISE PLAN 2306 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2 0 5 NORTH CITRUS STREET.
THE PRECISE PLAN BEING REQUESTED IS TO ALLOW FOR THE EXPANSION TO AN EXISTING DEALERSHIP BUILDING OF 13,130 SQUARE FEET.
THE LOT SIZE IS 2.2 ACRES, AND IT'S LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH CIRUS STREET AND EAST GARVEY, EAST GARVEY AVENUE NORTH.
AND IT IS SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES.
THIS IS JUST A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE EXISTING SITE, WHICH WAS, UH, PREVIOUSLY A NISSAN DEALERSHIP THAT WAS, UM, VACATED THE, UM, APPLICANT.
AND, UM, HIS TEAM DID HIRE A S QA CONSULTANT, WHICH IS, UM, ULTRA SYSTEMS, WHICH DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS CONSIDERED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 1 5 3 3 2, WHICH IS CLASS 32 FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.
AS IT MET ALL THE NECESSARY REQUIREMENTS, WHICH ARE LISTED OUT HERE ON THE SCREEN, THIS IS THEIR PROPOSED SITE PLAN.
THE REAR SETBACK WOULD REMAIN AT THE 245 FEET, AS NOTHING IS BEING ADDED AT THE REAR.
THE NORTH SETBACK WOULD ALSO REMAIN AT 61 FEET AND 11 INCHES.
THE SOUTH SETBACK CLOSEST TO THE PROPERTY LINE WOULD REMAIN AT 52 FEET.
AND THE NEW SETBACK WHERE THE ADDITION IS BEING ADDED WOULD HAVE AN 89 FOOT TWO INCH SETBACK.
AND THE FRONT SETBACK, WHICH WOULD BE FROM THE NEW COVERED ENTRANCE, HAS A 122 FOOT AND SIX INCH SETBACK FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE FOR THEIR FLOOR PLAN FOR THE FIRST FLOOR.
THE FIRST FLOOR WILL CONSIST OF A SHOWROOM, A CUSTOMER LOUNGE, A VEHICLE DELIVERY AREA, OFFICES THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE FIRST FLOOR, UH, PARTS STORAGE ROOM, AND A PARTS RETAIL AREA, RESTROOMS AND, UH, SERVICE RECEPTION AND SERVICE ADVISOR'S LOCATION.
AS FOR THE SECOND FLOOR, IT'S GONNA HAVE A PART STORAGE ROOM, A COUPLE MORE OFFICES, RESTROOMS, A BREAK ROOM, AND A TRAINING ROOM.
THE REMAINING SECTIONS ARE OPEN TO THE FIRST FLOOR FOR THEIR FRONT AND REAR ELEVATIONS.
THE ONE ON THE TOP IS THE FRONT ELEVATION.
THE ONE ON THE BOTTOM IS THE REAR ELEVATION.
THE HIGHEST POINT FOR THE BUILDING AS A WHOLE WOULD BE 49 FEET AND SIX INCHES IN HEIGHT.
AND HERE ARE THE SITE ELEVATIONS, AGAIN, WITH THE HIGHEST POINT BEING 49 FEET AND SIX INCHES.
UM, THIS MORNING THE APPLYING DIVISION DID RECEIVE A LETTER IN OPPOSITION FOR THE PROJECT.
THIS LETTER WAS FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, VIA EMAIL.
AND THEN IT WAS ALSO GIVEN, UM, PRIOR TO THIS MEETING, THE LETTER EXPRESSED CONCERNS FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT DUE TO EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT CAUSE FLOODING ON THE SITE.
UM, HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A RESPONSE IN OR FOR THAT LETTER IN OPPOSITION, WHICH IS ALSO FORWARDED, UH, FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REVIEW.
[00:35:01]
THE PROPOSAL MEETS ALL ZONING REQUIREMENTS, PLANNING STAFF IS RECOMMENDING ADOPTING RESOLUTION 23 6 1 3 SORRY, 23 6 1 3 1 APPROVING PRECISE PLAN 2306.I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE APPLICANT AND HIS TEAM HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS.
THANK YOU FOR THE STAFF REPORT.
DOES ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF CHAIR? IF I MAY? UM, AS A MEANS OF CLARIFICATION, UM, ULTRA SYSTEMS IS THE CITY'S, UM, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT.
UH, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
AND THEY REPORT DIRECTLY TO THE CITY.
HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE A C Q A GUIDELINE THAT THAT REQUIRES, UH, THE APPLICANT OR THE ALLOWS THE APPLICANT TO SELECT, UM, THE C Q A CONSULTANT THAT IS GONNA BE USED FROM A LIST OF PRE, FROM A PRE-APPROVED CITY COUNCIL LIST.
UM, AND THE C Q A CONSULTANT IS REQUIRED TO BE PAID DIRECTLY BY THE APPLICANT.
HOWEVER, THE ULTRA SYSTEMS, THE C Q A CONSULTANT REPORTS DIRECTLY TO THE CITY.
ALL OF THEIR WORK HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY AND THE CITY ALONE.
I WILL NOW OPEN PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE'RE NOW HERE TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT, ANDREW BEZA.
THANK YOU, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
UM, AS WAS STATED, THERE WAS AN OPPOSITION FILED AND, UM, WE DID PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE.
UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M MORE THAN WELCOME TO TRY TO ANSWER.
UM, BUT THE, BUT THE GIST OF, OF THEIR, OF WHAT HAPPENED IS WE ACQUIRED THIS ISSUE.
IT WAS AT, AT ONE POINT IN TIME, UM, THE WATER THAT WAS FLOWING, IT, IT DIDN'T FLOOD AT ONE POINT IN TIME.
THERE WERE, THERE WERE HOLES IN THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD FLOW INTO THE OTHER PROPERTY.
FROM OUR UNDERSTANDING, THAT WAS IN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE THEN PROPERTY OWNERS ON BOTH LOTS.
AND WHEN ON THE SOUTHERN LOT, THEY BEGAN CONSTRUCTION, THEY STOPPED UP THE HOLES, THEY BLOCKED THOSE HOLES OFF, WHICH THEN IS WHAT CAUSED FLOODING, BECAUSE NOW THERE WAS NOWHERE FOR THE WATER TO FLOW.
UM, WE UNDERSTAND THAT AS, AS THAT NOW THAT WE, WE HAVE THE PROPERTY, WE HAVE CONTROL OF THE PROPERTY, THAT WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT WE REMEDY THE ISSUE.
WE CAN'T HAVE A BUNCH OF CARS PARKED IN THREE FEET OF WATER.
UM, SO AS A PART OF OUR PLAN, WE HAVE IT, WE, THERE'S A PART IN THERE TO DEAL WITH THE, THE IRRIGATION AND THE FLOODING TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS REMOVAL OF THAT WATER.
AND THEN COLLECTION OF STORM WATER, THAT'S A, A PART OF OUR PLAN.
AND SO WE THINK THAT THE OPPOSITION REALLY KIND OF MISSES THE POINT ON, ON WHERE WE'RE AT.
AND IF WE WERE TO DELAY, UH, MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT, IT'S REALLY JUST GONNA DELAY GETTING A RESOLUTION TO THE, TO THE ISSUE THAT THEY RAISE.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE FOR ME? I ALSO HAVE OUR ARCHITECT HERE WHO COULD PROVIDE PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAILED, UM, MORE TECHNICAL RESPONSE.
I CAN TELL YOU IN GENERAL, I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, SO I CAN'T TELL YOU THE MORE DETAILED STUFF, BUT HE CAN SPEAK TO THAT IF YOU NEED THAT AS WELL.
BECAUSE I MEAN, MY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT.
COMMISSIONER LEWIS, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION REGARDING, UH, THE LETTER DATED OCTOBER 9TH FROM, I BELIEVE REPRESENTATIVE OF DIAMOND CITY SHOPPING CENTER, L L C.
UM, IT SEEMS THEY'RE, THEY'RE INDICATING, AND, AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS JUST A QUESTION FOR, FOR YOU, BUT MAYBE ALSO A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
IT SAYS THAT THE, UH, THE CITY DOES NOT SEEM TO GET ANY COOPERATION IN REPAIRING THE CONDITION EITHER.
AND SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HAS THERE BEEN, HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONTACT WITH, UH, WITH YOUR, UH, WITH YOUR ENTITY PERTAINING TO, UH, THIS ISSUE AND THE CITY THERE? THERE WAS, SO THERE WAS INITIALLY SOME CONTACT FROM THE CITY BACK, I'D WANNA SAY SOMETIME LATE LAST YEAR WHEN, WHEN THE REIGNS FIRST, FIRST STARTED, UM, WE WERE CONTACTED AT THAT TIME, WE WEREN'T IN CONTROL OF THE PROPERTY.
WE WERE IN PROCESS OF TRYING TO, UH, OBTAIN CONTROL OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S A DISPUTE BETWEEN US AND THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE PRIOR TENANTS.
SO BECAUSE WE WEREN'T CONTROLLING IT, THERE WASN'T MUCH WE COULD DO.
WE, WE MADE SURE TO NOTIFY THE LANDLORD AND BY THE TIME ANYTHING WAS GONNA BE RESOLVED, THE RAINS HAD STOPPED AND THE WATER HAD HAD DRIED UP.
SO THERE WASN'T ANYTHING TO BE DONE.
AGAIN, IT BECAME AN ISSUE MORE RECENTLY, AGAIN, WHEN TROPICAL STORM HILLARY CAME THROUGH, UM, WE IMMEDIATELY, UH, I MEAN WE DON'T, WE COULDN'T DO A FULL FLEDGED REMEDIATION.
WE HAD THAT AS PART OF OUR PLAN.
[00:40:01]
SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE WENT AND GOT A PUMP TO PUMP WATER OUT TO, TO THE DRAINAGE OUT ON THE STREET.UM, SO WE DID WHAT WE COULD TO REMEDY IT IN A TEMPORARY FASHION.
WE, WE NEVER MEANT FOR THIS PUMP AND TO HAVE IT THERE WITH HOSES AS A PERMANENT SOLUTION TO THE PLAN, IT'S, THAT WAS A TEMPORARY SOLUTION SO THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE STANDING WATER THERE.
WE UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES WITH STANDING WATER AND WANT TO GET THAT OFF, OFF THE LOT, BUT AS WE MOVE FORWARD, ONCE WE GET INTO, UM, OUR, OUR CONSTRUCTION, WE'RE GONNA DEAL WITH IT IN A MORE PERMANENT WAY WITH ACTUAL, YOU KNOW, DRAINAGE THROUGH THE UNDERGROUND AND, AND PIPING AND EVERYTHING OF THAT.
SO DURING TROPICAL STORM, HILLARY, THIS WAS NOT A, A FLOODING ISSUE? IT IT DID, IT DID FILL UP, BUT IT, ONCE THE RAIN STOPPED THAT WE GOT OUT THERE, WE GOT, WE REMOVED THE WATER RELATIVELY QUICKLY, AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S A SUMP PUMP.
IT'S, IT'S A STRANGE SITUATION FROM MY UNDERSTANDING.
SO THERE'S WHAT LOOKS LIKE A GUTTER THAT GOES DOWN AND WATER GOES IN THERE, BUT THERE'S ACTUALLY NO, YOU KNOW, UNDERGROUND PIPING TO, FOR THAT WATER TO GO ANYWHERE, THERE'S A PUMP IN THERE TO PUMP IT OUT.
AND WHAT IT WOULD DO IS WE'D PUMP IT ALONG THAT, THAT SOUTH WALL MM-HMM.
SO ONCE THAT WAS STOPPED UP, IT BASICALLY JUST PUMPS THE WATER BACK UP AND THEN IT JUST FLOWS RIGHT BACK ONTO THE LOT IT SITS THERE.
UM, SO THAT'S WHY WE, WE OBTAINED THE PUMP.
WE HAVE THE PUMP, WE BOUGHT THE PUMP.
SO IF IT RAINS AGAIN AND THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF RAIN, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO GET THE STANDING WATER OFF AT LEAST UNTIL WE GET OUR, OUR PERMANENT SOLUTION IN PLACE.
ALRIGHT, VICE CHAIR WILLIAMS, ANY COMMENTS? I HAVE NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME.
COMMISSIONER BRACERO, I HAVE NO QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER YANG? UM, I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUESTION THOUGH REGARDING THE SUMP PUMP IN THE MOTOR'S NOT WORKING, WORKING.
UM, AND I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S A DISCREPANCIES OR THE UNDERSTANDING OF WHEN, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE LEVEL AND THE ELEVATIONS OF THAT PARTICULAR LOT BETWEEN THOSE TWO LOTS MM-HMM.
FACING AT THAT AREA AND THEN BEING PUMPED OUT.
NOW, ACCORDING TO WHAT I'M, I DIDN'T GET TO HEAR WHAT HE HAVE TO SAY.
I ONLY CAN READ WHAT HE WROTE.
AND BASICALLY THEY'RE SAYING THAT THE MOTOR WAS NOT WORKING PROPERLY.
AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT YOU JUST ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY AS WELL.
SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS MOVING ON, IS THAT, THAT PORTION, I'M NOT SURE IF, UM, AT THIS STAGE THAT WE CAN WORK IT OUT SO THAT THERE'S NO FLOODING ISSUES THAT'S HAPPENING.
CITIES DO NOT TAKE CARE OF FLOODING.
SO, SO AGAIN, A AS IT STANDS, WHAT WE HAVE UNTIL WE GET THE ABILITY TO DO OUR, OUR COMPLETE PLAN WITH STORM WATER COLLECTION AND, AND THE WATER TO FLOW OUT, UM, WE, WE HAVE A PUMP TO GET THE WATER OFF THERE AND GET IT INTO THE, INTO, ALONG THE STREET AND INTO THE GUTTERS.
UM, AGAIN, IT'S A TEMPORARY SOLUTION SO THAT IF IT DOES RAIN, WE CAN'T STOP IT FROM FLOODING IF THERE'S ENOUGH RAIN, BUT WE CAN GET THE WATER OFF MM-HMM.
UM, AND THAT'S AGAIN OUR TEMPORARY SOLUTION UNTIL WE ARE, WE'RE ABLE TO BREAK GROUND AND GET INTO CONSTRUCTION AND WORK AS A PART OF OUR PLAN.
IF I COULD ADD TO THAT, SORRY.
SO THIS IS THE ENTITLEMENTS FROM PLANNING.
SO IT'S ABOUT THE FACADE IMPROVEMENTS.
ONCE THEY SUBMIT INTO BUILDING FOR THE BUILDING PERMITS, THEY'LL GO THROUGH ENGINEERING AS WELL.
AND THAT'S WHEN THEY'LL ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS.
WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO HEAR TO TESTIMONY FROM THOSE IN FAVOR.
UH, THERE'S TWO MORE FROM THE APPLICANT OR ANY MEMBERS OF THE APPLICANT'S PARTY WANNA SPEAK ON THIS? NO QUESTIONS.
WE'RE NOW, UH, MOVE ON TO ANY OF THOSE.
ANYONE WHO'S OPPOSED TO THE PROJECT, SEE NONE.
WE'RE NOW, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION.
I WILL NOW OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
VICE CHAIR WILLIAMS. UM, AT THIS POINT, UM, IF THE POTENTIAL OPERATOR IS GOING TO PUT IN THE NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS IN ORDER TO HANDLE THE DRAINAGE, UM, I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY MUCH WELCOMED.
COMMISSIONER ERO? UM, I THINK IT'S A WIN-WIN.
WE HAD A VERY NICE DEALERSHIP AND A PROBLEM THAT'S ALREADY EXISTING TO BE REMEDIED.
[00:45:02]
COMMISSIONER YANG, IT'S A GREAT, GIMME ONE SEC.HOWEVER, UM, I DO LIKE TO SEE IF WE, I KNOW THE HYDROLOGY WHEN WE MOVE ON TO THE SECOND DEPARTMENTS, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, THE HYDROLOGY, UM, REPORTS OR WHAT HAVE YOU WILL DICTATE OF HOW TO HANDLE THE WATER ISSUE.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PUT, WE CAN PUT SOMETHING REGARDING THAT, YOU KNOW, TAKE CARE OF THE WATER IN THE FUTURE IS MOVING ONWARD.
I'M SURE THAT, I HOPE THAT IT WOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF THE HYDROLOGY REPORT THAT THEY PROBABLY HAVE TO DO.
IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN KIND OF INCORPORATE THAT IN THERE SOMEHOW? IT COULD BE REDUNDANT, BUT I LIKE TO BE ABLE TO ADD THAT IN.
IS THERE A MOTION OR A SECOND? I GUESS IF THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION.
ALL MOTION TO ADOPT, UH, RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 DASH 6 1 3 3.
UH, ADOPTING OR APPROVING PRECISE PLAN NUMBER 23 DASH OH SIX.
I LIKE TO SECOND THAT WITH THE ADDITIONS OF MAKING SURE THAT THE WATER IS TAKEN CARE OF.
SO, COMMISSIONER, HANG, IF I COULD POINT YOU TO A BUILDING DIVISION CONDITION OF APPROVAL J WHERE IT REQUIRES THAT A GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEERING DIVISION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT.
SO THAT, WOULD THAT SATISFY YOUR CONCERN? YES.
THE MOTION ON THE TABLE? WE HAVE A FIRST FOR APPROVAL? YEAH, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEWIS AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER YANG PAULINA ROCA, CAN YOU CLARIFY THE RESOLUTION AND ROLL CALL? UM, SO THE RESOLUTION IS, UH, RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 DASH 6 1 3 3.
UM, AND THEN IT WAS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEWIS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ.
DID I GET THAT RIGHT? OH, SORRY.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER YANG? YES.
OKAY, SO FOUR ONE MOTION PASSES.
[5. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 23-02]
NOW, UM, MOVE ON TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO TWO, ZONE CHANGE NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO TWO CODE AMENDMENT DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO ONE INITIAL STUDY, NEGATIVE DECORATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LOCATION CITYWIDE.UH, PAULINA, WHO WOULD DO THE STAFF REPORT ON THIS? UM, JOHN MORLIN, OUR CONSULTANT FROM RAINCON WILL BE PRESENTING THE STAFF REPORT FOR YOU THIS EVENING.
WHICH ITEM IS THIS? YEAH, SO THEY'RE SETTING UP.
I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING PROJECT THAT STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING WITH, UM, THE CONSULTANT ON AND WITH OUR SUBCOMMITTEES, WHICH I KNOW SOME OF OUR COMMISSIONERS WERE ON THAT SUBCOMMITTEE.
UH, SO WE'RE EXCITED TO BE PRESENTING THIS FOR YOU GUYS TONIGHT AND MOVING FORWARD WITH COMPLETING THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE.
UH, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UM, CHAIRMAN, UM, I WOULD, MY NAME'S JOHN MORLAND.
I JUST WANTED TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UM, UH, TO THANK YOU AND, UH, UH, THANK THE CITY FOR ALLOWING US TO WORK ON THIS, UH, PROJECT.
UM, IT'S, IT'S COME A LONG WAY.
UM, AND I'M, TONIGHT I'M GONNA HAVE, UH, OUR, UH, PLANNER, UM, SUSAN HERNANDEZ, UH, PROVIDE THE PRESENTATION.
SUSAN, UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
[00:50:01]
I WILL BE PRESENTING, UM, THIS PROJECT, WHICH IS A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 23 6 1 3 4 6 1 3 5 6 1 3 6 AND 6 1 3 7.RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT THE INITIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NUMBER ZERO TWO, ZONE CHANGE NUMBER 2302 AND CODE AMENDMENT NUMBER 2301.
SO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE BEGAN MAY, 2021.
FOLLOWING THAT, THE CONSULTANTS CONDUCTED RESEARCH CREATED A WEBSITE, CONDUCTED SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS, UH, WITH CITY DECISION MAKERS AND HELD OUTREACH MEETINGS WITH THE PUBLIC.
AS MENTIONED, VARIOUS FORMS OF OUTREACH WERE CONDUCTED.
A WEBSITE WAS CREATED TO POST UPDATES OF THE PROGRESS AND INFORMATION OF WHEN AND WHERE MEETINGS WOULD BE HELD, AS WELL AS UPDATES ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS THAT WERE PREPARED.
I'M SORRY, CAN YOU, CAN YOU PUT THE SPEAKER CLOSER TO YOU SO WE CAN HEAR A LITTLE BIT BETTER? THANK YOU.
IN 2022, PUBLIC OUTREACH MEETINGS WERE HELD WITH EACH OF THE FIVE DISTRICTS.
BETWEEN MARCH 13TH AND MARCH 30TH, THESE MEETINGS WERE HELD IN PERSON AND ONE OF THESE MEETINGS, UM, WAS HELD IN PERSON AND LIVE STREAMED SURVEYS WERE CONDUCTED TO GAIN INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING THE ZONING CODE, SUCH AS, UM, FOR PARKING, COMMERCIAL USES, DRIVE-THROUGHS, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PLANNING PROCEDURES.
AN OUTREACH LIST WAS ALSO CREATED, UM, WITH A LIST OF RESIDENTS, BUSINESS OWNERS AND OTHERS THAT WERE INTERESTED IN KEEPING UP TO DATE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE PROCESS.
UM, THEY WERE ALSO SENT EMAIL UPDATES, UM, THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.
SO GENERALLY, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE IS PERTAINING TO CHAPTER 26 OF THE ZONING CODE, AND IT WAS REORGANIZED INTO EIGHT ARTICLES.
UH, WE WILL GO OVER SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF SOME OF THESE ARTICLES LATER IN THIS PRESENTATION.
ARTICLES THAT ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THE HIGHLIGHT SLIDES, UM, GENERALLY STAYED THE SAME.
ADDITIONALLY, THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES INCLUDED THE INTEGRATION OF CHAPTER 20 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS INTO CHAPTER 26.
AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THAT SUBDIVISION ARTICLE WAS ADDED AS ARTICLE EIGHT.
NOW TO GO OVER SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS.
SO, UH, FIRST ARTICLE ONE, ENACTMENT AND APPLICABILITY GENERALLY WAS KEPT THE SAME WITH THE GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS.
UM, SOME OF THE DEFINITIONS WERE UPDATED, UH, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE UPDATES.
UM, NOW TO GO INTO ARTICLE TWO RESIDENTIAL HIGHLIGHTS.
SO THIS ARTICLE WAS UPDATED TO INCLUDE THE REMOVAL OF AREA DISTRICTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES AND ESTABLISH MINIMUM LOT WIDTH, MINIMUM LOT DEPTH AND MINIMUM LOT AREA CRITERIA.
THE REQUIREMENT AND PROCESS FOR LARGE HOMES AND LARGE ADDITIONS WERE REMOVED.
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND ALLOWABLE RESIDENTIAL USES WERE REVISED MAINLY TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESSES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH STATE HOUSING LAWS.
THIS INCLUDED THE REMOVAL OF THE C U P REQUIREMENT FOR MOBILE HOMES TO BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT, BUT STILL REQUIRING A PRECISE PLAN.
WE EXPANDED THE DEFINITION OF GROUP HOME TO ALLOW THOSE WITH SIX OR FEWER OCCUPANTS IN SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY ZONES PER STATE LAW.
UM, AND, UM, THEY WOULD REQUIRE A CCPS FOR LARGER FACILITIES AND HIGHER INTENSITY MULTIFAMILY ZONES.
AND FINALLY, WE ALSO ADDED FARM WORKER AND EMPLOYEE HOUSING, UH, PER STATE LAW.
ARTICLE TWO ALSO CONTAINED, UM, USES AND REGULATIONS FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.
SO, UH, WE RENAMED VARIOUS EXISTING ZONES SUCH AS THE OFFICE, PROFESSIONAL, NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMERCIAL, REGIONAL, COMMERCIAL AND SERVICE, COMMERCIAL ZONES TO OFFICE, PROFESSIONAL MIXED USE, NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, REGIONAL COMMERCIAL MIXED USE AND SERVICE COMMERCIAL MIXED USE.
SO GENERALLY, UM, ADDING MIXED USE TO THESE EXISTING, UM, COMMERCIAL ZONES.
WE ALSO, UH, REZONE MEDIUM COMMERCIAL, THE C TWO ZONE AND HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONES TO N M MU AND SS M U NEW USES, UM, WERE ADDED TO THE LAND USE TABLE SUCH AS CRAFT MANUFACTURING, CRAFT BREWERIES.
UM, IN THE MOST RECENT, UM, ADDITION OF THE, UM, MUNICIPAL CODE UPDATE, UH, WE PROHIBITED DRIVE-THROUGHS,
[00:55:02]
UH, WE'LL GO OVER THIS LATER IN A LATER SLIDE.UH, WE INCORPORATED STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN MIXED USE ZONES, UM, FOR COMMERCIAL MIXED USE AND OFFICE MIXED USE ZONES AS THE MIXED USE OVERLAY WAS REMOVED.
UM, ALSO COMMERCIAL PARKING LANDSCAPES, UH, REQUIREMENTS WERE UPDATED IN THE PREVIOUS CODE.
UM, FOR WEST COVINA OR THE ONE THAT'S CURRENTLY ACTIVE, UM, WE REQUIRE, UH, WEST COVINA REQUIRED ONE TREE PER 10 PARKING SPACES.
THE PROPOSED, UH, REQUIREMENTS, UM, FOR LANDSCAPING, FOR PARKING LOTS WILL REQUIRE ONE TREE FOR EVERY SIX PARKING SPACES OR ONE TREE FOR EVERY 10, UM, PARKING SPACES WITH AN INCREASE IN THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPING, UM, TO A LOT COVERAGE LANDSCAPE COVERAGE OF 12%.
ARTICLE THREE, UM, REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL ZONES WAS UPDATED.
THIS SECTION CONTAINS VARIOUS REGULATIONS SUCH AS PARKING REGULATIONS AND GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
UM, SOME OF THE UPDATES HERE INCLUDE, UM, PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONS, UM, WHICH ARE NOW INCLUDED IN THIS SECTION OF THE CODE.
AND IT INCLUDES GRAPHICS AND TABLES TO BETTER ILLUSTRATE PARKING.
UM, RESTAURANT PARKING WAS SIMPLIFIED TO JUST REQUIRE ONE SPACE FOR EVERY 100 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA.
UH, OUTDOOR DINING DOES NOT REQUIRE, UM, PARKING FOR THE FIRST 500 SQUARE FEET OF OUTDOOR DINING AREA PER BUSINESS.
UM, AND MEDICAL OFFICE PARKING WAS DECREASED TO ONE SPACE FOR EVERY 250 SQUARE FEET.
UM, FORMALLY, UM, IT WAS ONE SPACE FOR EVERY 150 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA.
UM, WE ALSO, UM, INCREASED, UH, THE REQUIREMENT FOR MULTI-FAMILY GUEST PARKING AND NOW REQUIRING ONE SPACE FOR EVERY FOUR UNITS.
SO ARTICLE FOUR SPECIFIC LAND USES WAS UPDATED TO ALLOW FOR AND AD REGULATIONS FOR NEW TYPES OF USES.
UM, SO AS PREVIOUS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, CRAFT MANUFACTURING FACILITIES DISTILLERIES, UM, SO AS TO BETTER ALIGN WITH A, B C REGULATIONS, OUTDOOR DINING REQUIREMENTS WERE ADDED, WHICH INCLUDES LANDSCAPING, SETBACKS, LOCATION REQUIREMENTS, AS WELL AS PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY REQUIREMENTS EV CHARGING AND SOLAR CARPORT REQUIREMENTS WERE ADDED, UM, SUCH AS DESIGN AND LOCATION REQUIREMENTS, HOTEL MOTEL CONVERSION REQUIREMENTS, UM, PARKING AND LANDSCAPING AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS WERE ADDED FOR THAT.
UM, DENSITY BONUS REQUIREMENTS WERE UPDATED TO REFLECT RECENT STATE LAWS AND TO BETTER DEFINE CONCESSIONS AND WAIVERS AND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE.
I JUST ALSO WANTED TO ADD THAT THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, ALSO REFLECTS RECENT CITY COUNCIL ADOPTIONS, UM, SUCH AS FOR SERVICE STATION, ALCOHOL SALES AND SHOPPING CART REGULATIONS.
I, SO FOR JUST QUICKLY GO OVER ARTICLE FIVE, NONCONFORMITIES, UM, THAT ONE GENERALLY STAYED THE SAME.
VERY FEW UPDATES WERE MADE TO THAT.
UM, AND NOW JUMPING INTO ARTICLE SIX FOR PERMIT PROCESSING AND PROCEDURES, UH, THIS ARTICLE WAS SIMPLIFIED.
UM, IT SIMPLIFIED THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS.
UH, THIS WAS PREDOMINANTLY, UM, TO SIMPLIFY ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES.
UH, WE INCREASED THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FROM 300, UH, 300 FOOT RADIUS FROM PROJECT SITE TO 500 FOOT RADIUS AND 1000 UH, FOOT RADIUS FOR WIRELESS FACILITIES.
UM, WE ALSO REPLACED, UH, NEWSPAPER POSTING REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS WITH ONSITE POSTING, UM, AGAIN, GOING OVER QUICKLY.
ARTICLE SEVEN, ZONING CODE ADMINISTRATIVE.
UM, THAT ONE GENERALLY STAYED THE SAME WITH VERY FEW UPDATES.
ARTICLE EIGHT SUBDIVISION CODE INCLUDED AN UPDATE TO INCREASE THE PARK DEDICATION REQUIREMENT FOR SUBDIVISIONS FROM 3.0 ACRES PER 1000 RESIDENTS, UM, OF THE SUBDIVISION TO 3.2 ACRES.
UH, WE REDUCED THE REVIEWING AUTHORITY OF PARCEL MAPS.
UM, SO PREVIOUSLY FROM PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE COMMUNITY DIRECT DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR INSTEAD, UH, REVISIONS INCLUDE, UM, ALSO INCLUDE FLAG LOT REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS THE LIMITATION ON THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL FLAG LOTS AND, UM, THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR FLAG LOTS.
NOW GOING INTO DRIVE-THROUGHS, SO IN THE CURRENT RENDITION OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE DRIVE-THROUGHS ARE NOT PERMITTED.
[01:00:01]
UM, WE DID RECEIVE ONE COMMENT ABOUT THE DRIVE-THROUGHS, UM, BUT THERE ARE, UM, POSSIBLE REGULATIONS, UM, TO ADD IF, UM, YOU WANTED TO ALLOW DRIVE-THROUGHS SUCH AS LOCATION REQUIREMENTS, UM, NOT ALLOWING THEM WITHIN 500 FEET FROM THE I, UH, INTERSTATE 10 FREEWAY, 500 FEET FROM ANOTHER DRIVE THROUGH FACILITY AND 50 FEET FROM RESIDENTIAL.OTHER POSSIBLE REGULATIONS MAY INCLUDE, UM, QUEUING LENGTHS AND DESIGNS LANDSCAPING AND ENSURING THAT DRIVE, UH, THROUGH FACILITIES ARE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY.
NOW, GOING INTO, UM, THE OTHER RESOLUTIONS, UH, SO FOR THE ZONING MAP CHANGE, IT INCLUDES A ZONING MAP CHANGE FROM THESE LOTS WHICH ARE, UH, CURRENTLY PUBLIC BUILDING AND THEY WOULD BE, UM, CHANGE TO OPEN SPACE BASE.
ANOTHER ZONING MAP CHANGE INCLUDES THE ZONE CHANGE OF THESE LOTS FROM PLANNED INDUSTRIAL TO SERVICE COMMERCIAL.
NOW GOING INTO THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS.
SO THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS INCLUDE, INCLUDES AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE MAP FOR THE LAND USE CHANGE OF THESE PARCELS FROM NEIGHBORHOOD LOW TO PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, AND THESE PARCELS FROM CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL TO COMMERCIAL.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SORRY, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? FROM CIVIC TO COMMERCIAL? UH, SO IN THE SECOND IMAGE THERE, THEY WERE ORIGINALLY CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL ZONED OR LAND USE IN THE GENERAL PLAN, AND THEY'RE BEING CHANGED TO COMMERCIAL.
WHERE IS THIS LOCATED? UH, UH, THIS IS ON, LET'S SEE, GARVEY AVENUE.
AND WHAT'S THE CROSS STREET HERE? IT'S WEST GARVEY AVENUE NORTH.
UM, IT'S THE, UH, THE COLLEGE IN THE, UM, WEST PORTION OF THE, UH, WESTERN PORTION OF THE CITY, UM, PACIFIC COLLEGE GARVEY AND WHAT, LEMME GET THAT NORTHWESTERN.
SO AT TO NORTHWESTERN COLLEGE, THOSE PROPERTIES NORTH.
AND IS THERE A REASON WHY WE'RE DOING THIS? THE, THE INTENT OF THIS, THE INTENT OF THIS CHANGE IS THIS WAS THE ONLY, THIS WAS THE ONLY, UM, UH, UH, ZONING DESIGN, THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF, OF THIS TYPE, UM, IN, IN THE CITY.
UM, IT WAS ESSENTIALLY A ZONING THAT WAS CREATED FOR THIS PROPERTY, UM, FOR THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT IN, IN TERMS TO, UM, UH, BE CONSISTENT.
UH, WE RECOMMEND A, UH, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CHANGE, UH, TO COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE, UM, THE ZONES ALONG, UH, WEST GARVEY AVENUE NORTH IN THE AREA.
IT'S, IT'S THE COLLEGE DOES EXIST, BUT FOR THE CIVIC PORTION, WHICH IS THE BLUE PORTION, IS THAT THE BLUE PORTION? CIVIC IS, IT'S FOR CITY USE, BUT WE'RE CONVERTING IT TO COMMERCIAL USE.
SO THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC, IF I'M GETTING THIS RIGHT, JOHN, UM, THAT ZONING IS SPECIFIC TO THOSE PROPERTIES.
WE'RE GENERALIZING IT WITH, UM, OTHER USES WITHIN THE CITY OR THE LAND USE FOR THAT'S USED THROUGHOUT THE OTHER CITIES OR THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE CITY.
SO IT'S CONSISTENT AND THERE'S NOT ONE SPECIFIC TO THESE PROPERTIES.
SO WOULD THE COLLEGE THEN END UP BECOMING NON-CONFORMING OR WOULD IT BE A POSSIBLE USE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONE? MM-HMM.
UM, SO IT WOULD NOT BE A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USE.
IT'D STILL BE ALLOWED IN THAT PROP, IN THAT ZONE, BUT BEFORE IT WAS DEDICATED TO CIVIC INSTITUTIONAL.
DO THEY HAVE A SAY WOULD BE THE TYPE? YEAH, SO I MEAN, I'LL JUST SAY THAT I'LL, I THINK THE, WHEN YOU CHANGE CIVIC OR EVEN A PARK SPACE OR CIVIC, YOU KNOW, IT CREATES A BIG THING FOR THE COMMUNITY.
SO, UM, OH, CAN, AND THERE'S JUST SAY IF SELL, I FORGOT THE COLLEGE NAME THERE, BUT IF THE COLLEGE WANTED TO SELL ITSELF ONE DAY AND THERE'S A BUSINESS THAT WANTS TO MOVE IN, CURRENTLY APPLY FOR A, A, A, A CODE AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING, DEPENDING ON THE USE, THEY WOULDN'T NEED TO 'CAUSE IT'S COMMERCIAL.
SO IT WOULD ACTUALLY EXPAND WHAT'S ALLOWED ON THAT PROPERTY AS FAR AS USES GO.
[01:05:01]
IS PRESERVING OBVIOUSLY AN ENG I MEAN THE EDUCATION OR THE CIVIC DEFINITION FOR THAT.THEY CAN STILL HAVE A SCHOOL THERE THAT WOULD STILL, THAT USE WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED MM-HMM.
HOWEVER, IF THEY, IF THEIR SCHOOL APPLICATION EXPIRED, THEN THEY'RE NO LONGER ALLOWED IT, IT, THIS DOES NOT, UH, TERMINATE THE RIGHT FOR THEM TO USE TO USE THAT PROPERTY FOR SCHOOL OR FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES.
THAT USE IS STILL ALLOWED, UM, IN COMMERCIAL ZONING.
SO WE HAVE, UM, OTHER FOR EX UH, OTHER, UH, INS OR TUTORING, UH, BUSINESSES IN OUR COMMERCIAL CENTER.
SO IT WOULD STILL BE AN ALLOWED USE.
UM, LIKE I SAID, IF ANYTHING IT WOULD EXPAND THE TYPE OF USES ALLOWED ON THAT PROPERTY.
UM, CIVIC IS MOSTLY LIKE THE PROPERTY HERE, IT'S CIVIC BECAUSE IT'S CITY HALL, RIGHT.
UM, SO, AND IT, IT WOULD LIMIT IT IF YOU WANTED TO OPEN UP A CITY HALL THERE.
I GUESS THAT WOULD BE A LIMITING FACTOR, RIGHT, JOHN? THAT'S A BIG THING WHEN IT COMES TO THE COMMUNITY.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM I'M HAVING
I MEAN, DOESN'T NECESSARILY ELIMINATE IT, BUT YOU'RE NOW REDEFINING WHAT THAT ZONE IS, WHICH WAS SPECIFICALLY MEANT FOR CIVIC, CIVIC OR EDUCATE, WHATEVER SPECIFIC OR INSTITUTIONAL EDUCATION IN THIS.
SO, SO WE SINCE, UM, THE EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION, AND IT CAME FROM THE EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION, NOT NECESSARILY THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION, BUT THIS IS, WAS ACTUALLY, UH, PLANNED INDUSTRIAL, UM, AND IS THE ONLY, UM, PROPERTY WITH THE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DESIGNATION IN THE ENTIRE CITY.
UM, IT'S ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL AND ADJACENT TO THE FREEWAY AND PREDOMINANTLY IN THE CITY.
UM, MOST OF THE, UM, THE EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATIONS ARE, UH, SERVICE, UM, COMMERCIAL.
AND WE FELT THAT THAT DESIGNATION WOULD BE A BROADER APPROACH AND ALLOWED FOR ADDITIONAL VARIETY INCLUDING COLLEGES.
UM, WHICH IS WHY HENCE WE, WHY WE, WE PROPOSED IT.
UM, AND THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION, WE FELT THAT WAS, UM, IT WAS MORE APPROPRIATE AS OTHER, UM, PRIVATE, UH, COLLEGES IN, IN THE CITY HAVE A, UH, HAVE, ARE ON A, UM, UH, GENERALLY ON A COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION.
AND THEN WE, DID SHE GET INPUT FROM THE CURRENT INSTITUTION AT STAR REGARDING THE CHANGE? OKAY, WE'VE BEEN ASKING FOR INPUT.
SO WE HAVE HAD, UM, THE DOCUMENT OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO IT'S BEEN AVAILABLE TO THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE TO PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
ARE THESE FINAL, THEY'RE ALREADY A MOTION WE'RE BRINGING THEM, UH, FOR YOU GUYS FOR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT.
WHO, WHO OWNS THE LOT THERE? IS IT OWNED BY THE, BY THAT, THAT COLLEGE OR IS IT OWNED BY A PRIVATE OWNER? A DIFFERENT OWNER FROM THE COLLEGE? I BELIEVE IT'S THE, UH, COLLEGE, UH, THE COLLEGE HAS BEEN THERE FOR, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG, BUT, UH, THEY'VE BEEN THERE.
CITY STAFF CONFIRMED THAT BECAUSE I WANT, I, I MEAN, WE CHANGED SOMETHING TO COMMERCIAL.
NEXT THING YOU KNOW, THE OWNERS EVICTED THEM SO THEY COULD GET A BIG, A BIG COMMERCIAL BUSINESS TO MOVE IN THERE.
SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.
DO WE KNOW IF THAT'S OWNED BY THE COLLEGE PLAN? WHAT IS IT CURRENTLY PLANNED? I BELIEVE THAT IT, IT IS OWNED BY THE COLLEGE BECAUSE IT REMEMBER, UM, A, A FEW MONTHS AGO THERE WAS A CHURCH THE, THAT APPLIED FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO EXPAND THE CHURCH.
AND THEY HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLEGE TO USE THEIR PARKING LOT AND THE RECORDED AGREEMENT THAT THEY HAD AT THAT TIME WAS SIGNED BY THE COLLEGE.
SO THAT SHOWS THAT THE COLLEGE OWNS THAT, THAT LAND.
UM, SO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THIS PROJECT, UM, IT WAS REVIEWED UNDER S Q L GUIDELINES.
AN INITIAL STUDY, NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED.
THE PROJECT WAS ANALYZED FOR EACH OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES PROVIDED IN IN THE C ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST.
THE I S N D DRAFT WAS SUBJECT TO A 20 DAY PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD, WHICH BEGAN AUGUST 28TH AND ENDED SEPTEMBER 17TH.
THE I S N D WAS SENT TO ALL 52 PEOPLE ON THE PROJECT INTEREST LIST AND TO, UH, VARIOUS OTHER AGENCIES.
THREE COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED DURING THIS COMMENT PERIOD TIME.
UH, THE COMMENTS INC INCLUDED A COMMENT LETTER FROM A
[01:10:01]
RESIDENT, UM, ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION ON THE R ONE ZONES.WE PROVIDED A RESPONSE TO THEM AND PROVIDED CLARIFICATION.
IN ADDITION, THE ZONING MAP WAS UPDATED, UH, JUST TO BETTER SHOW THE DIFFERENT R ONE ZONES.
WE ALSO RECEIVED A COMMENT LETTER FROM LA METRO IN WHICH THEY SAID, IN WHICH THEY STATED THAT THEY OPERATE A RAIL LINE ADJACENT TO THE CITY AND THAT DEVELOPERS ADJACENT TO THIS LINE SHOULD REACH OUT TO LA METRO.
UH, WE DON'T, WE DO NOT THINK THAT THIS IS NECESSARY TO BE IN THE CODE.
UH, BUT WE WILL MENTION THIS IN OUR CHECKLIST GUIDELINES THAT WILL BE PREPARED LATER FOR THE CITY.
AND FINALLY, WE ALSO RECEIVED A COMMENT, UH, REGARDING THE DRIVE-THROUGH REGULATIONS.
UM, AND THE COMMENTER PROVIDED, UH, VARIOUS SUGGESTIONS ON HOW WE SHOULD REVISE, UH, THE REGULATIONS.
AND THE FINAL I S N D WAS POSTED IN SEP ON SEPTEMBER 29TH.
UM, SO IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 61, 34, 23, 61, 35, 23, 61, 36, AND RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 61 37.
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE INITIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NUMBER 2302, ZONE CHANGE NUMBER 2302, AND THE CODE AMENDMENT NUMBER 2301.
WE ARE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU FOR THE STAFF REPORT.
DOES ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER LEWIS? JUST GIVEN HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE, ARE NOT HERE? I I THINK IT'D JUST BE FASTER IF WE GET THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF IT AND THEN, UM, IF, IF THE CHAIR WOULD INDULGE ME AND THEN, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION AT THAT POINT.
ANYONE, ANYONE ELSE HAS COMMENTS FOR STAFF? UM, I DID HAVE A COMMENT.
SO, UH, OR A QUESTION, THE 500, UH, FOOT RADIUS, IS THAT FROM PROPERTY LINE OR IS THAT FROM THE STRUCTURE? UM, SORRY.
IN REGARDS TO THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION? YES.
SO THAT WOULD BE FROM THE PROJECT SITE.
AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE RIGHT AFTER THAT WAS THE, WAS IT, WHO ELSE? 1000 FEET FOR WIRELESS FACILITIES.
I THOUGHT IT WAS, UH, PROPOSED FOR 1500 FEET.
UM, WE FELT THAT, UH, WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE, UH, COMPARISONS, UH, OF, UH, THE ANALOGS, UH, FOR WIRELESS FACILITY NOTIFICATIONS, THE HIGHER END WAS A THOUSAND, WAS, UM, A THOUSAND FEET.
I KNOW THAT, UH, 15, UM, 1500 FEET, UH, WAS ONE OF THE POTENTIAL OPTIONS THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED AS PART OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
BUT ULTIMATELY, UM, UH, IT WAS A THOUSAND, A THOUSAND FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINES.
WITH THIS, WITH THIS PARTICULAR STUDY SESSIONS, WE CAN ACTUALLY RECOMMEND IT'S FOR 1500.
IS THAT, WELL, THE PART OF THE ITEM, THE PART OF THE ITEM, UM, BEFORE IS A, IS A RECOMMENDATION TO, UM, TO CITY COUNCIL, UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, WOULD, UH, WANT TO CONSIDER AN INCREASE IN THAT NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
UM, THEN YOU CAN, I, UH, I WOULD RECOMMEND KIND OF INCLUDING THAT AS PART OF, UM, THE RECOMMENDATION AND FOR WE COULD FORWARD THAT TO CITY COUNCIL.
IS IT, I, WE DID, WE ALREADY CODE UPDATE AND WE, WE, UH, AGREED FOR 1500, UM, WHICH IS ACTUALLY WHAT WALNUT WAS HAVING IN THERE'S TOO.
SO IT IS 1500, UM, 1500 WAS MENTIONED.
HOWEVER, UM, UM, PART OF THE DIRECTION WAS TO LOOK AT WHAT THE OTHER CITIES WERE DOING.
AND IN THAT RESEARCH, THE MOST THAT THE CITY FOUND, OR THE MOST THAT THE CITY'S CONSULTANT FOUND WAS, WAS 1000, 1000 FEET, I DON'T THINK.
BUT ULTIMATELY WE CAN RECOMMEND TO INCREASE TO 1500.
UH, THANK YOU FOR THE STAFF REPORT.
UH, WE'RE NOW OPEN PUBLIC HEARING ONE AT A TIME, GUYS, ONE AT A TIME.
[01:15:01]
UH, HEAR TESTIMONY.CAN WE SHOW THE SCREENS TO THE PUBLIC HEARING? OR AT LEAST, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO?
UH, WE'RE NOW CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING.
CAN I ADD SOMETHING FIRST? UM, THIS IS A CODE AMENDMENT CHANGE THAT'S AFFECTING ALL THE PROPERTIES IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, AND I WANTED TO ADD THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE THAT SHOWS UP TO OPPOSE OR TO APPROVE FOR THE CODE AMENDMENT.
SO, WE'LL, WE'LL START THAT WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONER COMMENTS.
UH, ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER, HANG.
AND I GUESS ONE OF THE THING THAT I WAS NOT CLARIFY IS REGARDING THE, UM, SOLAR PANEL THAT YOU CAN INCREASE THE HEIGHTS BY FIVE MORE FEET.
IS THAT, UM, FOUR? SOMEWHERE IN HERE?
IT'S JUST WHAT, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AND SEE'S A WHOLE TWO INCH THICK CODE AMENDMENT THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH.
SO IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION TO ABSORB.
I WANT SAY THAT'S ABOUT THERE.
IT'S SO, UM, YES, THAT IS, THAT IS CORRECT.
REGARDING, UM, SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS SUCH AS PANELS, UM, THIS IS ON PAGE 106 OF THE DRAFT, UM, OF THE DRAFT LANGUAGE, TRYING TO GET A SECTION NUMBER.
SO IT'S AN ARTICLE THREE REGULATIONS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO ALL ZONES.
AND ESSENTIALLY, UM, IT'S PART OF THE HEIGHT PROJECTIONS THAT ARE ALLOWED TO GO ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT.
SO ESSENTIALLY SOLAR PANELS THAT WOULD BE, UM, ROOF MOUNTED, UM, WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO, UM, EXCEED THE HEIGHT LIMIT BY UP TO FIVE FEET ON ALL COPY.
WE CAN'T SEE 106, WE CAN ONLY SEE THE FIRST TWO DIGIT.
OH, IT'S, UM, IT WOULD BE THE SECOND PAGE OF ARTICLE THREE.
SO ARTICLE THREE, DIVISION ONE.
SO IT WOULD PROBABLY BE RIGHT WHERE, UH, PAGE 10, I WOULD THINK WOULD PROBABLY START ON IN, IN YOUR DOCUMENT.
ABOUT HOW MANY MILLIMETERS, UH, THROUGH THE DOCUMENT ARE WE TALKING
SO THE SECTION NUMBERS, WHICH WOULD BE IN THE LEFT HAND COLUMN, UM, ON THE HARD COPY WOULD BE, UH, IT'S 26 DASH 65 DASH SIX AND PARAGRAPH C 26 60.
IT'S, IT'S THE ONE WITH THE PICTURE OF A HOUSE.
THE PAGE AFTER THEY HAVE A DRAWING OF A HOUSE, THE PAGE THREE AND 26 65 TALKS ABOUT THE HEIGHT MEASUREMENT AND EXCEPTIONS.
AND IT IS, UH, PAGE THREE IS THE NUMBER THAT WE SEE AFTER IT'S GONNA BE, YEAH, IF YOU SEE PAGE 72, PAGE 72, AND THEN FLIP THE PAGE TWICE.
I DO WANT TO MENTION, I, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE, UH, THE STRIKETHROUGH VERSION, SO THE FORMATTING AND, UH, PAGE ATION.
[01:20:07]
SO I GUESS, UM, EXTENDING FIVE FEET, IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON BEHIND THAT? UM, THE, THE REASON AND THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THAT WAS, UM, WITH THE MOST RECENT, UM, UH, CAL GREEN CODE UPDATE, WHICH, UM, ARE, UH, UPDATES TO THE BUILDING CODE THAT OCCUR EVERY, UM, 18 MONTHS, UM, ESSENTIALLY FOR COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION.UM, THE MOST RECENT ONE ESSENTIALLY MANDATED, UM, THE INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS, UM, ON MULTIFAMILY, ON MULTIFAMILY, UM, BUILDINGS.
UH, THE INTENT, UM, OF STATE LAW IS TO ALSO, UH, REQUIRE THAT FOR COMMERCIAL, UM, FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, UH, IN THE FUTURE AS WELL TOO.
SO WE FELT, UH, ESPECIALLY, UM, TO MAXIMIZE SOLAR ORIENTATION AS WELL AS ALLOWING, UM, COMPLIANCE WITH THAT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FOR, UM, UH, MODERATE, UM, EXCEPTION TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF IT'S ON A FLAT ROOF, THEY CAN ACTUALLY GO UP FIVE MORE FEET BECAUSE THE SLOPE FOR THE FOUR 12 OR THREE 12 SLOPE THAT THE SOLAR PANEL NEEDED, IS THAT KINDA THE IDEAS BEHIND? CORRECT.
UM, SO ESSENTIALLY MAXIMIZE, UM, GENERALLY THE SOUTH OR SOUTHEAST FACING, UM, ORIENTATION, WHICH IS MOST DESIRABLE FOR, UM, SOLAR PANELS, UH, WHATEVER KIND OF ANGLE THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE, UM, THE SOLAR PANEL THAT, UM, THAT WAS SELECTED BY THE, UH, BY THE FUTURE DEVELOPER OR BUILDER.
UH, COMMISSIONER, BE QUESTION? ANY COMMENTS? HUH? ANY COMMENTS? I ALREADY DID.
SO THE, UM, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE WORKING IN HAND WITH THE, UM, CITY ENGINEER, WHAT HAVE YOU, WHEN IT COMES TO THE APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAPS? YES, THAT IS, THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, IN GENERAL, IN TERMS OF THE, UM, THE, UH, THE GENERAL INTERNAL PROCESS, UH, THAT WAS ESSENTIALLY JUST CARRIED OVER FROM THE EXISTING CODE INTO, INTO THE, UM, UH, INTO ARTICLE EIGHT.
NOW, UM, DOES THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT NOW, UM, ENCOURAGE FLAG LOTS AND RESIDENTIAL AREAS? UH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, UM, THAT IT'S ESSENTIALLY, IT'S ESSENTIALLY SILENT, UM, ON THE CREATION OF FLAG LOTS.
I DID NOTICE THAT YOU DID PROVIDE A DRAWING SHOWING HOW IT COULD BE DONE.
ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT IF THE CITY DECIDES TO ALLOW THAT ON RESIDENTIAL LOTS, THAT PERHAPS, UM, DON'T ALLOW ANY MORE THAN ONE FLAG LOT, AND I'M REFERRING TO PAGE 26, IT SHOWS A DRAWING SHOWING WHAT, I GUESS IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK AND THEY SHOW THE SIDES WHERE THERE ARE STREETS.
UM, THAT EXHIBIT, THAT EXHIBIT IS IN THE, UM, DEFINITION SECTION AND IS ESSENTIALLY TO ILLUSTRATE, UM, THE DEFINITIONS OF A VARIETY OF, UM, DIFFERENT LOTS THAT COULD OCCUR.
UM, JUST, UH, GIVE ME A SECOND TO POINT TO THE CORRECT SECTION.
SO IN ARTICLE EIGHT, UM, IT WOULD BE SECTION 26, UM, DASH 2 99.
UM, THERE ARE, THERE ARE, UH, UH, THREE PARAGRAPHS ABOUT THE USE OF, UM, USE OF FLAG LOTTS MM-HMM.
[01:25:05]
UH, SO THERE IS A LIMITATION ON THE NUMBER OF FLAG LOTS WITHIN A SUBDIVISION, UM, JUST TO AVOID THE OVER CONCENTRATION OF, LIKE HAVING A FLAG LOT NEXT TO A FLAG LOT NE NEXT TO A FLAG LOT.AND THE, UM, THE AISLE WIDTH THAT IS BEING SUGGESTED WOULD BE 20 FEET? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND ALSO THERE WOULD BE A PROHIBITION THAT ONE FLAG LOT CANNOT BE CREATED, CREATED NEXT TO ANOTHER FLAG LOT.
AND THOSE, UH, UM, AND DO YOU WANNA POINT OUT THAT THOSE WOULD BE, UM, UH, AT LEAST THE, UH, THE LIMITATION, THE NUMBER AND THE ADJACENCY OR NEWER PROVISIONS, UM, FOR THE SUBDIVISION FOR, UM, FOR THIS CODE UPDATE.
HOW DOES THAT PROVISIONS OR PROHIBITIONS AFFECT SSB NINE? I BELIEVE THAT IS THE CODE FOR CORRECT.
UM, WITH, UM, SB WITH SSB NINE, UM, THE PROCESS THAT WE TOOK WITH SSB NINE IS ESSENTIALLY INCORPORATED THE, UM, THE CITY'S CURRENT, UM, ORDINANCE AND ESSENTIALLY JUST INCORPORATED, UM, AS IT STANDS TODAY INTO THE, INTO THE CODE.
UM, THE SSB NINE, THE SB NINE, UM, SUBDIVISION, UM, REQUIREMENTS WOULD, WOULD ESSENTIALLY KIND OF SUPERSEDE, UM, THE SECTION, UH, SINCE THERE ARE FOR SMALL URBAN, UH, SMALL URBAN INFILL LOTS.
SO ANYTHING THAT'S COMPLIANT WITH THE, UM, SB UH, SB NINE ORDINANCE, UM, UH, WOULD APPLY.
SO SB NINE WOULD SUPERSEDE THIS PARTICULAR CODE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW.
THESE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR STANDARD LOT SUBDIVISIONS, THE SS, UM, THERE IS A SEPARATE SECTION, UM, SUBDIVISION SECTION FOR THE, FOR, UM, URBAN URBAN LOT SPLITS.
AND, UH, YOUR COMMISSIONER
UM, TOOK A GOOD DEAL OF TIME GOING THROUGH THIS AND, UM, WANTED TO, UM, WANTED TO ADDRESS, UH, ONE OF THE, UH, THE CHANGES IN THE, UH, UH, MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN, UH, R ONE AND, AND, UH, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, UM, ZONED LOCATIONS.
SO WE WOULD BE INCREASING THAT TO 45 FEET NOW.
IS THAT CORRECT? CAN YOU POINT TO WHICH, UM, SECTION THAT WOULD BE COMMISSIONER? UH, IT WOULD BE IN SECTION, UH, I CAN'T SEE THE PAGE.
IS, IS THAT ACCURATE? IT'S SUPPOSEDLY PAGE 56.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ACCURATE OR NOT.
SO I GUESS R ONE IN THE CERTAIN SECTIONS, LIKE ALONG A SOA AREA, OR I FORGOT, I THINK IT'S AUSA THAT WOULD BE R ONE.
HOWEVER, THOSE R ONE ARE MUCH MORE DENSE THAN OTHER AREAS.
THE, UM, WELL THESE, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD, UM, AND WE CAN, WE CAN ADD THIS CLAR, WE CAN ADD THIS CLARIFICATION TO 26 S 54, BUT THE INTENT IS THIS IS ESSENTIALLY FOR MULTIFAMILY, UM, DEVELOPMENT, NOT, UM, SINGLE FAMILY WELL, BUT IT SAYS MAXIMUM SUB H SAYS MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT WHEN WITHIN 100 FEET.
[01:30:01]
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, AM I, AM I READING THIS WRONG IN TERMS OF ITS APPLICABILITY OR I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M NOT, I'M NOT MISUNDERSTANDING IT.THERE'S UNFORTUNATELY, THE COPY THAT I HAVE IS NOT VERY CLEAR AND THE FONT IS REALLY SMALL.
THE, UM, THE INTENT OF THAT SECTION IS, UH, HEIGHT LIMITATION WHEN, UM, DEVELOPMENT IS ADJACENT TO, UM, SINGLE FAMILY OR, UH, UM, THE RA ZONE.
THIS, UH, LANGUAGE, UM, IS THE SAME HEIGHT LIMITATION ESSENTIALLY.
THAT IS, UM, UH, IN, UH, THE CURRENT MIXED USE, UH, MIXED USE OVERLAY RIGHT NOW.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT I'M, I WAS CLEAR ON THAT.
UM, FOR, SO, SO THIS IS, UM, SO THIS, THIS CODE AMENDMENT WOULD NOT INCREASE THE, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO WE'RE STAYING WITH 25 THEN, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.
I THINK IF YOU LOOK IN, UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO, IT BASICALLY SAID ALL BUILDINGS CONTAINING ANY RESIDENTIAL USE SHALL BE LIMITED TO 45 FEET, EXCEPT WITHIN THE AREA BOUNDED BY CITRUS STREET TO THE WEST WORKMAN STREET TO THE NORTH BARRANCA AVENUE TO THE EAST AND THE INTERSTATE TO THE WEST.
SO THOSE CAN BE HIGHER TO 85 FEET.
UM, AND THEN, UH, SWITCHING, UH, SWITCHING GEARS TO, UH, 26 DASH 75, UM, IT DEALS WITH MEASUREMENT OF FENCE OR WALL HEIGHT.
UM, NOW FRANKLY, AS I READ THIS, THIS WILL WORK GREAT IN KANSAS, BUT I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS GOING TO WORK PARTICULARLY WELL ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF WEST COVINO OR THE SOUTHERN SIDE.
WE'RE MEASURING HEIGHT BASED ON THE LOWEST PROPERTY LEVEL.
SO EFFECTIVELY SOMEBODY WHO HAS A SIGNIFICANT GRADE SEPARATION IS STUCK WITH A SIX FOOT HIGH FENCE FOR THEIR, ON THEIR NEIGHBOR'S SIDE AND MAYBE TWO FOOT HIGH ON THEIR SIDE.
IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT THIS IS GONNA DO? UH, THAT WOULD BE, UM, THAT IS CORRECT.
SO IN, IN AREAS WHERE THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN, UM, ESSENTIALLY PAD HEIGHTS OR LOT HEIGHTS, UM, BETWEEN THE MEASUREMENT OF HEIGHT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY, UM, UH, TO SIX FEET, AND IT WOULD BE MEASURED FROM THE, UM, THE LOWEST ELEVATION.
SO IF THERE'S A TWO FOOT PAD HEIGHT DIFFERENCE, UM, EFFECTIVELY IT WOULD BE A FOUR FOOT TALL FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOU?
IT'S ON THE PROPERTY LINE, YES.
THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW IT'S MEASURED.
HOWEVER, IF THERE'S A GRADE DEF DIFFERENTIAL, UM, WE DO, THERE IS A SECTION THAT REGULATES FREESTANDING FENCES AND ALSO, AND ALSO FENCES ON TOP OF RETAINING WALLS.
SO FOR FENCES ON TOP OF RETAINING WALLS, ALTHOUGH WE MEASURE A HEIGHT OF FREESTANDING, A FREE A, ANY FREESTANDING FENCE OR ANY, ANY FENCE THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT TO SIX TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT WOULD BE SIX FEET FROM LOWEST ADJACENT GRADE TO THE TOP OF THE WALL.
HOWEVER, IF THERE IS A, A, A FENCE, FREESTANDING FENCE RETAINING WALL COMBINATION, DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF WHO'S CONSTRUCTING THE FENCE, IF IT'S GONNA, OR, OR RETAINING WALL, AND WHERE IT'S FACING WOULD DETERMINE THE HEIGHT, THE OVERALL HEIGHT.
FOR INSTANCE, IF I BELIEVE IF IT'S, UH, UM, AN OUTWARD FACING RETAINING WALL, WHERE, WHERE, UM, WHERE THE NE WHERE THE RETAINING WALL FACES THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED A, IS IT FOUR FEET? FOUR? IT'S INTERIOR FACING.
IT'S A 12 EXTERIOR FACING OH, YES.
SO THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED UP TO THREE, UM, THREE FEET ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND WITH A, WITH A, UM, SIX FOOT TALL FREESTANDING WALL ON TOP WITHOUT BY RIGHT.
IT WOULD BE ALLOWED THAT, OKAY.
SO THAT WOULD, AND AND THAT DOESN'T, THAT'S NOT A PERMIT REQUIRING SCENARIO.
A A BUILDING PERMIT WOULD BE REQUIRED.
YES, BECAUSE ANYTHING ABOVE SIX FEET BY BUILDING CODE REQUIRES A BUILDING PERMIT.
I JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THIS
[01:35:01]
IS CLEAR BECAUSE IT, IT, IT LEAVES A LOT TO BE DESIRED IN THAT REGARD.I ALSO WANNA, I ALSO WANNA POINT OUT THAT THE CURRENT CODE PROVISION SAYS THAT YOU CAN GET AN ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT OVER THE COUNTER TO GO UP TO SEVEN FEET, AND THIS TAKES THAT AWAY EFFECTIVELY.
SO WHY DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? YEAH, I KNOW.
I, WE ESSENTIALLY WANTED TO, UM, TO ESSENTIALLY SIMPLIFY, UM, THE PROCESS.
UH, BUT IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WANTED TO ADD THE, ESSENTIALLY THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION, UM, FOR THE ADDITIONAL, UH, FOOT AND HEIGHT, THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE ADDED.
I MEAN, I, I, I'M SORRY, BUT I, I SEE PEOPLE BUILD THESE ULTRA TALL FENCES THROUGHOUT OUR CITY, AND FRANKLY, UH, THIS COMMISSION HAS GIVEN SUBSTANTIAL DEFERENCE ON THAT ISSUE.
I MAY NOT AGREE WITH THAT SUBSTANTIAL DEFERENCE, BUT WE'VE GIVEN THAT SUBSTANTIAL DEFERENCE, SO I THINK IT SHOULD BE CODIFIED AS A MATTER OF.
AND, UM, AND I DO WANT TO MENTION TOO, THAT, UH, ES ESSENTIALLY IN AN INTERIOR CONDITION, UM, AND ESSENTIALLY THAT WOULD BE, UH, LARGER OFFICES ON SECTION 26 DASH 77, UM, 26, I'M SORRY, 26 DASH 77.
THAT'S ESSENTIALLY THE, UH, UM, THE PROVISIONS THAT, UH, REGULATE, UM, RETAINING WALLS AND ITEMS, UH, WHERE THERE'S CHANGE OF GRADE.
UM, ESSENTIALLY IT DOES ALLOW PROVISIONS FOR UP TO, UM, UH, WHERE A RETAINING WALL PROTECTS A CUT BELOW THE NATURAL GRADE.
UM, ESSENTIALLY THE CUT SIDE SHALL OUT A SEED, UM, 15 FEET.
SO THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THAT, UM, ALLOWS FOR A, A MUCH MORE SUBSTANTIAL KIND OF ALTERATION.
THAT'S WHERE WE KIND OF SAW ALSO TO THE, UH, THE DIFFERENCE WHERE THERE COULD BE SOME FLEXIBILITY.
THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY A PROPERTY LINE FENCE, IT'S MORE INTERNAL.
UM, SO THAT'S, AND THIS IS SOME THAT, UH, PROVISION ISN'T IN THE, UM, EXISTING CODE, ESSENTIALLY, PARAGRAPH, UM, C WELL, I THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE IT TO SEVEN FEET AS A MATTER OF, RIGHT.
ARE WE MAKING THE CHANGES NOW? I'M JUST, I'M JUST GOING THROUGH AND GIVING MY, I I, I WOULD LOVE TO MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS TONIGHT IF WE CAN.
I HAVE A, I HAVE A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS I WANNA GO THROUGH THOUGH, BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.
I, UH, I AM NOT, I'M NOT OF THE OPINION THAT THIS SHOULD BE GLOSSED OVER AND JUST VOTED ON.
UM, I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE IN MANY, MANY YEARS, AND OBVIOUSLY THERE, UH, THERE ARE ISSUES.
UM, BUT JUST, JUST, UM, FOR A BIT OF BACKGROUND, THE, THE SIX FOOT MAX, UM, THE SIX FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS WHAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED BY, RIGHT.
SO WE, WHEN WE REDID, WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE CODE STANDARDS ON FENCES, WE WERE, WE WERE A BIT MORE CONSERVATIVE AND SAID MAXIMUM SIX FEET.
WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T LIKE, I GUESS STAFF HAD ISSUES OR PROBLEMS WITH THE FACT THAT, UM, IN THE PAST, NEIGHBORS WERE FIGHTING EACH OTHER AND THEY WERE UTILIZING THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE, AND STAFF TO RESOLVE THEIR FENCE ISSUES.
SO WE, UM, WE BASICALLY JUST SIMPLIFIED IT SIX FEET.
BUT IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WISHES TO EX, UM, TO ALLOW A SEVEN FEET BY RIGHT, THEN THAT WOULD BE I, I AGREE.
WE'VE, WE'VE DECIDED THOSE DISPUTES BEFORE, I DON'T WANT TO DO IT AGAIN.
UM, AS FAR AS, UM, UH, LET'S SEE, SWITCHING TWO SIX DASH 1 0 9 REGARDING ALCOHOL BEVERAGE SALE ESTABLISHMENTS.
UM, I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, WITH REGARD TO STANDARDS FOR, UH, STANDARDS FOR REVOCATION, UM, THAT WE, THAT WE INCLUDE SOME SORT OF STANDARD FOR REVOCATION OF, OF A, UH, AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE, UH, SALES, UH, LICENSE.
UM, AND I THINK GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE'VE JUST HAD A HEARING ON THAT, WE CAN PROBABLY JUST ADOPT THE STANDARDS THAT WE'VE SET FORTH, UM, AS, AS THE MINIMUM BASELINE.
THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION.
UH, I DO HAVE, UM, I DO HAVE A FEW MORE QUESTIONS WITH
[01:40:01]
REGARD TO 26 DASH ONE 17, UM, IS PERTAINING TO EMERGENCY SHELTERS.I'M TRYING TO GO AS QUICKLY AS I CAN SO THAT WE'RE NOT HERE ALL NIGHT.
UM, I, I AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS REQUIREMENT FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS.
IT'S IN, UH, A SUBDIVISION TWO, UH, CLIENTS MUST VACATE THE FACILITY BY 8:00 AM AND HAVE NO GUARANTEED BED FOR THE THE NEXT NIGHT.
I, I GUESS I'M, I'M JUST CONCERNED, UH, I, I, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT, UM, COULD PERHAPS ENCOURAGE LOITERING IN THE AREA? BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE, IN THE EVENT THAT WE ESTABLISH A, UH, AN EMERGENCY SHELTER AND THE, AND THE POOR INDIVIDUAL IS, IS IN A, IN A BIND AND HAS TO STAY ON SITE, UM, JUST TO GUARANTEE THAT THEY HAVE A, A, A SPOT FOR THE NEXT NIGHT.
I, I WOULD WANT TO REMOVE THAT REQUIREMENT BECAUSE, UM, HOPEFULLY IF, IF SOMEONE'S IN THAT KIND OF A A, IN THAT KIND OF NEED, WE WOULD WANT TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO HAVE SHELTER AND, YOU KNOW, KIND OF NOT, NOT BE IN A POSITION WHERE THEY'RE EFFECTIVELY REQUIRED TO LOITER IN FRONT OF THE FACILITY UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE CUTOFF COMES SO THAT THEY CAN FIND A PLACE TO PUT THEIR HEAD THAT EVENING.
I, I JUST THINK THAT'S BAD POLICY.
UM, SO I'D LIKE TO REMOVE THAT REQUIREMENT IF WE CAN CAN, SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? SURE.
SO IT SAYS THAT, UM, IT SAYS THAT FOR A, AN EMERGENCY SHELTER, UM, THERE'S NO GUARANTEED BED FOR THE NEXT NIGHT.
IT'S SUBDIVISION, UH, IT'S 26 DASH ONE 11 A SUB TWO.
IT'S THE SECOND, UH, SECOND FULL SENTENCE OF THAT, CLIENTS MUST VACATE THE FACILITY BY 8:00 AM AND HAVE NO GUARANTEED BED FOR THE NEXT NIGHT.
AGAIN, I JUST, I, I THINK THAT IF, IF THE FOCUS IS ON SHELTER AND WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE A LOITERING PROBLEM, I FEEL LIKE THAT'S GOING TO ASSURE THAT WE WILL HAVE A LOITERING PROBLEM, BECAUSE PEOPLE WILL WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE THERE THE, THE FOLLOWING NIGHT.
IF THEY'RE IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION, THEY CAN'T GO BACK.
THAT'S, THAT SEEMS TO BE PROBLEMATIC TO ME.
UM, IS THAT FOR COMMER UH, RESIDENTS OR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES? YEAH.
FOR, NO, THIS IS FOR, THIS IS FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS, 26 DASH 17 ON MIDNIGHT MISSION AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT THEY ARE SAYING THEY WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE BY 8:00 AM THE NEXT DAY.
BUT LIKE HE SAID, IF THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE A BED MM-HMM.
'CAUSE THEY WANNA HOPEFULLY BE GUARANTEED BED AND, AND NOT BE IN A POSITION WHERE, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS, PERHAPS THEY WANT TO GO APPLY FOR A JOB.
THEY HAVE TO GET A, AN, THEY HAVE TO GO TO AN INTERVIEW AND THEN THEY CAN'T, THEY, THEY CAN'T BE BACK AT A SHELTER THE, THE, THE NEXT NIGHT.
I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S SEEMS TO ME IT'S BAD POLICY.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.
BUT EITHER WAY, UM, I MEAN, IF, IF YOU ALLOWED THE TEMPORARY SITUATIONS TO BE THERE, THEN THEY'LL BE THERE ALL THE TIME.
SEE, YOUR CONCERN IS THAT WE'RE, YOU MENTIONED LOITERING, BUT I I WOULD BE CONCERNED IF, UH, OBVIOUSLY EMERGENCY SHELTER, THE, THE, THE, THE ISSUE IS, IS THAT AN EMERGENCY SHELTER MAY NOT, MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET SOMEONE INTO TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IMMEDIATELY.
SOMETIMES THAT'S NOT AVAILABLE.
UH, YOU KNOW, I HOPE WE HAVE RESOURCES SUCH THAT THAT NEVER HAPPENS IN THE CITY, BUT LET'S SAY HYPOTHETICALLY IT DOES HAPPEN.
MY CONCERN WOULD BE IF SOMEBODY IS IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION WHERE THEY NEED SHELTER AND THEY NEED TO, UH, AND THEY NEED TO GO AGAIN, HYPOTHETICALLY, TAKE CARE OF A CHILD, TAKE DO, YOU KNOW, PICK UP A CHILD FROM SCHOOL, HYPOTHETICALLY, PICK UP OR GO, GO GET A, A GO TO A JOB INTERVIEW OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, SUCH THAT, UM, SUCH THAT THEY HAVE TO BE BACK BY A CERTAIN CUTOFF TIME IN ORDER TO RESERVE, UH, RESERVE THEIR SHELTER FOR AN EMERGENCY HOUSING SITUATION.
I THINK THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S A SILLY REQUIREMENT.
I THINK WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD GIVE SOME DEFERENCE THERE, BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY IS ACTUALLY LOOKING AFFIRMATIVELY FOR HOUSING AT THAT POINT IN TIME, I, I, I THINK THE, THE SHELTER CAN MAKE THE DECISION IF IT'S, IF IT'S ONE OF THOSE ISSUES WHERE THE PERSON IS NOT LEGITIMATELY ACCEPTING HELP OR WHATEVER IT IS.
I MEAN, THIS IS THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THE CARE COURTS AND ALL THAT STUFF THAT'S COMING.
SO, UH, UH, THAT'S NOT MY CONCERN.
MY CONCERN IS FOR THE PERSON WHO IS LEGITIMATELY TRYING TO DIG THEIR WAY OUT OF WHATEVER FINANCIAL STRIFE THAT LED TO THEM BEING HOMELESS.
UH, I, I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA SEE A SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO LOITER IN FRONT OF THE MIDNIGHT MISSION, OR LET'S SAY HYPOTHETICALLY WE HAD THAT IN OUR CITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, I JUST THINK IT'S BAD POLICY.
AGAIN, THIS IS MY 2 CENTS, BUT I THINK THAT FEEL FREE TO, THAT MAY BE TOO BROAD, BECAUSE
[01:45:01]
SOMETIMES SOME OF THOSE VICTIMS OR EMERGENCY SITUATIONS DEAL WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.AND WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS KICK OUT A CHILD OR, OR, OR A MOM AND SAY, GET OUT OF OUR CITY.
SO, WELL, THIS IS SAYING THAT IT'S REQUIRED THAT, THAT THERE, THAT THEY HAVE NO GUARANTEED BED FOR THE NEXT NIGHT.
I THINK THEY'RE CONFUSING AN EMERGENCY SHELTER WITH A HOMELESS SHELTER.
EMERGENCY IS LIKE WITH THE WEATHER, LIKE IN NEW YORK, WHEN THE TYPICAL GETS LIKE A FEMA OR CERTAIN RIGHT, RIGHT.
OR I GUESS EMERGENCY SHELTER, IS THAT FOR BEING ONLY AT NIGHTTIME WITH THE DURATIONS OF 24 7? IT'S SLEEPING.
SO CAN YOU CLARIFY, UH, WHAT THAT MEANS, UH, CITY STAFF? SURE.
UM, JUST TO CLARIFY REGARDING THIS, THIS SECTION, UM, THIS SECTION IS ALREADY IN THE CURRENT CODE CODE ALREADY.
SO HOWEVER, IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WISHES TO REMOVE IT FROM THE CURRENT, FROM THE, THE CODE, UM, IT'S WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW TO RECOMMEND THAT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
UM, JOHN, CAN YOU EXPLAIN FURTHER REGARDING THE BAIL? SO THE CODE SAYS YEAH, CLARIFY THAT, WHAT THE CODE SAYS CURRENTLY.
UM, ESSENTIALLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PERMANENT, UM, A PERMANENT SHELTER AND EMERGENCY SHELTER IS EMERGENCY SHELTERS.
UH, FOR, UM, SHORT TERM USE, SOMETIMES, USUALLY DURING THE WINTER MONTHS, UM, A JURISDICTION MAY WANT TO OPEN UP A, AN EMERGENCY SHELTER, UM, OVER A PERIOD OF TIME.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT FOR, UM, AN EXTENDED, UM, EXTENDED DURATION, BUT IT IS INTENDED FOR THE, UM, TEMPORARY, UH, SHELTER OF THE UNHOUSED.
SO IS THAT LIKE THE ONE THAT ST.
TOPHER USED TO HAVE AT THE CHURCH? UM, I'M NOT, I BELIEVE SO.
I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT ONE.
AND YES, IT HAS TO DO WITH WEATHER, LIKE HE SAID.
UM, IN SOME AREAS THE TEMPERATURE GETS BELOW FREEZING AND, RIGHT.
WELL, I KNOW THAT IT WAS A SHELTER THAT WOULD TRANSFER FROM CHURCH TO CHURCH ALL THE WAY FROM HERE TO
IT WAS, HAD DIFFERENT LOCATIONS DURING THE WINTER MONTHS.
AND THEN, UM, GOING TO THE, THE HOME OCCUPATION SECTION 26 DASH ONE 19, UM, THERE'S, I, I THINK THIS IS JUST A SITUATION WHERE THIS, THIS CODE PROVISION JUST APPEARS TO BE OUTDATED.
UM, THIS IS, I'M LOOKING AT, UH, 26 DASH ONE 19 A SUB NINE.
UM, THERE SHALL BE NO USE OF UTILITIES OR COMMUNITY FACILITIES BEYOND THAT NORMAL TO THE USE, UH, OF THE RESIDENTIAL OF THE PROPERTY FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES.
I, I THINK, I THINK WE OUGHT TO, UH, WE OUGHT TO ADD, UH, UH, FIBER INTERNET OR, UH, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
I, I, I JUST THINK, UH, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE'RE SAYING THAT PEOPLE ARE, ARE IN NON-CONFORMING USE BECAUSE THEY'RE USING, UH, A BUSINESS INTERNET LINE FROM SPECTRUM OR, OR FRONTIER, I THINK THAT'S, UH, REALISTICALLY, UH, I, I THINK PEOPLE WOULD BE HERE WITH PITCHFORKS IF, UH, IF THAT WERE EVER REALLY ENFORCED.
WHICH, WHICH ONE WAS THAT AGAIN? AGAIN? 26 DASH 19, UH, ENTITLED HOME OCCUPATION, UH, A SUBDIVISION 9 26, 19 26 1 19 1 19 0 1 19.
AND IT'S NUMBER NINE UNDERNEATH THAT.
UH, SINCE I READ THIS ENTIRE THING, UM, I JUST THOUGHT THIS ONE WAS KIND OF FUNNY AND I, UH, I DON'T WANNA WASTE ANY REAL TIME ON IT, BUT, UH, THE, THE 26 DASH ONE 20 REGARDING MASSAGE PARLORS AND HEALTH AND BEAUTY SPAS, UH, SUB, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S SUBDIVISION F UH, FOUR SAYS, SAYS, MASSAGE ROOMS SHALL NOT HAVE ANY DOORS, BUT MAY COVER THE DOORWAY WITH DRAPED CURTAINS.
NOW, UH, I I, I HAVE ZERO, UH, DESIRE TO GET INTO THE PERIAN INTEREST THAT, UH, I ASSUME THIS IS TRYING TO PREVENT.
UH, BUT I, I WILL, I WILL SAY I, I DON'T REALLY KNOW OF ANY, UH, MODERN HIGH-END, UH, HEALTH OR MASSAGE, UH, OR HEALTH HEALTH SPAS THAT DON'T HAVE DOORS.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS JUST KIND OF FUNNY.
UH, GOING TO 26 DASH 1 22 MOBILE SERVICES, UM, AND GOING SPECIFICALLY TO THE MOBILE SERVICES PERMITTED, UH, SUB B UM, TWO MOBILE SERVICES SHALL NOT INCLUDE SERVICES THAT QUOTE, IN THE OPINION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR WOULD POSE A NEGATIVE IMPACT UPON NEARBY PROPERTIES WHEN PROVIDED.
UM, NOW AGAIN, I, UH, I I WILL SAY I, I QUITE
[01:50:01]
TRUST PAULINE'S JUDGMENT IN THIS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M GONNA TRUST THE NEXT PERSON WHO OCCUPIES THIS POSITION.YEAH, 20, MAYBE AS LONG AS I'M ALIVE.
UH, 26 DASH 1 22 ENTITLED MOBILE SERVICES.
UM, I, I JUST, I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, UH, WHY IS THERE NOT AN ASCERTAINABLE STANDARD OR SPECIFIC THINGS THAT ARE, THAT ARE SET FORTH IN THAT? AGAIN, IF, IF WE'RE UPDATING THIS, I THINK I, I, I, I DON'T WANNA SEE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT BECOMES ARBITRARY.
I MEAN, PEOPLE WORKING FROM HOME, IF THEY, UH, LET'S SAY THEY WANT TO GET, THEY WANT TO GET A CAR WASH DONE WHILE THEY'RE WORKING AT HOME, AND THE MOBILE CAR WASH PERSON COMES UP AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SAYS, NO MORE MOBILE CAR WASHES.
I DON'T KNOW, PAULINA, MAYBE YOU HAVE A, A STRONG OPINION ON THAT OR, YOU KNOW, BUT I I, I, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE SOME FORM OF ASCERTAINABLE STANDARD IN THERE.
AND I I WOULD, I WOULD APPRECIATE SOME CHANGE IN THAT.
UM, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WOULD, UH, CAUSE THIS TO BE A PROBLEM? I MEAN, DO YOU HAVE A MOBILE DOGGY GROOMER, OR, WELL, I, I'M, I PERSONALLY DON'T, DON'T USE ANY MOBILE SERVICES THAT COME TO MY HOUSE OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, I DO, I HAVE A MOBILE CAR WASH AND A MOBILE DOGGY GROOMER.
BUT, BUT AGAIN, WHAT WOULD BE THE PROBLEM? BUT, BUT AGAIN, I DON'T VIEW IT AS A PROBLEM.
MY CONCERN WOULD BE IS THAT, UH, IF IT'S, IF IN THE OPINION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, THERE'S A PROBLEM, I, I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STANDARD IS.
SO WHAT DOES IT SAY? WHAT, WHAT'S BEING CH I WILL READ IT VERBATIM.
IT SAYS MOBILE SERVICES SHALL NOT INCLUDE SERVICES.
THAT QUOTE, IN THE OPINION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR WOULD POSE A NEGATIVE IMPACT UPON NEARBY PROPERTIES ONE PROVIDED, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.
AND, AND IF YOU KNOW WHAT IT MEANS MORE POWER TO YOU, THAT'S TOO, UH, WE NEED, WE NEED SOME CLARIFICATION.
THAT MAY BE TOO BIASED ON, ON MOBILE SERVICES.
WE WON'T WANT ANY, UH, MOBILE SERVICES THAT WOULD, UH, CONSTITUTE A NUISANCE.
UM, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY MODIFY THAT TO, BUT IF THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE BASE, I WAS GONNA SAY, YOU, YOU DO HAVE, UM, THERE, THERE ARE NOISE, UH, ABATEMENT PROVISIONS IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE.
I THINK YOU COULD VERY EASILY CROSS, CROSS-REFERENCE THOSE OR ANY OTHER PUBLIC NUISANCE.
SO WE HAVE AN ASCERTAINABLE STANDARD.
I, I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE RESIDENTS DESERVE, NOT SOME ARBITRARY NEBULOUS STANDARD.
UM, AND I'M GONNA HIGHLIGHT THAT BECAUSE, UH, YEAH, BECAUSE IF A, IF A GROOMER COMES AND THE VACUUM'S TOO LOUD, ARE YOU GONNA CITE THEM? TELL 'EM GET OUT OF THE CITY? SO I THINK IT'S TOO BROAD AND I, I THINK FOR SURE THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT.
UH, I, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TAKE IT OUT.
I THINK WE CAN ASCERTAINABLE STANDARD, A WINDOW COMING WASHES YOUR WINDOWS DOOR.
HOW OFTEN DO YOU GET YOUR WINDOWS WASHED WASHED? RIGHT.
I'M JUST SAYING IT'S TOO BROAD.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S NOT EVEN A GOOD ONE EITHER.
THAT SHORT DOG GROOMER, THEN NONE OF THOSE ARE, I GUESS WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT.
I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, UH, COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN IN THE PAST THAT WOULD YEAH, WE WOULD NEED THIS TYPE OF, YEAH.
DO WE NEED TO WASTE PAPER OR
IT'S BEEN IN THE CODE FOR A LONG TIME, SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS IN THE CODE THAT WE DON'T ACTUALLY ENFORCE.
WELL, THAT'S CURRENTLY IN THE CODE.
SO THIS IS NOT LIKE, THIS IS NOT LIKE THIS IS BEING PROPOSED.
NO, THIS IS, THIS IS THE LAW AS IT STANDS.
WHAT HAVE THERE HA HAS BEEN THIS BEEN VIOLATED? IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT? I DON'T KNOW.
WE WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE OPINION OF, OF, UH, PAUL HERE.
HAS IT EVER BEEN VIOLATED? HOW DID IT COME, IN YOUR OPINION? COME NOT NO
WELL, JUST, JUST, UM, FOR THE RECORD, THIS, THE, IN, IN THE PAST, AND I BELIEVE, UM, POTENTIALLY PRESENTLY, THE CITY HAS NOT ALLOWED MOBILE CAR WASHES.
UM, MAINLY BECAUSE OF, UH, UM, WHILE MOBILE CAR WASHES THAT DON'T HAVE A WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM SELF, MAYBE BECAUSE OF L L I D REGULATIONS.
[01:55:01]
IN THE OPINION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, THEY'VE, THEY'VE VIOLATED THE, THE LAW? OR IS IT NO, I THINK IT HAS OR NOT HAS TO DO WITH THE COLLECTION OF WASTEWATER AFTERWARDS.IT'S NOT SOLELY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, BUT AL BUT THE CITY ENGINEER, MAINLY BECAUSE OF THE CITY'S L I, UH, CITY, WELL, THE STATE'S L I D REGULATION REGULATIONS.
SO, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH WATER RUNOFF MM-HMM.
I BELIEVE IT'S UP TO $10,000 PER DAY.
I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT THERE.
I MEAN, LIKE, OKAY, I GOT A DEALERSHIP AT MY HOUSE, SO LET'S WASH ALL THE CARS.
AND A LOT OF THEM CARRY THEIR OWN TANKS.
SOME OF THEM RECYCLE THE WATER TOO.
THEY CANNOT COLLECT THE WATER AFTER THEY WASH
SO YOU WANT THEM TO BE A FU SERVICE CAR WASH? NO, NO, NO, NO.
I MEAN, IT HAS TO DO WITH SOME ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT WE CAN'T JUST DUMP THE WATER INTO THE DRAIN THAT GOES TO THE OCEAN.
SO THERE'S CERTAIN CHEMICAL THEY HAVE TO COLLECT IT AND RECYCLE THEM SOMEHOW.
I HEAR THAT ALL COUNTY LET'S A LOT OF WATER GO INTO THE OCEAN
SO, UH, NEXT I WAS, I WAS LOOKING AT THE, THE OUTDOOR DINING PROVISION, UH, WHICH I, I AM NOT CERTAIN I, I HAVEN'T DOUBLE CHECKED ON THIS, BUT THIS IS 26 DASH 1 24, JUST A COUPLE PAGES OVER.
UM, SO IT'S THE, IT SAYS SOURCE NEW, BUT I, I AM NOT SURE IF, IS THIS A NEW PROVISION OR, YES, THAT IS CORRECT, YES.
UM, I JUST, I JUST HAD A, A COUPLE OF OF QUESTIONS AND, AND MAYBE THIS IS JUST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I, I LIKE TO THINK BIG, BUT, UH, BASED ON THIS, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT YOU COULD NEVER HAVE A ROOFTOP DINING ESTABLISHMENT BECAUSE IT WOULD, IT WOULD, UH, IT WOULD INTERFERE WITH THE, UH, GIMME ONE SECOND.
I'M LOOKING FOR THE PROVISION.
UH, THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA SHALL NOT BE LOCATED IN A MANNER WHICH WILL, UH, OR SHALL BE LOCATED IN A MANNER WHICH WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH VISIBILITY, VEHICULAR OR PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY OR ACCESS TO, UH, CITY OR PUBLIC UTIL FACILITIES.
UH, AND I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, UM, SO, SO LET'S SAY, BECAUSE WE HAVE ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES IN THIS CITY, UM, PREDOMINANTLY, UH, THERE'S THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CITY HAS, HAS A LOT OF UNDERGROUND IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.
BUT, UM, SO EFFECTIVELY IT, YOU, YOU COULDN'T HAVE THAT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT MIGHT INTERFERE WITH THE VIEW OF THE, UH, OF THE UTILITY POLES.
IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING, OR, I MEAN, IS IS IT NOT, IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING? NO, THE, THE INTENT, UM, HERE IN TERMS OF VISIBILITY IS MORE, UM, UH, THE INTENT IS, UH, HAVING ESSENTIALLY THE OUTDOOR DINING AREAS ENCROACHED INTO KIND OF PARKING AREAS AND OBSTRUCT, UH, VEHICULAR, UH, VISIBILITY OF PEDESTRIANS AND PEDESTRIAN VISIBILITY OF MOTORISTS.
I THINK WE CAN REWORD THAT TO MAKE THAT A LITTLE, UH, LITTLE CLEAR.
AND, AND THEN HOW ABOUT PUBLIC RIGHTAWAY TOO, LIKE PEDESTRIAN WA UH, SIDEWALK, I MEAN PUBLIC SIDEWALKS AND SO FORTH.
AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I, THAT I WAS, UH, KIND OF CURIOUS ABOUT IS WE HAVE THIS, THIS HARD CAP AT 25% OF THE RESTAURANT'S GROSS FLOOR AREA.
AND I JUST WANT TO, I MEAN, LOOK, I DON'T KNOW WHAT RESTAURANT OR, OR, OR DINING, UH, OR, OR OR DINING AREA, BUT WOULD, WOULD POTENTIALLY WANT TO DO THIS.
BUT, UH, LET'S SAY THERE IS A RESTAURANT THAT WANTS TO COME IN THAT WANTS TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, MORE OF AN OUTDOOR THEME.
WE'RE WE'RE CAPPING THEM AT 25% OF THEIR, OF THE, OF THE GROSS, UH, THE GROSS AREA OF THEIR, UH, OF THEIR FLOOR SPACE IS, AND I, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE ANY, WE HAVE ANY PLAY IN THAT, SUCH THAT LET'S SAY SOMEBODY DID WANT TO COME IN AND, AND DO THAT, UH, THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION.
UM, ON THERE, ON, ON THERE, THE, THE INTENT WAS THE 25%, UM, PROVISION WAS ESSENTIALLY GONNA BE, UM, ESSENTIALLY SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE, UM, BY RIGHT, WITH A LOWER THRESHOLD PERMIT.
UM, AND THEN ABOVE 25%, UH, WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY, UH, BE REQUIRED FOR LIKE A PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW.
UM, THAT, UH, IT'S, SO IS THAT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S JUST COVERED BY, UH, WOULD, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD, THAT SOMEBODY WHO
[02:00:01]
WANTED TO DO THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION GET A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT? UH, CORRECT.I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY WE, WE CAN OR SHOULD MAKE THAT EASIER, BUT, UM, WE CAN, WELL, I, FRANKLY, I, I THINK IF, IF THERE'S A, UH, A TREND, UM, IN THE FUTURE FOR, FOR OUTDOOR DINING, UM, I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY LOOK AT ADDRESSING THAT AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.
UM, I WENT THROUGH THE REMAINDER OF IT AND I THINK I'M OKAY WITH THE REST OF IT.
WELL, UH, WE'RE GONNA CALL A RECESS FOR FOUR MINUTES.
PLANNING, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IS BACK FROM RECESS AT 9:05 PM PACIFIC TIME.
AND, UH, WE'LL GO BACK TO COMMISSION COMMENTS WITH VICE CHAIR WILLIAMS. OKAY.
I DID, I DID HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS UNDER THE DEFINITION.
I DID NOTICE WHEN IT CAME TO ADULT ORIENTED, UM, ACTIVITIES AND BUSINESSES, THAT THERE WERE QUITE A FEW THAT WERE OUTLINED.
UM, IS THIS, BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE THESE TYPES OF USES AND WE KNOW WHAT ZONES WE WANT TO ALLOW THEM IN, UH, ON, UH, THE DEFINITIONS, UM, FOR THIS, FOR THIS TYPE OF USE, WE ESSENTIALLY, UM, TOOK IT FROM THE EXISTING CODE.
UM, JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE, UH, DEFINITE INTER INTRICACIES, UM, AND DIDN'T ADJUST WHERE THEY WERE PERMITTED, UM, OR CURRENTLY ALLOWED.
SO THAT HASN'T CHANGED THROUGHOUT, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
AND IS THAT THE SAME CASE WITH THE DIFFERENT CANNABIS, UM, USES AS WELL UNDER DEFINITION? THAT IS CORRECT.
WHAT, WHAT CANNABIS UHHUH, THAT'S ON PAGE EIGHT.
IS THAT A NEW THING? CANNABIS IS NOT, CANNABIS USES ARE NOT, IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE CITY.
UM, IT'S JUST THAT WE, WE SPECIFIED, UM, AND MADE IT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT CURRENT STATE LAW REFERS TO THESE TYPES OF WHAT THEY'RE CALLED BASICALLY.
AND BASICALLY LIMITING THAT TO, UM, NOT RECREATIONAL, BUT TO MEDICAL.
SO IS WEST PEANUT ALLOWING MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN THE CITY OR WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT THERE'S, THERE'S NO CHANGES TO THE, UM, THE CANNABIS.
WE JUST MERELY INCLUDED THE, UH, THE DEFINITIONS.
MARIJUANA IS A STATE, IT'S A STATE LAW, RIGHT? YES.
IT'S A STATE LAW OR FROM A DIS YEAH.
YOU CAN USE IT, BUT YOU CAN'T SELL IT OR, OR DO BUSINESS THAT INCORPORATES THAT TYPE OF USE, AT LEAST IN THE CITY LIMITS OF WEST COVINA.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS, THAT WAS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
IF THERE WERE SPECIFIC ZONES THAT YOU EITHER WERE GONNA SUGGEST THAT THESE ACTIVITIES WOULD BE ALLOWED,
UM, YOU KNOW WHAT, GOING BACK TO THE WIRELESS, IF YOU LOOK AT, UH, 26 DASH 34 AND THEN GO TWO PAGES OVER BECAUSE THERE'S NO NUMBER ON THAT PAGE OR THE ONE BEFORE 26.
STATE HERE THAT TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES AND ANTENNAS SHALL NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN 1500 FEET OF A PROPERTY.
OF A PROPERTY WITH AN EXISTING FACILITY OR ANTENNA MEASURED FROM PROPERTY NET.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? I'M SORRY, WHAT SECTION IS THAT? I THINK IT'S 2026 DASH 34 26 1 34 AND THEN 1 34 PAGES.
22 1 34 AND THEN TURN TWO PAGES.
'CAUSE THERE'S NO NUMBERS ON THOSE PAGES.
YOU MEAN 26 DASH 1 35 4, SORRY, 26 1 34.
AND THEN YOU HAVE TO TURN, HEY, MISSION, I WILL SAY WHEN IT COMES TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS, THERE ARE FEDERAL LAWS THAT HAVE TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
UH, ONE OF WHICH IS THAT CAN'T IMPOSE STANDARDS THAT ARE SO STRINGENT, IT MAKES IT INFEASIBLE TO CONSTRUCT IT.
SO I WOULD TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION ON YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND
[02:05:01]
CONSIDERING THE SURVEY OF WHAT OTHER JURISDICTIONS ARE DOING REGARDING THAT NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS 'CAUSE THAT THAT COST IS BEING IMPOSED ON THE PROVIDER.SO THIS ACTUALLY SAYS THAT IT'S NOT ALLOWED AND THEN, THEN THE ANTENNA IS ALLOWED.
IT, IT JUST CONTRADICTS ITSELF.
AM I NOT READING IT RIGHT, NICK OR ATTORNEY? I'M SEEING IT AS, AS, AS WITHIN AN EXISTING FACILITY.
SO IT CAN'T, SO YOU CAN'T PUT ANOTHER ONE WITHIN 1500 FEET OF AN EXISTING FACILITY, WHICH I, WELL, I THINK THAT'S RE I THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE STANDARD THAT'S THERE.
THE, THE, UM, THE, THE OTHER STANDARD IS IF IT'S, IF IT'S NOT WITHIN 1500 FEET, IT SHALL BE, UH, PERMITTED, UH, SHALL, SHALL BE PERMITTED WITH, WITH IN 500 FEET OF, UH, OR SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED WITHIN, UH, 500 FEET OF SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES OR 100 FEET OF SURROUNDING MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
AND THAT'S, UH, TWO, UH, DOUBLE SMALL.
I, UH, SUB B IS THAT ON THE NEXT PAGE OR THE SAME ONE? I'M SAME PAGE.
IS THAT UP ABOVE? UH, IT'S, SO YOU'LL SEE LOCATION ON PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S THE TWO I'M TALKING ABOUT.
THEN DOUBLE LOWERCASE, I SUB B UNDER THAT.
BUT WE CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO BASICALLY, UM, NO FREESTANDING WIRELESS FACILITY SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHIN INSTEAD OF 500 FEET.
WE CAN ALSO MAKE CHANGES TO 1500 FEET.
NOW THERE'S A LITTLE CONTRADICTION ALSO.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD THEM ANYWHERE IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
BUT ALSO IF YOU LOOK AT ONE PAGE BEFORE, UM, WHICH IS 1 26 DASH 1 35 AND D IT BASICALLY ALSO STATED THAT PROHIBITED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
SO IT'S NOT, YOU CAN'T HAVE WIRELESS COMMUNICATION IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES, BUT IF YOU LOOK ONE SENTENCE ABOVE THAT, IT'S ALSO CONTRADICTING AS WELL.
SO ON PARAGRAPH FOUR, THE SUBSECTION D IS THE WAY I READ THAT THESE TYPES OF FACILITIES ARE NOT PROHIBITED.
IT'S NOT A BLANKET PROHIBITION FOR EVERY SINGLE TYPE OF WIRELESS FACILITY, BUT IT IS, IT IS SPECIFYING CERTAIN TYPES THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED, UM, ANTENNAS WITH THE SOLID OR WIRE SURFACE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT, BUT THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN, SO HOW FAR DOES A WIRELESS TOWER GO? WHAT'S THEIR, YOU KNOW, IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE.
I MEAN, YOU HAVE SMALL CELL FACILITIES, WHICH CAN BE AS LARGE AS MAYBE A SMALL FRIDGE AND SMALLER TO, UM, A GREENFIELD FACILITY, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE BUILDING A BRAND NEW TOWER THAT'S GOING SEVERAL STORIES HIGH.
SO THERE, THERE ARE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT TYPES OF WIRELESS FACILITIES.
WELL, NO, WE'RE TALKING RESIDENTIAL.
SO HOW FAR, LIKE THERE'S ONE AT CAMERON PARK, HOW FAR DOES THAT ONE GO? WHAT'S THE RADIUS? WHAT, HOW MANY PEOPLE DOES IT REACH? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
THERE'S OBVIOUSLY SOME TYPE OF SIGNAL THAT, HOW FAR DOES IT GO? OH, HOW MANY CUSTOMERS IT SERVES THAT, THAT, I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT.
IT'S, IT'S ALSO GONNA DEPEND ON, ON WHAT RADIO FREQUENCY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
BECAUSE IF IT'S FIVE G, IT'S MUCH, IT COVERS MUCH LESS AREA THAN THAN FOUR G AND THREE G'S MORE AND TWO G'S EVEN EVEN FURTHER.
SO IT JUST DEPENDS ON, ON WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO I, YEAH, THE SMALL CELL FACILITIES, THEY, THEY ADDRESS LESS PEOPLE, BUT THEY'RE SMALLER AND THEN THEY STACK MORE IN.
BUT THERE'S THE IDEA, THEY'RE LESS VISIBLE.
BUT THE LARGER TOWERS SUPPOSEDLY COVER MORE AREA.
BUT THE, THE, THE WAY THE FEDERAL LAW IS WRITTEN IS IF THEIR ENGINEER, THE CARRIER'S ENGINEER COMES AND SAYS, I NEED THIS TOWER HERE TO PROVIDE COVERAGE, THAT SIGNIFICANTLY LIMITS YOUR ABILITY TO SAY NO
BUT ALSO, UM, ALSO THIS, THE, THE FEDERAL LAW ALSO STATED THAT AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONS, AS CITY COUNCILS, WE CAN ALSO DECIDE ON IN TERMS OF THE LOCATIONS OF WHERE WE PLACE THESE AS WELL.
AND THEY HAD HAVE TO ADHERE TO THE CODE AS WELL.
WE, WE JUST WANNA ROLL OUT THE RED
[02:10:01]
CARPET.SO FOR EXAMPLE, THIS IS A ZONING CODE.
IT CONSISTS OF THE ENTIRE LAND OF WEST COVINA.
WE'RE JUST BASICALLY SAYING THAT WITHIN THIS ZONING CODE MM-HMM.
SO THE LAW ALLOWS YOU TO REGULATE AESTHETICS SO YOU CAN ADDRESS CERTAIN ASPECTS.
UH, IN SOME LOCATION YOU CAN SAY THIS DID NOT, NOT THIS CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL.
BUT WHAT YOU CAN'T DO IS MAKE THAT DISTANCE SO BIG THAT IT BANS IT COMPLETELY FROM ALL RESIDENTIAL SPACE.
'CAUSE THAT BECOMES A PROHIBITION.
AND THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE THE I, I'LL BE FLUENT.
YOU'LL, YOU'LL GET SUED AND PROBABLY LOSE
IF WE'RE GETTING SUED, THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, THE CITY OF WALNUT WOULD'VE BEEN SUED ALREADY BECAUSE THEY ARE PROHIBITING WIRELESS, STANDALONE WIRELESS FACILITY.
SO THE QUESTIONS COME IN IS THAT AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME, WE'RE DOING A ZONING CODE, WHICH CONSISTS OF ALL ZONING IN ALL BUILDING FOR THE CITY OF WEST COA.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW IS RESIDENTIAL ZONING CODE THAT WE'RE, WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REGARDING THE WIRE.
THEY CAN PUT IT IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA AND THEN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY CODE THAT WE HAD.
THERE'S THERE'S LIKE 10 OR 16 OF THEM BEFORE.
WHICH IS, WE'RE CHANGING IT TO, YOU KNOW.
WELL, I MEAN YOU GUYS HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CHANGE THIS CODE HOW YOU WANT.
I I JUST AS YOUR ATTORNEY, I'M ADVISING YOU.
IT'S BASED, IF I WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE, I WOULD YES.
LITERALLY PRINT OUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
WELL, WHAT DOES IT MATTER? PUT IT IN MY, WE ASKED FOR 15 OR 2000 IF PEOPLE WOULD CHANGE IT ANYWAY.
SO LET'S JUST ASK FOR WHAT DOES WALMART HAVE? YEAH, YEAH.
AND I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT GARDENA HAS.
15, UM, FIFTEEN'S, I'M ASKING THE PEOPLE WE PAY THE CITY PAID FOR.
SO THE, OUR CONSULTANTS, DO WE KNOW WHAT'S WALNUT? HAVE THEY SAID, THEY SAID NO OTHER CITY HAS MORE THAN A THOUSAND.
THAT THAT WAS THE NOTIFICATION.
THE NOTIFICATION RADIUS, NOT THE SEPARATION.
THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS FROM FACILITY.
WE'RE LOOKING IT UP NOW ACTUALLY WE CAN RE MAKE RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY, UH, TO OUR CITY COUNCILS, BUT IT'S ALSO UP TO THE CITY COUNCILS TO MAKE THE ADOPTIONS.
COMMISSIONER HANK, YOU SAID THE CITY OF WALNUT AND WHAT OTHER CITY HAVE A STRICT BELIEVE DIAMOND BAR, WALNUT AND DIAMOND BAR.
ALSO, THERE'S A LITTLE CONTRADICTION ALSO TO ABOVE THE SENTENCE FOR D ABOVE NUMBER FOUR.
IT ALSO, THERE'S A CONSTRAINTS IS THAT WIRELESS TELECOM FACILITY LOCATED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTWAY, WHICH IS ALLOWED, WHICH IS EVEN IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE EVERYWHERE HAS PUBLIC RIGHTWAY.
UM, THIS SECTION IS FOR, UM, ALL LAND USES.
THERE IS A SEPARATE SECTION FOR TELECOMMUNICATION WITHIN, WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THIS SECTION THAT, THAT WE'RE REVIEWING AT THE MOMENT IS FOR, FOR WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES WITHIN ALL LAND USES, IT'S, IT'S, THERE'S A SEPARATE SECTION FOR TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
SO IT'S, SO IF THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF THAT IS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES, IS THAT ALLOWED? BECAUSE PUBLIC RIGHTWAY, IT'S TECHNICAL IS EVERYWHERE.
BUT THEY'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT THE TYPES OF, UM, EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICES.
WELL, THOSE ARE, IT'S NOT, THERE'S CERTAIN EQUIPMENT THAT THEY DO NEED TO HAVE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH, UM, ANYONE IF, IF IT IS A MAJOR DISASTER.
AND SO I COULD UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S LIST, RIGHT? ONE NUMBER 1, 2, 3.
WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS IT'S 1, 2, 3, WHICH IS NOT PART OF THE EMERGENCY PORTION.
THIS IS, WELL, WHO'S TO SAY THAT IT ISN'T? BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT, OH, IT'S LISTED, UM, FOR THE EMERGENCY PORTION, YOU LOOK AT THE SIGNAL LIGHTS, SOME OF THEM ACTUALLY DO HAVE SOME TYPE OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT ATTACHED TO THEM.
SO IF YOU LOOK ABOVE NUMBER FOUR, IF YOU LOOK ABOVE NUMBER FOUR, ITEM NUMBER TWO, IT DID STATE THAT IS A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS ARE ALLOWED ON CITY OPERATED LAND FOR PUBLIC AGENCY WHEN USED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICE, PUBLIC UTILITIES, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.
SO THAT'S COVER ON ITEM NUMBER TWO.
THIS IS TALKING ABOUT ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
BUT EVEN ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS DEALING WITH THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY, JUST LIKE YOU HAVE EDISON, THERE ARE CERTAIN SERVICES THAT MAY BE NEEDED, WHICH ISN'T JUST IMMEDIATELY WEST COVINA FIRE.
AND HAVE YOU, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS TO BE ABLE TO ALSO HAVE ACCESS TO
[02:15:01]
LET PEOPLE KNOW IF THERE IS A MAJOR EMERGENCY.WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THAT'S ALSO COVERED.
SO YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD WANT THEM TO PERHAPS USE THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
ACTUALLY THIS, WE HAVE IT ALREADY ON OUR CELL PHONE.
DIDN'T WE GET A NOTIFICATION LAST WEEK?
THEY TESTED LAST WEEK, TESTED EVERYONE'S CELL PHONE TO MAKE SURE AND IN RUSSIA MM-HMM.
I WILL SAY IT IS INTERESTING, I WAS JUST LOOKING TO, TO SEE IF I COULD FIND THE, UM, MUNICIPAL CODE THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER HANG AND COMMISSIONER BERA WERE TALKING ABOUT IN WALNUT.
AND IT APPEARS THAT THEY, THEY'RE CORRECT.
UM, TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS ANDANA SHALL NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN 1500 FEET OF ANY SCHOOL TRAIL PARK OR OUT OR OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA, SPORTING VENUES AND RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
I DON'T, I I THINK THAT WOULD BE TANTAMOUNT TO A BLANKET PROHIBITION AND BASED UPON MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE CITY OF WALNUT.
BUT HEY, WHO, WHO AM I TO JUDGE? AND INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, SCHOOLS WOULD BE GOING THROUGH THE STATE ARCHITECT, THEY WOULDN'T LOCATED CORRECT.
THEY COULD LOCATE IT ON ON THE PROPERTY.
THOUGH EVEN COMING TO THE CITY.
AND THE CITY, UM, I CURRENTLY, WE'RE, WE'RE CREATING, WE ARE WORKING ON CREATING A MAP FROM DUE TO THE, A PREVIOUS APPLICATION THAT THAT WAS VOTED UPON.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT I DISCOVERED IS THAT THERE ARE SOME, UM, TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES ON PARK CITY PARKS WITHIN THE CITY OF WALNUT.
UM, I BELIEVE SUZANNE PARK, UM, HAS A LIGHT POLE THAT HAS A TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY.
UM, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE ONE, THOSE, THAT'S ONE OF THE WIRELESS FACILITIES THAT WE MAPPED OUT.
AND ALSO MOUNT SAC HAS A WIRELESS FACILITY, A TELE WIRELESS TO THE COMMUNICATION FACILITY.
AND I BELIEVE DIAMOND BAR HIGH SCHOOL, UM, THE HIGH SCHOOLS TEND TO HAVE IN THEIR FOOTBALL FIELDS, UM, THE LIGHT STANDARDS ARE TELECOMMUNICATION.
'CAUSE I ACTUALLY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO DIAMOND BAR HIGH SCHOOL TO SEE THE TYPE OF LIGHT FIXTURES THAT THEY HAD FOR TELECOMMUNICATION.
I MEAN, WE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, I MEAN CERTAIN PROJECTS ARE GRANDFATHERED IN.
UM, IT BASICALLY WE'RE, WE'RE WORKING ON THIS CODE AMENDMENTS FOR FUTURE USE.
SO I KNOW IN THE COMMITTEE, OBVIOUSLY THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS WAS A CONCERN TO, UH, I KNOW THE MAYOR AT THE TIME AND THE COUNCIL MEMBER AT THE TIME AND THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
SO I BELIEVE WE WERE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AS WELL.
SO I'M NOT SURE HOW THIS GOT CHANGED.
UM, AND JUST, UH, FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION ON THE CITY OF DIAMOND BARS SEPARATION, UM, REQUIRED, UH, AND NOPE, I TAKE THAT BACK.
THIS WAS ADULT BUSINESSES, NEVERMIND
SO IF WE WERE TO, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT YEAH.
THEY HAVE THOUGH, IF WE WERE TO ADD LIKE A REQUIREMENT LIKE THE CITY OF WALNUT HAVE HAS, UM, BUT FOR CASES WHERE OBVIOUSLY CELL TOWERS AND COVERAGE IS NEEDED, THEN BY, BY FEDERAL LAW, THE CITY HAS TO GRANT THAT.
SO REGARDLESS, UH, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE CITY'S ORDINANCE MAY OR THE CODE MAY SAY IN THE CITY WESTFIELD THAT WE ADOPT EVENTUALLY, UM, IN THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S STILL, THE FEDERAL LAW STILL SUPERSEDES IT.
SO IN ANY CASE, ON CASE BY CASE BASIS, IT COULD BE ADDRESSED.
NO, I STILL HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
WELL YOU, YOU, YOU DO WANT YOUR LOCAL CODE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH FEDERAL LAW.
YOU DON'T WANT TO SET IT UP WHERE IT'S NOT.
SO I WILL WANT, WHY DOES WALNUT HAVE THAT VERBIAGE? I'M NOT THEIR ATTORNEY.
I, I WILL SAY THAT THEIR RESIDENCE UNITED IN BUNCHES AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THEY, THEY WON THAT FIGHT.
BECAUSE WHEN RESIDENTS UNITE THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE SHOW IN, IN COURT OR OUTSIDE OF COURT.
SO ACTUALLY WHEN THE CODE WAS CREATED, UM, CITY OF ATTORNEY, I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO EXPLAIN TO US THAT WHEN THE CODE WAS CREATED 30 SOME ODD YEARS AGO, THERE ARE, I BELIEVE THERE ARE QUITE A FEW THINGS THAT THEY ACTUALLY ALLOW THE CITY TO DECIDE.
I BELIEVE ONE OF THE THING WAS THE LOCATIONS OF THE TOWEL.
UM, AND THEN THE OTHER LO THE OTHER WAS THE TYPE WHERE, HOW
[02:20:01]
BIG IT IS, HOW SMALL IT IS.CITI CAN ACTUALLY DICTATE THAT.
UM, I FORGOT WHAT THE THIRD OR, OR IF THERE'S THE FOURTH ONE IS, BUT I LIKE TO LOOK INTO THAT BECAUSE IT WAS A 30 YEARS AGO.
I MEAN, THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE CAN'T USE.
WE CAN'T BASICALLY SAY THAT, HEY, WE, WE DON'T WANT THIS BECAUSE OF RADIATIONS, WELL, FOR HEALTH REASONS.
BUT THEY ARE ALSO GIVING THE CITY OR ANY GOVERNING BODY TO SAY THAT, HEY, YOU GUYS GET TO SAY WHERE YOU WANNA PUT THIS, WHICH IS, WHICH IS THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING.
WE'RE HAVING A ZONING CODE DISCUSSIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO WITH OUR LAND.
WHERE CAN WE PUT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, WHERE CAN WE PUT COMMERCIAL BUILDING? AND THIS IS SOMEWHAT A COMMERCIAL THING, AND WHERE COULD WE DO, OR WHAT COULD WE DO WITH THE RESIDENTIAL AREA? NOW THE OTHER THING THAT, THAT THEY HAD ALSO GIVEN US WAS THE FACT THAT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, AND, AND, AND YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT AESTHETICALLY WE CAN ACTUALLY TURN DOWN POLES IF IT DOESN'T AESTHETICALLY PLEASES THE RESONANCE.
UM, SO THEY DID GIVE US THIS, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS AS WELL.
UM, SOME CITY HAD ALREADY, UM, PUT SOME PLANS INTO IT.
SO WE'RE, I GUESS WE'RE IN A DISCUSSION AND IT'S A LONG DISCUSSION AND THIS IS A HUGE, UM, DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH.
AND, AND THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY RESIDENTS THAT COME OUT HERE TONIGHT, I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT, OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE BEING INFORMED, BUT MAYBE THEY JUST MISSED THE MEETING.
AND I LIKE TO SEE IF WE POSSIBLY CAN CONTINUE THIS SO THAT PERHAPS WE CAN GET RESIDENTS TO COME OUT, OR AT LEAST THEY GET A CHANCE TO LISTEN TO, YOU KNOW, THIS CODE IS, WILL BE AFFECTING ALL LAND USERS IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA.
I MEAN, I, I'LL UH, ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MO YES.
AND I'LL, I'LL SECOND THAT AND I'LL, I'LL, AND IF THE COMMISSION'S OKAY.
WITH THAT, I'LL ALSO LIKE TO DIRECT STAFF, UM, TO PUT ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND ON OUR CITY'S WEBSITE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO COME SPEAK AT THE NEXT MEETING REGARDING THE CODE, UH, UPDATE, UM, AND, AND GET THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE MATTER AND, AND LIST SOME OF THE MAIN TOPICS DISCUSSED BY THE COMMISSION TODAY.
UH, AND, AND POINT THAT OUT ON THE POST I, UM, CHAIR, IF I MAY, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT, THAT, UM, WE DID A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF COMMUNITY OUTREACH ON THIS ITEM.
WE'VE HAD, UM, AT LEAST SEVEN COMMUNITY PUBLIC MEETINGS DISCUSSING THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE.
WE HAVE A WEBSITE SPECIFICALLY DEDICATED TO THE COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY, UM, DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE.
WE'VE SENT OUT EMAIL BLAST REGARDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE.
WE'VE HAD, WE'VE HAD, UM, FLYERS AND OR, AND, UM, POSTERS POSTED IN PUBLIC AREAS IN THE CITY.
AND AT JUST AT THE LAST, UM, CITY COUNCIL MEETING, UM, IT WAS ANNOUNCED THAT TONIGHT'S MEETING WAS GOING TO BE HELD TODAY IN FRONT OF FULL COUNCIL, UM, CHAMBER.
I I'M ONLY HERE BECAUSE, BUT NO, IT'S TUESDAY.
BUT, BUT STAFF HAS DONE A TREMENDOUS JOB AND OBVIOUSLY YOU GUYS HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO PUT THIS TOGETHER, AND I KNOW YOU DID TOO, JOANNE AND, AND PAULINA AND THE CONSULTING FIRM AND THEN ALL YOUR STAFF.
UM, I THINK WE, WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE OBVIOUSLY THE RESIDENTS GET ONE MORE CHANCE AND AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IF THEY, HOPEFULLY THEY, THEY DO.
IF NOT, THEN THEY LOSE, THEY LOSE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
BUT, BUT, UH, I THINK POINTING OUT SOME OF THE BIG TOPICS THAT WE DISCUSSED TODAY AND HOPEFULLY DOING A POST WILL GET SOME SORT OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
I THINK THAT WAS JUST THE CONCERN THAT SOME OF US HAVE, AND HOPEFULLY ONE MORE CHANCE.
AND, AND, AND WITH THAT SECOND, I'LL SAY, PAULINA, CAN YOU DO ROLL CALL? I, I AND YOU CAN GO AND COMMISSIONER LEWIS REAL QUICK.
I, I, I AM, I'M ON THE FENCE WITH REGARD TO CONTINUING THIS.
'CAUSE ULTIMATELY THERE'S GONNA BE AT LEAST ANOTHER ROUND IN WHICH THIS CAN BE CONSIDERED IN FRONT OF THE, THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY.
UM, AND I FEEL LIKE FOR THE MOST PART, UM, IF THERE, IF THERE IS ANYTHING THAT ANYONE IS PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT, THEY'RE PROBABLY MOST LIKELY GOING TO TRY TO ADDRESS THAT WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.
MY, MY PRIMARY, MY PRIMARY CONCERN WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE GET INTO ANY NUANCED,
[02:25:01]
UM, ITEMS HERE, I I, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THOSE HERE AND NOW IF WE CAN.AND THEN IF, IF WE DO WANT TO CONTINUE, CONTINUE IT SUCH THAT, UM, SUCH THAT THE CONSULTANTS CAN BRING THIS BACK, CITY STAFF CAN BRING THIS BACK FOR THE, FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF, UM, INCORPORATING ALL OF THE, UH, THINGS THAT WERE DISCUSSED THIS EVENING.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE A MORE PRODUCTIVE WAY OF DOING THINGS.
AND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TIMELINE WOULD BE FOR THAT.
UH, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAD CONCERNS ABOUT WAS, UM, AND, AND AGAIN, THIS IS A, THIS IS A SMALL THING, BUT, UM, AS IT PERTAINED TO THAT MOBILE SERVICES ASPECT, UM, AND, UH, NO OFFENSE TO PAULINA, BUT CREATING A, AN, AN ASCERTAINABLE STANDARD RATHER THAN THE OPINION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.
UM, I, I'D LIKE TO SEE, UM, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE CONSULTANTS AND STAFF COME UP WITH AN ASCERTAINABLE STANDARD THAT PERHAPS HAS CROSS REFERENCES TO THE VARIOUS STANDARDS IN OUR, UH, UM, IN OUR, UH, UH, A A U P C U P, UM, STANDARDS SUCH THAT THIS CAN BE SOMETHING THAT ISN'T ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS.
UM, I, I WOULD ALSO, UM, I I WOULD ALSO SAY, UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT ANYONE HAS TO ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GIVE THAT BACK TO YOU, UM, AND YOU CAN COME BACK HOPEFULLY FAIRLY QUICKLY WITH THE MINOR CHANGES THAT I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
UM, AND THEN WE CAN, WE CAN VOTE YAY OR NAY ON THAT AND THEN SEND IT ON TO CITY COUNCIL.
THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE WHAT I THINK WOULD BE THE MOST PRODUCTIVE USE OF OUR TIME.
THAT WOULD, UM, IF I CAN INTERJECT THAT ALSO ALLOW US TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT, UH, WALNUT AND DIAMOND BAR ARE DOING WITH THEIR TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND SEE YEAH.
WHAT WE CAN INCORPORATE FROM THAT.
YEAH, I THINK THAT'S NOT ALREADY, IT'S NOT ONLY TO MARKET THE NEXT MEETING, BUT ALSO INCORPORATE WHAT SOME OF THE MEMBERS HERE SAID TODAY AND LOOK INTO THOSE ISSUES AND THEN GET BACK TO US AT THAT NEXT MEETING, I THINK IS IMPORTANT.
UH, I THINK THAT ONE OF THE, UH, ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS IS THAT OBVIOUSLY A, A COUNCIL MEMBER HAS THE ABILITY TO APPOINT COMMISSION MEMBERS AND, AND, AND BE A PUBLIC, BE A PUBLIC SERVANT BY ASKING THOSE TOUGH QUESTIONS.
SO WHEN IT DOES GO TO THE COUNCIL, UH, STAFF'S ABLE TO COMMUNICATE THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION IN DETAIL AND WHY THE COMMISSION VOTED EASTERN AWAY, WHY THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN OFF OR SHOULD BE LEFT ALONE AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
'CAUSE I BELIEVE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT BEFORE IT GOES TO THAT NEXT STEP.
SO, SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, UH, CAN I INTERJECT ONE LAST TIME? YES.
SO WE DO, THERE IS TIME SENSITIVITY IN GETTING THIS COMPLETED.
UM, SO, UH, WE ARE GONNA TRY TO BRING IT BACK AT THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, MEETING, UM, SO THAT WE CAN GET IT ON TO IN FRONT OF COUNSEL BEFORE THE DEADLINE.
SO, UM, THAT IS GONNA BE OUR GOAL.
SO, UH, YEAH, SO, UH, I'LL, IF, UH, COMMISSIONER HANG WANTS TO AMEND HER COMMISSION, I'LL, UH, SORRY IF COMMISSIONER HANG WANTS TO AMEND HER MOTION AND I'LL SECOND IT, WHICH IS, WHICH WILL INCLUDE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS TODAY FOR CITY STAFF TO LOOK INTO AND REPORT BACK TO THE COMMISSION ON SOME OF THE, ON, ON THE COMMENTS THAT WERE A CONCERN TO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS AND, AND INTEGRATE THOSE COMMENTS INTO, INTO CHANGES IS WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST.
WELL, YOU, UM, WELL, I THINK ADD ON, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THEM COME BACK WITH THE DETAILS AND THEN, AND THEN WE HAVE THE CHANCE TO GO THROUGH THOSE DETAILS WELL, IN INTEGRATING THOSE COMMENTS INTO PROPOSAL, BECAUSE THAT'S A, THAT'S LIKE PROPOSAL.
AND THEN WE CAN, AND THEN WE CAN A LOT, WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT, UH, ABOUT THOSE, THOSE PROSPECTIVE CHANGES.
SOME OF THEM ARE, ARE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND SO I, I THINK, I THINK THAT THEY CAN COME BACK WITH CONCRETE, UH, PROPOSALS THAT WE CAN SAY, OKAY, WE'RE, WE'RE EITHER GOING WITH THAT OR WE'RE GOING WITH THE, THE, THE, THE VERSION THAT THEY, THAT THEY PREVIOUSLY GAVE US.
OR, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CHANGING A WORD HERE OR THERE.
AND, AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF OUR TIME.
THAT WAY WE HAVE CONCRETE PROPOSALS IN FRONT OF US, WE CAN VOTE YAY OR NAY ON THEM OR AMEND THEM.
UM, YEAH, BASED UPON, BASED UPON WHATEVER LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE, UM, AND THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER PRIOR TO VOTING ON THEM.
SO IT'S A LOT TO AGREE TO EACH CHANGE, BUT I THINK CITY STAFF SHOULD LOOK INTO LIKE THE COMMENTS YOU MADE ABOUT THE CHANGES YOU WANT.
THEY SHOULD COME BACK WITH A REPORT AND, AND WAYS THAT IT COULD, WHAT'S THE PROS AND CONS OF THAT CHANGE AND SO FORTH.
SO, UH, IF COMMISSIONER HANGS OKAY WITH THAT, YES, THAT WOULD BE FINE.
I MEAN, THERE, ALL OF US MADE REALLY GOOD, YOU KNOW, UM,
[02:30:01]
SUGGESTIONS, SO THAT WE SHOULD INCORPORATE ALL THAT AND KIND OF LIKE GO THROUGH IT.AND THEN, SO NEXT TIME WE CAN CONTINUE THE DISCUSSIONS AS WELL.
AND SINCE THERE'S A MOTION, SECOND WE'LL DO ROLL CALL AND THEN OPEN DISCUSSION AFTER.
CAN WE OPEN DISCUSSION AFTERWARDS SO YOU COULD INPUT THOSE COMMENTS FOR THE NEXT MEETING OR? I THINK WE, THE ONLY THING IS I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER COMMENTS YOU GUYS WANT CHANGES, UM, THAT WE GET THAT DIRECTION TODAY SO THAT WHEN WE COME BACK TO YOU AT THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU CAN LOOK OVER ALL THOSE PROPOSED CHANGES.
'CAUSE WE'RE NOT GONNA, UM, IN ORDER TO MEET THAT TIMEFRAME, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO COME BACK AGAIN AND, AND MEET IT.
UM, SO THAT'S GONNA BE VERY LIMITING ON OUR END.
SO THE MORE FEEDBACK THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE US TONIGHT SO THAT WE'RE BETTER PREPARED TO, UM, RESPOND TO ANY CHANGES OR SUGGESTIONS YOU HAVE.
SO LIKE WHAT COMMISSIONER, LIKE COMMISSIONER LEWIS MENTIONED A BUNCH OF OH, THOSE LISTS.
WE CAN COME BACK AND WATCH IT AND YEAH.
SO TAKE THAT FEEDBACK AND WE CAN COME BACK AND SAY, OKAY, THESE ARE THE, THE SUGGESTIONS YOU GUYS MADE.
WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE 'EM, OR THIS IS THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT BACK FROM WALNUT OR DIAMOND.
THIS IS WHAT WE CAN'T EXACTLY REFERENCE THE TWO.
LIKE, SO WE'LL DO THAT CITIES AND THEN WE CAN MAKE AN EDUCATED DECISION LIKE THAT.
AND IF WE CAN JUST, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE, UM, THAT IF YOU WANNA CHANGE OR HAVE COMMENTS ON, IF YOU CAN GET THAT TO US.
YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL DO THAT NOW.
SO WE'LL DO, WE'LL DO THE, WE'LL DO THE, SINCE THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND WE'LL DO ROLL CALL AND THEN AFTER THAT WE'LL OPEN UP DISCUSSION SO WE CAN GET THAT INPUT.
OR I NEED, IF WE NEED TO PUT NOW YEAH.
CHAIR, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO DO THE MOTION AFTER THE DISCUSSION.
SO I, THE QUESTION NOW, WELL HOLD THE MOTION A SECOND AND THEN OPEN, UH, BEFORE WE DO A ROLL CALL, DOES ANY COMMISSIONER HAVE ANY YEAH, ITEMS? I, I HAVE ONE, ONE FINAL THING AND I APOLOGIZE, BUT MY TABS GOT STUCK TOGETHER HERE.
UM, SO, UH, WITH REGARD TO, I BELIEVE THIS IS, UH, 26 DASH 2 59, UH, PERTAINING TO, UH, TREE PRUNING OF, UH, OF ANY OAK TREE, UM, UNLESS THE PERMIT IS FIRST, UH, OBTAINED FROM THE PLANNING DIVISION, I, I DID NOTICE THAT, THAT YOU HAVE, UM, YOU, YOU HAVE PROVISIONS FOR PUBLIC NECESSITY, UM, MEANING A, AN EMERGENT SITUATION AS IT PERTAINS TO, UH, PUBLIC TREES, BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY SUCH PROVISION FOR AN EMERGENT SITUATION THAT OCCURS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AS IT PERTAINS TO ANY OF THOSE TREES.
AND OBVIOUSLY I THINK THAT'S A PROBLEM I, I DON'T THINK THAT ANYONE SHOULD BE PUNISHED FOR.
LET'S, AND AND I ALSO THINK THERE'S ANOTHER ISSUE WITH THAT, UH, IS LET'S SAY HYPOTHETICALLY SOMEBODY HAS AN OAK TREE THAT IS, THAT IS OVER THEIR PROPERTY, UM, AND THEY WANT TO INSTALL SOLAR PANELS AND IT IMPACTS THE, UH, UH, IMPACTS THE EFFICIENCY OF THEIR SOLAR PANELS.
I, I THINK THOSE EXCEPTIONS NEED TO BE, UH, PUT INTO PLAY.
AND WE'RE, WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT A A 10%, UM, SCENARIO.
I THINK A 10% IS FRANKLY, UM, GIVEN HOW OVERGROWN SOME OF THE OAKS I SEE AROUND THE CITY ARE 10% SEEMS, UH, UNREASONABLY, UH, MINIMAL.
SO I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN INCREASE IN THE, UM, AMOUNT OF PRUNING THAT YOU CAN DO TO AN OAK TREE WITHOUT A PERMIT FROM THE PLANNING DIVISION.
UM, PERHAPS UP TO 30% OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
UM, I, I, I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE.
SO LONG AS YOU'RE NOT CAPPING THE TREE IN AN IMPERMISSIBLE MANNER, I THINK THAT EVERYONE CAN AGREE TO THAT.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY I'VE SEEN SOME PALM TREES, UM, THAT I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
I, I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT'S A THING, BUT I SEE THEM ALL OVER NOW.
THAT WAS MY ONLY OTHER COMMENT.
IF I MAY JUST, UH, COMMENT ON THAT JUST REALLY QUICK.
I I KNOW I, I DO WANNA CHECK WITH THE, UM, ARBORISTS, UM, ON THAT INTERNALLY WE HAVE THAT IN STAFF TO KIND OF, KIND OF GET THE IDEAL, UH, RECOMMENDATION, CERTAINLY PERCENTAGE.
AND WHAT SOME OF MY COMMENTS WERE, UM, IN REGARDS TO, UM, CLARIFICATION REGARDING, UH, LIKE, UH, COMMISSIONER LEWIS MENTIONED EARLIER REGARDING THE SHELTER ISSUE.
UH, I WANT CLARIFI, I WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION ON THAT MEETING THAT'S WRITTEN DOWN.
UM, BECAUSE I THINK OBVIOUSLY IF IT'S FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THEN WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDER CONSIDERATION, I THINK FOR WORKING WITH CHILDREN.
AND I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED.
THERE ARE SOME NON-PROFIT LIKE WINGS MM-HMM.
WHAT'S IT CALLED? IT'S CALLED WINGS.
THEY PROVIDE HOUSING FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN WHO HAVE,
[02:35:01]
UM, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ISSUES BECAUSE, AND SO THE, THE EMERGENCY SHELTER IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.AND SO MAYBE JUST CLARIFICATION AS FAR AS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOMELESS YEAH.
CLARIFICATION, WHAT THE PROPOSED CHANGES ARE, WHAT THE CURRENT CHANGES, AND THEN ALSO, UM, I WANT TO KNOW CLARIFICATION.
UH, AND I THINK THIS IS A, A, UH, A SUBJECT TO POST ABOUT WHICH WILL BE CHANGING A CIVIC, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE CORRECT TERM, CIVIC SLASH WHAT INSTITUTION OR SO CHANGING A CIVIC SLASH INSTITUTIONAL INTO A, UH, COMMERCIAL CATEGORY.
YOU KNOW, I THINK, UH, IN THE PAST RESIDENTS HAVE ACTED ON THAT IN THE PAST, ESPECIALLY ON GREEN SPACE AND PARKS.
I KNOW THAT'S A BIG CONCERN FOR OUR RESIDENTS.
AND I THINK THAT, UH, I WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION ON THAT AND, AND ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT GETS, UH, POSTED ON, IN REGARDS TO NOTIFYING THE COMMUNITY ABOUT IT ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
AND, UM, JUST, JUST ONE OTHER THING.
UM, IF, IF, IF ONE STAFF DOES COME BACK ON THAT, IF, IF WE CAN FIND OUT WHAT THE ORIGIN OF THAT, UH, INITIAL ZONING DECISION WAS, IF IT WAS, IF IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS, UH, DONE SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT SITE, UM, THAT THE PUBLIC HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON SPECIFICALLY, AND, YOU KNOW, THAT COLLEGE WAS, WAS PUT IN PLACE, UM, WITH THAT, WITH THAT SPECIFIC ZONING REQUIREMENT, I WOULD BE, I'D BE INTERESTED TO, TO UNDERSTAND THE, THE, THE BACKGROUND OF THAT SUCH THAT IF IT IS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE THAT WE'RE NOT, UH, WE'RE NOT DISTURBING PEOPLE'S, PEOPLE'S UNDERSTANDING AND OPINIONS THAT WERE, THAT WERE PUT INTO PLAY IN, IN, UH, IN, IN FORMULATING THAT DECISION AT THE TIME.
BECAUSE HAVING A COLLEGE CAMPUS THERE, UM, IS, IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM, YOU KNOW, HAVING A, A, A SHOPPING CENTER OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
UH, PEOPLE HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT EXPECTATION AND, AND VIEWPOINT TOWARDS THOSE THINGS.
SO I, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SEE THE NEXUS OF THAT.
AND I HAVE ONE MORE THING THAT I NEED TO, UH, LIKE TO ADD.
IS THAT THE AB 1221, I BELIEVE THAT'S THE NEW CODE FROM THE STATE.
I'LL BE INCORPORATING THAT IN HERE AS WELL, OR NOT YET.
I, I THINK THAT IT'S BASICALLY THE INCREASED HEIGHTS AND THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER ITEMS REGARDING THE A D U.
THERE'S SOME THAT, UH, 2023 JANUARY THAT ALLOW, UM, ADUS TO BE 18 FEET AND HIGH.
UM, ALSO TO COME THIS COMING JANUARY, THEY'RE GOING TO ALLOW ON MULTIPLE FAMILY PROPERTIES, UM, WHERE PEOPLE CAN SUBDIVIDE THEM TO 600 SQUARE FEET.
BUT THAT'S NEW LEGISLATION THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.
FROM WHAT HOUSES ARE GONNA BE NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.
MULTIPLE FAMILY ZONED PROPERTIES.
AND THE ONLY REASON WHY IT WAS LIMITED TO THAT, THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION, WHEN THEY READ IT, REALIZED THEY WERE GOING, THE WAY THE STATE WAS PRESENTING IT, IT WOULD'VE AFFECTED SINGLE FAMILY.
AND THEY THEMSELVES CONTACTED STATE AND SAID, NO, YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT WITH SINGLE FAMILY.
AND THEN, UH, ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER, HANG, I FORGOT WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY.
ANYWAY, UM, THE 600 SQUARE FEET KIND OF THROW ME OFF.
IS THAT, IS THAT, DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT IT'S GONNA BE A STATE LAW AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA TAKE EFFECT THIS COMING JANUARY.
DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT THE CODE, UH, AB WHAT? NO, I DON'T REMEMBER.
THERE WERE QUITE, THERE ARE QUITE A FEW, EVEN WHEN IT COMES TO, UM, THE, UM, NATIVE AMERICAN AND THE AB 52, THERE'S SOME NEW THINGS THAT ARE GONNA COME INTO EFFECT IN JANUARY DEALING WITH THAT AS WELL.
SO THERE, THERE'S QUITE A FEW, THERE'S QUITE A FEW CHANGES, THINGS THAT ARE GONNA HAPPEN JANUARY.
SO I'LL, I'LL SAY THAT IF OUR, IF OUR CONSULTANT COULD LOOK INTO SOME OF THE RECENT LAWS THAT GOVERNOR NEWSOM HAS JUST SIGNED INTO LAW THAT WILL MAYBE TAKING EFFECT IN JANUARY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CODE UPDATE REFLECTS CURRENT AND, AND OBVIOUSLY UPCOMING STATE LAWS THAT ARE GONNA GO INTO EFFECT IN JANUARY.
I THINK IT'S STATE LAW ALREADY, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
THAT'S WHY IT'S TAKEN INTO EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST, 2023 OR 2024? UH,
[02:40:02]
2024.AB AND THE, UM, THE CURRENT CODE BEFORE YOU DOES INCLUDE THOSE PROVISIONS FOR ADUS MM-HMM.
I ALSO HATE TO SAY THIS, BUT IF, IF WE THINK THAT THERE'S EVER GONNA BE A GOOD STOPPING POINT FOR THIS CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE, WE'RE GONNA BE CHASING OUR TAILS FOREVER, GUYS.
'CAUSE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A LOT.
IT'S A LOT OF STUFF COMING DOWN, UNFORTUNATELY.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONER BRACE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? NOTHING MORE.
AND, AND JUST TO CONFIRM, UH, COMMISSIONERS, THAT MOTION WAS A CONTINUANCE SPECIFICALLY TO OCTOBER 24TH? THAT'S CORRECT.
WITH, WITH THE, UH, WITH DIRECTION TO STAFF TO ADDRESS ALL THE COMMENTS PROVIDED.
UM, SO THIS WILL BE CONTINUED AND THEN, UH, NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO NON-HEARING ITEMS. WE HAVE NO NON-HEARING ITEMS THIS EVENING.
COMMISSION REPORTS AND COMMENTS AND MS.
[6. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT]
MOVE ON TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT.UH, PAULINA, DO YOU HAVE ANY ITEMS TO REPORT? YES,
I HAVE A COUPLE ITEMS I WANTED TO SHARE WITH THE COMMISSIONERS.
SO THIS SATURDAY WE HAVE DISTRICT ONE COMMUNITY MEETING, UM, AT DEL NORTE PARK FROM 10:00 AM TO 12:00 PM UM, SO IF ANYONE WANTS TO GET AN UPDATE ON, UH, FROM OUR MAYOR PRO TEM TOBA, HE'LL BE HAVING HIS COMMUNITY MEETING.
UM, THE REGULAR COUNCIL BE, OR REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD OCTOBER 17TH.
UM, AND THEN WE DO HAVE A COUPLE EVENTS COMING UP THE END OF THE MONTH.
SO WE HAVE CAR TOBER FEST CAR SHOW, WHICH WILL BE HELD AT THE EASTLAND CENTER, UM, BETWEEN 11:00 AM TO 3:00 PM AND THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE FESTIVAL FRIGHTS ON LONG GLENDORA AVENUE THE FOLLOWING, UH, WEEKEND, UH, OCTOBER 28TH.
UM, THERE'S GONNA BE A HALLOWEEN COSTUME CONTEST FOR EV ALL AGES.
THERE'S GONNA BE A HAUNTED MAZE, UM, AND FOOD AND VENDORS.
UH, SO IS THIS OUR FIRST THUNDER FEST? UH, NO, SORRY.
IT'S OUR SECOND ONE THAT WE'RE HAVING ON GLENDO AVENUE.
OH, THE ONE THAT'S EASTLAND THE CAR, CAR CARTO FEST.
I THINK IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE'RE HAVING IT AT EASTLAND.
[7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION]
IAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS TO REPORT? I FORGOT TO MENTION ONE THING.UM, AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, UM, WE DID, UH, THE COUNCIL DID A PROCLAMATION FOR, UH, NATIONAL COMMUNITY PLANNING MONTH AND BEING OUR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, I KNOW YOU GUYS, UH, SOME OF YOU WERE ABLE TO ATTEND AND RECEIVE THAT PROCLAMATION.
UM, SO JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE WAS AWARE THAT WE ARE CELEBRATING PLANNING MONTH THIS MONTH.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE ROLE THAT PLANNING PLAYS IN CREATING GREAT COMMUNITIES AND SHAPING AND BUILDING OUR CITY, UM, IT'S VITAL.
JUST AS YOU KNOW, WE WERE DISCUSSING THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE THAT PLAYS A ROLE UP TO, YOU KNOW, HOW HEIGHT YOUR WALL CAN BE TO
SO IT IMPACTS EVERYONE AND IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ROLE THAT SOMETIMES, UH, DOESN'T GET A LOT OF ATTENTION OR AUDIENCE FOR IT.
BUT, UM, SO JUST WANTED TO SAY, UM, THANK YOU FOR BEING ON OUR COMMISSION AND, UM, WE'RE HAPPY TO CELEBRATE PLANNING MONTH THIS MONTH.
UM, AND THEN THERE'S, UH, NO, UM, CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEMS TO REPORT AT THIS TIME.
AND, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ADJOURN THIS MEETING IN, UH, SENDING MY KIDDOES TO THE STORE CLERK, UH, WHO, WHO MOST THIS PAST WEEK THERE WAS A VIOLENT SHOOTING IN OUR CITY, IN DISTRICT ONE AT A LOCAL STORE.
AND THE, THE CITY, I MEAN, SORRY, THE, THE STORE CLERK, UH, PASSED AWAY IN THAT SHOOTING.
AND I WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR THAT OBVIOUSLY, UH, THOSE TWO SUSPECTS HAVE BEEN POSTED BY OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND OUR SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS ARE SHOWING WHO THOSE TWO KIDS ARE.
AND SOONER OR LATER YOU COULD RUN, YOU COULD HIDE THE MINIMUM WOMAN OF THE WESTFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT WILL FIND YOU AND BE READY.
AND I ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO ADJOURN THIS MEETING IN SENDING MY CONDOS ALSO TO THE PEOPLE OF
[02:45:01]
ISRAEL AND, UH, AGAIN, CONDEMN, UH, HAMAS ON THEIR ATTACK ON IN ISRAEL.AND THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 9:48 PM PACIFIC TIME.