[Call to Order]
[00:00:06]
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 PM PACIFIC TIME.
WE'LL NOW TAKE A MOMENT FOR SILENT PRAYER OR MEDIATION, FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WILL BE LED BY ASSISTANT PLANNER, JERRY.
PUT YOUR RIGHT HAND OVER YOUR HEARTS READY.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD IN THE VISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
GREAT, UH, PAULINA, CAN YOU DO ROLL CALL? GOOD EVENING.
VICE CHAIR, OR, UH, COMMISSIONER ERRA IS NOT HERE YET.
WE DON'T HAVE MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETING ON OCTOBER 24TH, 2023 OF THE REGULAR MEETING.
SO WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO ORAL COMMUNICATIONS.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TODAY? SEEING NONE TONIGHT,
[1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 23-02 ZONE CHANGE NO. 23-02]
WE HAVE, UH, ONE CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM FOR THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO TWO, ZONE CHANGE NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO TWO AND CODE AMENDMENT DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO ONE WITH AN INITIAL STUDY, NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, PAULINA, WHO WOULD DO THE STAFF REPORT.WE'RE GONNA HAVE JOHN MORLAND, OUR CONSULTANT, PROVIDE THE PRESENTATION THIS EVENING.
UM, JOHN MORLAND WITH RING CONSULTANTS, AND I'LL BE HANDING THE PRESENTATION OFF TO SUSAN HERNANDEZ.
I WILL BE PRESENTING, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE.
SO THIS 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 ZERO TWO CODE AMENDMENT.
UM, THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE NUMBER 0 1 23 0 1.
IN THE PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING HELD ON OCTOBER 10TH, 2023, UH, WE RECEIVED COMMENTS TO REVISE VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UH, WHICH WILL WE GO, WHICH WE WILL GO INTO MORE DETAIL LATER.
UH, WE ALSO RECEIVED COMMENTS TO RE NOTIFY THE PUBLIC REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE OF THIS MEETING.
UM, CITY STAFF POSTED THE NOTICE OF THE MEETING ON THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS. IT WAS SENT OUT, UM, THROUGH EMAIL BLASTS, AND THE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WERE POSTED ON THE PROJECT WEBSITE.
IN THE PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING, WE RECEIVED COMMENTS TO REVIEW AND REVISE THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS, EVENTS AND WALL HEIGHT, ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENTS, EMERGENCY SHELTERS, HOME OCCUPATIONS, MASSAGE PARLORS, AND HEALTH AND BEAUTY SPAS, MOBILE SERVICES, OUTDOOR DINING, TREE TRIMMING, GENERAL PLANT, THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, LAND USE, CHANGE, AND WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES.
SO THE COMMENT RECEIVED, UM, FOR FENCES AND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE WAS REGARDING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT THAT WILL BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT.
THIS SECTION WAS REVISED SO THAT THE PROPERTIES WILL BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A FENCE THAT IS A MAXIMUM OF SEVEN FEET AND HEIGHT IN THE REAR AND SIDE YARD SETBACK.
ADDITIONALLY, PROPERTIES WITH A DIFFERENCE IN GRADE IN THE REAR AND SIDE YARD SETBACK WILL BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A MAXIMUM OF
[00:05:01]
13 FEET, UM, FOR THE LOWER PROPERTY.AS DEPICTED ON THE PICTURE HERE, OTHER REVISIONS INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENT STANDARDS WERE REVISED TO CLARIFY THAT VIOLATIONS OF THE PROVISIONS WILL RESULT IN REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT.
AS PER REVOCATION STANDARDS OF ARTICLE SIX, EMERGENCY SHELTER STANDARDS WERE REVISED TO REMOVE THE FIRST COME FIRST SERVE ADMITTANCE REQUIREMENT THAT REQUIRED FACILITIES TO ONLY ADMIT CLIENTS BETWEEN 6:00 PM AND 7:00 AM.
THE HOME OCCUPATION STANDARDS WERE REVISED TO UPDATE LANGUAGE, UH, TO BROADEN THE USE, UM, OF COMMON RESIDENTIAL UTILITIES.
MASSAGE PARLOR AND HEALTH AND BEAUTY SPA REQUIREMENTS WERE REVISED TO ONLY PROHIBIT DOORS FOR BUSINESSES WHERE MASSAGE IS AN ACCESSORY USE MOBILE SERVICE STANDARDS WERE REVISED TO SPECIFY THAT MOBILE SERVICES SHALL NOT INCLUDE SERVICES THAT CREATE A NUISANCE IN ACCORDANCE TO CHAPTER 15 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE.
THE LANGUAGE FOR OUTDOOR DINING WAS REVISED TO CLARIFY THAT OUTDOOR DINING AREA SHALL BE, UH, KEPT CLEAR FROM PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR RIGHTS AWAY AND NOT TO OBSTRUCT, UH, THE LINE OF SIGHT FOR PEDESTRIANS AND DRIVERS, OR SHALL NOT IMPEDE ACCESS TO CITY AND PUBLIC UTILITIES.
IT IS NOW SPECIFIED THAT NEW OUTDOOR DINING FACILITIES SHALL REQUIRE AN ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT.
ADDITIONALLY, LANGUAGE WAS ADDED TO SPECIFY THAT NO PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR EMERGENCY TREE TRIMMING FOR TREES ON PRIVATE OR PUBLIC PROPERTY.
UM, AND THOUGH WE DID NOT RECEIVE COMMENTS, UH, REGARDING KIOSKS SUCH AS WATER FILL STATIONS AND KEY DUPLICATION KIOSKS.
FROM THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING, UM, CITY STAFF HAS RECEIVED SOME INQUIRIES REGARDING WATER FILL KIOSKS.
THE PREVIOUS ZONING ORDINANCE DID NOT HAVE REGULATIONS FOR THESE TYPES OF USES, AND AFTER RECEIVING THESE INQUIRIES, UM, REGULATIONS WERE ADDED.
SO THE REGULATIONS FOR KIOSKS INCLUDE, UM, THAT A KIOSK MAY BE AN ACCESSORY USE TO ANOTHER COMMERCIAL USE, SUCH AS A GROCERY STORE, OR IT MAY BE A STANDALONE USE.
IF THE KIOSK IS UNATTENDED, THEN IT CAN ONLY BE PERMITTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A LARGER RETAIL USE.
IF IT IS A STANDALONE KIOSK, THEN IT SHALL HAVE, UM, AN ATTENDANT, UH, REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS FOR STANDALONE KIOSK INCLUDE THAT THE PLACEMENT SHALL NOT CREATE A PARKING DEFICIT AND THE KIOSK, UM, SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND FREE OF LITTER.
IN THE PREVIOUS PUBLIC HEARING, A COMMENT WAS RECEIVED REGARDING, UM, THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CHANGE FOR THE PROPERTIES OWNED BY NORTHWEST COLLEGE.
UH, PREVIOUSLY THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT INCLUDED TO CHANGE THE LAND USE FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL TO COMMERCIAL.
HOWEVER, AFTER FURTHER CONSIDERATION, UM, THE GENERAL PLAN USE FOR, UH, THESE PROPERTIES WILL CONTINUE TO BE, UM, PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL.
THE ZONING CHANGE, UH, FROM PLANNED INDUSTRIAL, UM, TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL USE WAS AT, UM, CHANGED.
UM, SO AS, SO THAT THESE PROPERTIES COULD MATCH THE OTHER PROPERTIES ALSO OWNED BY NORTHWEST COLLEGE AND THIS ZONE CHANGE WON'T INHIBIT, UH, NORTHWEST COLLEGE FROM OPERATING AS USUAL.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONERS, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT WE WERE ABLE TO, UM, UH, TALK TO THE, TALK TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND, UM, REGARDING THIS AND TALK TO 'EM TODAY.
BUT, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER EXPRESSED WHAT ESSENTIALLY, UM, THEY WANTED IS THEY, THEY DIDN'T WANT ANY OF THEIR USES, UM, OR BUILDINGS ON SITE TO BE NONCONFORMING.
AND WE PROVIDED ANALYSIS BETWEEN THE EXISTING, UM, PLAN INDUSTRIAL ZONE AND THE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONES.
UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONES ALLOWS FOR, UM, UH, MORE USES THAN THE PLAN INDUSTRIAL.
ONE OF THE USES THAT'S NOT PERMITTED IN THE PLAN INDUSTRIAL ZONE IS ACTUALLY A PRIVATE COLLEGE USE.
SO TECHNICALLY IT'S LEGAL NONGO FORMING TODAY.
UM, THE HEIGHT DIFFERENCE IS ESSENTIALLY 35 FEET WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF RESIDENTIAL IS 35 FOOT LIMIT WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FOR THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE AND 25 FEET, UM, WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF RESIDENTIAL ZONE FOR THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE ZONE.
UM, ALL BUILDINGS ARE ONE STORY, SO IT WOULD MEET THE, UM, REQUIREMENT.
UM, AND ALSO JUST TO ADD FOR CONTEXT, UH, WE ALSO FOUND OUT THAT THE NORTH, UM, NORTHWEST COLLEGE, THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST HAVE BEEN OWNED.
THEY'RE OWNED BY THE COLLEGE, UM, OWNED BY THE, UM, THE FAMILY THAT, UM, STARTED THE COLLEGE.
[00:10:01]
ESSENTIALLY EXPANDED, PURCHASED THE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY, UM, DECADES AGO.AND THAT'S HOW, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY KIND OF HOW THAT AREA GROW.
AND I'LL HAND IT BACK OFF TO SUSAN WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS.
ANOTHER COMMENT RECEIVED DURING THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING WAS REGARDING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES.
AND WE RECEIVED COMMENTS TO COMPARE WEST COVINA REGULATIONS TO OTHER CITIES INCLUDING DIAMOND BAR AND WALNUT.
SO DIAMOND BAR ONLY PERMITS WIRELESS, TELECOM, TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES IN CERTAIN ZONES.
THEY REQUIRE A SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL OF 50 FEET OR THE HEIGHT OF THE ANTENNA PLUS 20%, AND THEY REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION OF HIGH OF A 500 FOOT RADIUS.
WALNUT PROHIBITS TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS AND ANTENNAS, UM, 1,500 FEET FROM RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
AND THEY REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION OF PI OF A 500 FOOT RADIUS.
UM, AFTER FURTHER ANALYSIS, UH, WE RECOMMEND THAT WEST COVINA REQUIRE A 500 FOOT RADIUS FROM SINGLE FAMILY AND A 100 FOOT RADIUS FROM MULTIFAMILY ZONES AND A PUBLIC, UH, HEARING NOTIFICATION OF 500 FEET OF A 500 FOOT RADIUS.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE 100 FEET MEANING, UH, OR ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT? I IS IS THAT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OR IS THAT FROM THE, THE STRUCTURE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
THE WIRELESS FACILITY STRUCTURE ITSELF, UM, THE, THE WIRELESS FACILITY ITSELF TO THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.
AND THIS IS AN IMPORTANT TOPIC.
AND WHY, WHY SUCH, WHY WOULD IT BE A HUNDRED FEET COMPARED TO 500 FEET FOR THOSE PROPERTIES? IT'S MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE, SO MOST, UH, A A LOT OF THE, MOST OF THE CITY, MOST OF THE COMMERCIAL AREAS IN THE CITY CAN, CAN POTENTIALLY BE DEVELOPED WITH MULTI, WELL WITH MULTI-FAMILY.
SO IT, IT WOULD PRECLUDE IT, IT WOULD PREVENT, UM, MOST OF THE CITY FROM HAVING, UM, A WIRELESS FACILITY IF IT'S FIVE, IF WE MADE IT 500 FEET.
SO WHAT IS CONSIDERED MULTI-FAMILY? IS THAT TWO OR MORE UNITS? THAT'D BE A HOUSE WITH AN ADU.
UH, WELL, IT, REGARDING AN ADU IT DEPENDS.
'CAUSE YOU CAN ALSO BUILD AN ADU ON MULTIFAMILY ZONES.
UH, SO IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE, UM, TWO OR MORE UNITS.
WHAT DOES WALNUT HAVE OR DIAMOND BAR IN, IN THIS CASE? A HUNDRED FEET.
SO, UM, DIAMOND BAR, THEY HAVE A SETBACK OF 50 FEET, UM, FROM RESIDENTIAL.
UM, SO THAT INCLUDES SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY, OR THE HEIGHT OF THE ANTENNA PLUS 20% WALNUT, UM, HAS JUST 1,500 FEET FROM ALL RESIDENTIAL.
I'M SORRY, CAN YOU GO BACK TO DIAMOND BAR AGAIN? UM, DIAMOND BAR, YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THE 50 FEET, IS THAT FOR THE HEIGHTS ONLY OR FOR THE DISTANCE? THAT'S THE DISTANCE, THE SETBACK DISTANCE FROM THE WIRELESS TO THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
CAN YOU BRING UP THE LIST THAT YOU HAD EARLIER? IT'S THIS ONE.
UM, IT'S A DIFFERENT ONE EARLIER.
THE LIST OF WALNUTS IN DIAMOND BAR.
AND TO ADD TO THAT STAFF, UM, WELL, OUR CONSULTANTS DID REACH OUT TO THE CITY OF WAL TO THE CITY OF WALNUT.
AND THEY, THEY HAD CHANGED THE CODE ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO TO, FOR THE 1,500 FEET FROM, FROM RESIDENTIAL PARKS, SCHOOLS AND SO FORTH.
[00:15:01]
BUT SINCE, SINCE THEN THEY, THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED.HOWEVER, THEY HAD DENIED AN APPLICATION FOR, FOR A PROVIDER RECENTLY, AND THEY, THEY'RE NOT SURE IF IF THAT WOULD, THAT'S GONNA BE RESULTING IN A LAWSUIT.
IT CAN POTENTIALLY, BUT THEY'RE NOT SURE IF THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN JUST YET.
AND UH, YOU KNOW HOW YOU MENTIONED THAT SOME COMMERCIAL ZONES MAY, MAY, SOME COMMERCIAL ZONES MAY EVENTUALLY TURN INTO MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING.
NOW IS THERE A WAY TO WRITE THIS OR, I MEAN THIS, THE CODE TO REFLECT CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES IN CASES LIKE THAT, OBVIOUSLY, YEAH, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IF EASTLAND HAD MULTIFAMILY HOMES BUILT ON THERE, THEN OBVIOUSLY A HUNDRED FEET'S REASONABLE.
BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF IT'S A, A NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT COMMERCIAL ZONING INVOLVED OR, OR CURRENT COMMERCIAL ZONING INVOLVED, THEN CAN A 500 SETBACK BE BEING MADE IN THAT CASE? 'CAUSE ONE WILL SAY THAT LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES ARE BEING HIT THE HARDEST.
YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S THE, THE GENERAL ARGUMENT WHEN IT COMES TO CERTAIN, CERTAIN RIGHTS THE RESIDENTS HAVE AND HOME HOMEOWNERS HAVE AND, UM, AND LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES HAVE.
SO CAN, CAN THAT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S POSSIBLE THAT, IN OTHER WORDS, MORE, MORE DETAIL IN REGARDS TO A HUNDRED FEET IN CASES OF DIFFERENT CRITERIA THAT THAT HAS TO BE MET IN ORDER TO USE THAT SETBACK? IF I CAN CLARIFY THE QUESTION, YOU GET WHAT I'M SAYING? YEAH.
ARE YOU ASKING, SO RIGHT NOW THE, OUR COMMERCIAL ZONES HAVE THE OVERLAY FOR RESIDENTIAL THAT YOU, UM, WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR RESIDENTIAL YEAH.
SO YOU'RE ASKING IF IN THOSE AREAS, UM, WE CAN REDUCE, IT'S KINDA LIKE WHERE YOU SAID THAT IF IF WE DIDN'T MORTAR IT A HUNDRED FEET, THEN IT'S GONNA ELIMINATE THE POTENTIAL OF ACTUALLY HAVING THE COVERAGE IN THAT AREA.
SO THOSE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE YOU WOULD WANNA REDUCE IT TO A HUNDRED, EVEN THOUGH IT'S MULTIFAMILY.
WELL, WELL YOU'RE, SO YEAH, I THINK ONE OF THE EXPLANATIONS THEY GAVE GAVE WAS THAT IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES THAT IF WE DID MORE THAN A HUNDRED FEET, THAT IT WOULD MAKE, THAT IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO BUILD A TOWER OR DO A TOWER OR WHATEVER THE SITUATION IS.
SO THOSE MUST BE AT CERTAIN, CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES TO WARRANT THAT IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
CAN THE BOOK BE MORE DETAILED, IS WHAT I'M SAYING? BECAUSE THEN YOU, YOU OPEN IT UP TO TOO BROADLY OF MULTI-FAMILY.
MAYBE IT'S, MAYBE IT'S, UH, APARTMENTS DID, I'M SORRY, DID YOU, DID YOU MEAN THAT IF IT'S A MULTI-FAMILY ZONE, LIKE MF ZONING AND IT'S AN APARTMENT, IT CAN BE HIGHER THAN 100 FEET.
BUT IF IT'S MIXED USE, THEY'RE EXEMPT.
IS, IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN? NO, NO, NO.
EXPLAIN TO, EXPLAIN TO US ONE MORE TIME WHY IT HAS TO BE A HUNDRED FEET COMPARED TO 500 FEET.
UM, 'CAUSE IF IT WAS FIVE, IF, IF IT WAS 500 FEET MM-HMM,
AND AS IS THAT ON CASE BY CASE BASIS? UM, NO, THAT'S NOT CASE BY CASE BASIS, BUT WE, BUT WHAT, UM, WHAT IS A CASE BY CASE BASIS IS THERE'S SOMETHING WRITTEN IN THE CODE IS IF THE, IF A PROVIDER WANTED TO REDUCE THAT BY 20%, THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT THROUGH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS, UM, WHICH IS ALREADY REQUIRED.
UM, IT, WHICH IS ALREADY REQUIRED FOR WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES.
UM, BUT IT, IT, IT'LL JUST BE THE SAME PROCESS WITH ADDITIONAL FINDINGS.
SO IN CASES, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE WERE TO SAY 500 FEET AND THEN, AND THEN HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE, A CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS, IS THAT AN OPTION IF YOU WOULD, IF YOU'RE ABLE TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS THEN, OR THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS? YEAH.
MM-HMM,
CAN I GIVE IT A TRY? UM, I GUESS REGARDING LAND USE, WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL AREA AND WE ALSO HAVE COMMERCIAL AREA.
[00:20:01]
AREA, PREDOMINANTLY A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL HOME PRIOR TO A FEW YEARS AGO UNTIL THE ADU CAME ABOUT.BUT AFTER, CURRENTLY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RESIDENTIAL AREA AS SINGLE UNIT OR RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH ADU AND ALSO COMMERCIAL AREA IS, UH, PREDOMINANTLY FOR COMMERCIAL USE.
HOWEVER, COMMERCIAL AREA, WE CAN ALSO BUILD MULTI-FAMILY UNIT AS WELL.
AND THOSE ARE ALL CONSIDERED, ONCE IT'S BEING BUILT, IT'S CONSIDERED MULTI-UNIT, BUT IT'S STILL COMMERCIAL LAND USE.
AND THAT IN THOSE AREA, COMMERCIAL AREA, IT'S ALLOWED FOR CELL TOWER.
HOWEVER, IF THEY HAVE A RESIDENT IN THOSE COMMERCIAL USE, THEN IT MUST BE A HUNDRED FEET AWAY FROM THESE BUILDING.
WELL, TWO, WE HAVE TO ESTABLISH FIRST AND FOREMOST, WHAT ARE WE CONSIDERING A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE OR A MULTI-UNIT FAMILY? SO MULTI-UNIT FAMILY IN THE WORLD OF REAL ESTATE COMMERCIAL IS FIVE UNITS OR MORE.
SO YEAH, I, I THINK IT WOULD HAVE TO APPLY TO THAT.
THAT WOULD NEED TO BE IN THERE.
YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY MORE DETAILS.
OH, THAT'S WHAT YOU MEANT BY FIVE UNITS OR MORE? YEAH, MORE DETAILS.
SO IT, IT WOULD BE BASED ON THE ZONING.
SO YOU HAVE ZONING THAT'S RESIDENT, UH, R ONE OR MF.
SO IT WOULDN'T BE BASED ON A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH AN ADU IN THE BACK AS A MULTI-FAMILY.
IT WOULD BE, IF IT'S IN A MULTI-FAMILY ZONE.
YEAH, THAT'S A, THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, LATER IN THE FUTURE THAT COULD WORK AGAINST US BECAUSE THEN THERE WOULD BE NOTHING ESTABLISHED AS TO WHAT IS THE MULTI-UNIT FAMILY.
SO I THINK THAT HAS TO BE ESTABLISHED NOW.
YEAH, IT ALREADY IS UNDER OUR GENERAL PLAN.
'CAUSE WHAT SHE'S EXPLAINING IS THE CITY ALREADY HAS EXISTING MULTIPLE FAMILY ZONING, WHICH IS SEPARATE FROM THE COMMERCIAL ZONE.
THE THING THAT WE DID APPROVE LAST YEAR WAS ALLOWING COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES TO HAVE SOME MIXED USE.
AND IN THOSE AREAS, THE MIXED USE WOULD BE A COMBINATION OF RETAIL ON THE GROUND FLOOR AND RESIDENTIALS ABOVE MIXED USE.
ALSO THOUGH THAT THAT'S, IT'S MIXED WITH COMMERCIAL, SO THAT'S EVEN A DIFFERENT ANIMAL AS WELL.
SO I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS PURELY RESIDENTIAL.
I THINK IT'D MORE TO LOOK AT THIS MAP THAT THE CITY KIND OF MAPPED OUT AND IT HAS ALL THE ZONING IN IT.
IT'S IN THE ATTACHMENT NUMBER SIX.
AND IN THAT PARTICULAR ATTACHMENT, UM, ALL THE ZONINGS ARE ARE OKAY, THANK YOU.
IT'S JUST THERE CAN'T BE ANY GRAY AREA FOR FUTURE.
SO, UM, IT'S BASED ON THE ZONING.
SO IF IT'S IN A MULTIFAMILY ZONE AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PULLING UP, THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD BE, UM, A HUNDRED FEET.
AND IF IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY ZONE, THEN IT'S 500 FEET.
UM, I'M, I'M NOT SURE THAT I'M FOLLOWING, BUT I THINK WHAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY IS THAT IF SOMEBODY BUILDS LIKE AN ADU AND A JUNIOR ADU ON THEIR PROPERTY, THAT IT'S ALL OF A SUDDEN MULTI-FAMILY.
THAT'S, NO, IT'S ZONE SINGLE FAMILY.
SO, I DON'T KNOW, I, I'M, IF THAT'S THE CONCERN, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S A CONCERN THAT, I DON'T THINK IT'S A CONCERN.
NOW I'M JUST SAYING, WHY CAN'T WE JUST ESTABLISH WHAT IS IT? IF IT'S NOT, THAT'S WHAT IS ACTUALLY IN THE PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION.
SO I'M TRYING, I'M TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DISTINCTION IS BECAUSE IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, IF, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL CHANGING TO MULTI-FAMILY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND WE'RE, AND WE'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE GONNA PUT ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON, ON WHERE CELL TOWERS COULD POTENTIALLY BE BUILT, WHEN WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE FACT THAT OF THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS IN THE CITY HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED FOR MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF OUR SUPPOSED HOUSING SHORTAGE IN THE CITY THAT WE NEED TO BUILD 10,000 UNITS BY THE END OF 2030.
ULTIMATELY, I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN HAVE THAT RESTRICTION AND THEN OPEN UP THE CITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE, OF HOUSING.
LIKE WE ARE EFFECTIVELY REQUIRED TO FROM UP ON HIGH.
NOW I'M GONNA SAY I DON'T PARTICULARLY CARE FOR THAT REQUIREMENT, BUT THAT IS EFFECTIVELY WHAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO.
SO IF WE'RE GOING IN AND WE'RE FORECLOSING UPON, YOU KNOW, PUTTING A CELL TOWER HERE, WE'RE EFFECTIVELY SAYING THAT WE'RE, WE'RE EFFECTIVELY MAKING IT SUCH THAT MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING CAN'T GO IN THE AREAS THAT WE'VE ALREADY PROPOSED FOR PURPOSES OF GETTING OUR, UM, OUR, OUR HOUSING ELEMENT
[00:25:01]
APPROVED.WE ARE BASICALLY UNDERMINING THAT BY, BY ARE BY PROPOSING ARE WE SOME MULTI-FAMILY, ALTERNATE ARE COMMERCIAL? LIKE ARE WE SAYING IT'S MULTI-FAMILY COMMERCIAL? IF THAT'S WHAT IT IS? LET'S JUST PUT THE VERBIAGE IN.
NO, UM, IF YOU'LL RECALL, LAST YEAR, STAFF TOOK TIME BECAUSE THE STATE FOR THE HOUSING ELEMENTS SAID THEY HAD TO ACTUALLY IDENTIFY PROPERTIES.
AND THEY GAVE US A LIST LISTING OF VARIOUS PROPERTIES.
AND THE ONES WHICH THEY CHOSE TO IDENTIFY FOR MIXED USE, THEY ALREADY HAVE THEIR ZONING.
AND SO WHEN THE MIXED USE ZONE, THE WAY IT WAS PROPOSED TO US, WHICH AFFECTS EXISTING COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, PARTICULARLY IN THE DOWNTOWN MM-HMM.
AND SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT NICK IS SAYING THAT WOULD BE UNDERMINING THE HOUSING ELEMENT THAT WE'VE ALREADY PRESENTED TO THE STATE AND THERE ARE RAMIFICATIONS IF WE WERE TO DO THAT.
NO, I, I GET EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE BOTH SAYING.
BUT IN THAT RESPECT, THOSE ARE NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL.
AND SO THOSE ARE CLEARLY COMMERCIAL.
SO HOUSING ELEMENT IS SAYING WE CAN, EVERYONE CAN HAVE AN ADU AND A JUNIOR, ADU.
SO NOW THERE'S A THREE UNIT PROPERTIES.
THEY'RE MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTIES.
NOW I KNOW WE'RE NOT CHANGING ZONING OR ANYTHING.
WHAT ABOUT IN THE FUTURE? AND I'M JUST SAYING IT JUST PROTECTS, BUT ZONING IS THE BASIS OF THE REGULATION, NOT THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE ACTUALLY ON THE PROPERTY.
RIGHT? SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND YOU DECIDE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO TURN IT INTO EFFECTIVELY A MINI CONDO COMPLEX, YOU GOT FOUR UNITS ON THERE, THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE ZONING AND IT'S STILL GONNA BE 500 FEET.
SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT GOING TO IMPACT, UH, IT'S NOT GONNA IMPACT THAT BECAUSE IT'S ZONING BASED.
SO AGAIN, SO IF IT'S, IF THAT'S COMMERCIAL, I MEAN, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S OKAY TO PUT IT NEXT TO A FOUR UNIT, NO RESIDENTIAL, IN FACT, THAT'S NOT, THE FOUR UNITS ARE STILL CONSIDERED RESIDENTIAL.
SO IF WE CAN ONLY PUT IT WITH COMMERCIAL, WHY DON'T WE JUST SAY MIXED USE COMMERCIAL OR WHATEVER IT IS.
SO, YOU KNOW, THINGS CAN CHANGE IN THE FUTURE.
EVERYBODY'S GONNA HAVE EVERY MULTIFAMILIES OR YOU KNOW, WHO KNOWS HOW MANY AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE ALL MULTIFAMILIES AND THIS CAN APPLY TO EVERYONE WITH ALL GENERAL, IT LEAVES OFF OUT ANY CHANCE? NO, IT DOESN'T BECAUSE WITH THE GENERAL PLANS, THE STATE REQUIRES THAT WE UPDATE IT JUST LIKE THE HOUSING ELEMENT.
AND PART OF WANTING TO GET YOUR HOUSING ELEMENT ADOPTED IS SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE THAT SEVEN OR EIGHT YEAR BREAK.
IF NOT, THEN THE STATE IS SAYING YOU'VE GOT TO PREPARE HOUSING ELEMENT MUCH SOONER.
AND SO WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, IT NORMALLY IS A DOCUMENT THAT IS APPROVED WITH A SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME AND NORMALLY IT IS AT LEAST 10 YEARS.
AND THEN AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER NEW REQUIREMENTS WILL COME DOWN.
WE HAD RAR DASH A, WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURE, R DASH ONE 6,000, ALL THE WAY TO R DASH ONE 40,000.
THAT WOULD BE ALL THOSE ENCOMPASSES OF A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL.
THOSE ARE MULTI, MULTI RESIDENTIAL.
MM-HMM,
SO EACH ACRE WOULD BE 45 UNITS.
SO THOSE ARE MORE, UM, MULTI-UNIT, NOT THE R ALL THE RS ARE RESIDENTIAL UNIT IN ALL THE MF ALL THE WAY TO M ONE MANUFACTURING.
AND THEN WE HAD THE OTHER AREAS, WHICH IS OPMU OFFICE PROFESSIONAL USE.
THOSE ARE CONSIDERED COMMERCIAL AND MU NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE.
THESE ARE ALL THE DIFFERENT TYPE OF ZONING.
SO STARTING WITH, UM, THE MANUFACTURING PORTION WITH 1000 WOULD BE THIS AREA RIGHT HERE, MF EIGHT ALL THE WAY TO MF, UM, 48, POSSIBLY M UM, ONE AS WELL.
AND THEN ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT US CONSIDER COMMERCIAL.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 500 FEET FROM A ALL THE RS ZONING AND THEN 100 FEET FROM ALL THE M ZONING.
AND THEN THE COMMERCIALS ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHTS.
UNLESS WE'LL MIX USING THOSE COMMERCIALS, THEN IT WOULD BE A HUNDRED FEET.
SO I THINK WHAT THEY HAVE, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IF IT'S THE, IF IT'S A MIXED USE THAT THERE'S THE, THAT THERE'S A SETBACK REQUIREMENT, IS THAT CORRECT? NO SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
SO MAINLY THE MULTI AND THEN THE RESIDENTIALS.
AND THEN COMMERCIALS ARE ALLOWED.
FOR THE 500 FEE FROM SINGLE FAMILY.
[00:30:02]
THAT IN THE FUTURE A, A, UM, SINGLE FAMILY RE UM, ZONE PROPERTY WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS, OR, OR, UM, W WOULD BE I GUESS INCORRECTLY DETERMINED AS MULTIFAMILY.UM, IN, IN CASES LIKE THIS, WE CAN ADD, WE CAN ADD, UM, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE, UM, USES OR ZONES OR, AND WE CAN ALSO ADD URBAN DWELLING UNITS BA UM, TO, TO THE 500 FEET.
'CAUSE URBAN DWELLING UNITS ARE BASICALLY, UM, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH TWO UNITS.
IT'S QUITE CONFUSING NOWADAYS WHEN THEY HAD THE ADU, THE JUNIOR ADU, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE IS COMING UP, BUT IN ONE SINGLE RESIDENCE IS LIKE THREE.
SO DO WE, I MEAN, IN THE ZONING WORLD, WE DON'T CALL THAT A MULTI-UNIT.
WE CALL IT STILL SINGLE RESIDENTIAL AREA, UH, ZONING.
'CAUSE SOME PEOPLE THINK OF IT AS MULTI-UNIT SINCE YOU HAVE THREE UNITS IN ONE LOT RIGHT NOW OR MAYBE MORE COMING.
WHAT'S, UM, THIS IS A DIFFERENT SUBJECT, BUT WHAT'S THE ZONING FOR THE SPORTS FLEX PARKS AND OPEN SPACE? IT IS HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS A PARTNER.
THIS BRINGS US TO THE CONCLUSION AND IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 6 1 3 4 23 6 1 3 5 23 6 1 3 6 AND 23 6 1 3 7, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT THE INITIAL STUDY OF NEG A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, THE GENERAL PLANNED AMENDMENT ZONE CHANGE AND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE.
WE'RE NOW, UM, OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.
WE'RE DOING SPEAKER AND YOU ARE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS.
SPECIFICALLY THE GENERAL PLAN.
UM, WE ALL KNOW THAT THE STATE IS PUSHING FOR HOUSING AND RESIDENTIAL AND EVERYTHING THAT I READ THROUGH HERE.
OH, THERE SEEMS TO BE A GREAT PUSH TOWARDS BUILDING RESIDENTIAL.
BUT IN ONE PARTICULAR, UNDER THE GENERAL PLAN 2.5, THERE'S A WORDING THAT SAYS TRANSFORMATIVE DEVELOPMENT.
CAN SOMEBODY ELABORATE ON THAT UNDER THE GENERAL PLAN? I THINK IT WAS TWO, UH, 2.5 UNDER THAT.
CAN YOU ELABORATE ON WHAT YOU REGARD AS TRANSFORMATIVE, WHAT THAT MEANS? WELL, WHAT I'LL DO IS, UH, LET'S SEE WHERE ALL YOUR QUESTIONS ARE AND THEN I'LL, I'LL MAKE SURE AND THEN STAFF CAN RESPOND TO 'EM.
UM, AND THE NEXT THING IS, UM, I I I'M CONCERNED ABOUT PROTECTING THE BUSINESSES IN THE SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU GUYS REGARD THE TRIANGLE, THE GLENDORA, THE VINCENT, AND I CAN'T THINK OF THE THIRD STREET, BUT IT'S CONSIDERED THE TRIANGLE AS YOU GUYS HAVE IN YOUR WORDING.
UM, YOU ALSO SPEAK ON THE UNDER 3.1, UM, ENCROACHMENT.
UM, ALTHOUGH YOU HAVE WORDING THAT SAYS ECONOMICALLY STRONG NEIGHBORHOODS AND YOU WANNA PREVENT ENCROACHMENT.
I WOULD LIKE AN ELABORATE, SOMEBODY TO ELABORATE ON THAT.
SO IF RESIDENTS, ARE YOU SPEAKING ON A RESIDENTIAL STANCE? ARE YOU SPEAKING ON A BUSINESS STANCE? I MEAN, HOW ARE WE TO PRESERVE THAT AREA FOR CON CURRENT BUSINESSES OR FUTURE BUSINESSES? UM, THAT, THAT'S ONE THING.
SO ENCROACHMENT IS A WORD THAT I, I WANT TO ALLOW TO HAVE ELABORATED PLEASE.
UM, AND THEN I GUESS ON THERE AS WELL, IT SAYS INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES AND IN, UH, INTENSITY.
HOW ARE YOU, UH, UH, GIVE ME EXAMPLE ON THAT AS FAR AS IT PREEXISTING ON, PREEXISTING ON WHAT THAT MEANS.
SO I HOPE I'M NOT SO VAGUE, BUT THOSE THINGS STRUCK ME IN READING UNDER THE GENERAL PLAN SPECIFICALLY TO THE GEN,
[00:35:01]
TO THE TRIANGLE AREA, HOW ARE WE CONTINUALLY TO PROMOTE OUR BUSINESSES AND YET WANTING TO, TO PROVIDE THE RESIDENTIAL USE OR THE, THE RESIDENTIAL THAT NEEDS TO COME IN THAT'S BEING CRAMMED DOWN EVERY CITY.SO I JUST WANT TO SEE HOW WE'RE GOING TO BE EQUAL, UM, TO BOTH BUSINESSES AS WELL AS THE FORCING OF RESIDENTIAL.
IF YOU CAN ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.
AND, UH, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK TODAY IN FAVOR OR OPPOSE SEEING NONE.
AND THEN IF STAFF COULD ANSWER THE RESIDENT'S QUESTIONS, UM, I WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT, THAT MS. GIL GILLINGHAM.
UM, REGARDING REGARD, UM, REGARDING THE TRIANGLE THAT, THAT WAS MENTIONED, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE DOES NOT MAKE ANY CHANGES TO DOWN THAT TRIANGLE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN PLAN AND CODE AREA.
UM, THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE IS NOT GONNA MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THE DOWNTOWN AND PLAN AND CODE AREA.
SO THAT IS GONNA REMAIN IN CHANGE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF NOT ALLOWING DRIVE-THROUGHS.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN THE DOWNTOWN PLAN AND CODE AREA.
UM, SPECIFIC
DO YOU WANNA ELABORATE ON THE, 'CAUSE YOU HAVE IT RIGHT THERE.
WHAT WAS THE POLICY? ITS 3.1
UM, REGARDING, UM, POLICY, UH, POLICY AND ACTIONS CURRENTLY IN THE, UM, THE GENERAL PLAN, UM, THE ZONING CODE, THE ZONING CODE UPDATE DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY AMENDMENTS TO THIS PORTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN.
SO THIS IS, UM, EXISTING, EXISTING LANGUAGE.
UM, IT DOES STATE TO PRESERVE EXISTING HOUSING STOCK AND TO INCORPORATE STANDARDS, UM, IN THE DEVELOPMENT CODE TO PRESERVE THE EXISTING FORM AND CHARACTER OF STABLE RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND PREVENT ENCROACHMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES AND INTENSITY.
UM, FROM A, UH, FROM A DEVELOPMENT CODE'S PERSPECTIVE, THIS POLICY AND ACTION, UM, HAS TO DO WITH THE, UM, WITH THE, UM, PART OF THE, UH, THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT, UM, PART, PARTICULARLY THE, THE, UH, THE DOWNTOWN AREAS.
AND AS JOANNE MENTIONED, PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, THAT'S PART OF THE EXISTING DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, WHICH WE ARE NOT, WHICH WE ARE NOT AMENDING.
UM, SO I'M, I'M, I, I DON'T DUNNO IF YOU WANNA SPEAK ABOUT LIKE, ANY POLICIES OR ANYTHING.
THAT WAS ABOUT THE TRANSFORMATIVE ZONES, OR IT WAS TRANSFORMATIVE ZONES, THE BUSINESSES ON GLENDORA, THE TRIANGLE ISSUE, APPROACHMENT, APPROACHMENT, ELABORATIONS AND INCAPABLE LAND USE.
SO, UM, POLICY 2.5 ENCOURAGES, UH, TRANSFORMATIVE DEVELOPMENT, UM, ON THE TRIANGLE, BOUNDED BY GLENDORA AVENUE, VINCENT AVENUE, AND INTERSTATE 10.
UM, PART OF THE, UH, SUB POLICIES OF THE GENERAL PLAN IS TO SUPPORT REVITALIZATION OF GLENDORA AVENUE RETAIL.
UM, SO THIS IS, UH, THE GENERAL PLAN IS EFFECTIVELY TO, UM, PRETTY MUCH ENHANCE, ENHANCE THE BUSINESSES AND THE, UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ALREADY THERE.
UM, AND OTHER POLICIES IN THE GENERAL PLAN, UM, OR TO ALSO BRAND THE AREA AS WEST COVINA IS AS WEST COVINA ISS MAIN STREET.
UM, THIS, THIS AREA IS PART OF THE, UM, AGAIN, THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, WHICH ISN'T, UM, BEING AMENDED AS THIS ITEM.
UM, THAT'S BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
UH, WE'RE NOW, UH, OPEN DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION.
I'LL NOW OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
COMMISSIONER LEWIS? UH, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FOR RIGHT NOW.
VICE CHAIR WILLIAMS? I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW.
COMMISSIONER BERA? NO QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER.
[00:40:01]
MY QUESTION WOULD BE IF YOU COULD ELABORATE ON THE EMERGENCY SHELTERS TIME FRAMING.SO, UM, WE LOOKED, UH, FOR, REGARDING THE, UM, URBAN AGENCY SHELTERS, WE, UM, LOOKED AT THE EXISTING, UM, STATE LAW FRAMEWORK, THE HOURS OF, UM, OPERATION.
THE PREVIOUS, THE EXISTING, UM, ZONING CODE AS IT EXISTS TODAY ESSENTIALLY SAYS THAT EVERYONE ESSENTIALLY HAS TO DEPART BY, UM, BY EIGHT O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING.
UM, THAT'S, UH, PROVISION IS ESSENTIALLY NOT IN THE, UM, STATE LAW FRAMEWORK.
UH, SO EFFECTIVELY BASED ON, UM, DISCUSSION, UM, FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING, UM, WE REMOVED THAT REQUIREMENT REMOVED ESSENTIALLY THAT REGULATION OF 8:00 AM OF 8:00 AM YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THEN I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER ISSUE IN REGARDS TO MASSAGE PARLORS ABOUT HAVING DOORS ON THE DOORS OR CURTAINS.
UM, DOES THE CITY HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPECT THOSE PARLORS AT ANY TIME? YES.
YOU WANNA, SO IT SAYS ON PUBLIC RECORD, RIGHT? YES.
REGARDING THE, THE MASSAGE, THE DOORS AND MASSAGE PARLORS, UM, WHEN, WHEN THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE, THE, UM, THE THOUGHT WAS THAT THERE ARE, THERE ARE SEVERAL MASSAGE PARLORS THAT ARE, THAT ARE, UM, RESPECTABLE MASSAGE PARLORS AND CHAINS LIKE MASSAGE ENVY, UM, BURKE WILLIAMS, AND ALL OF THOSE HAVE DOORS AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA GO INTO THE CITY IF WE WE'RE NOT GONNA ALLOW THEM TO HAVE DOORS.
AND, AND THOSE ARE DESIRABLE TYPE USES, UM, TO HAVE IN A CITY LIKE WEST COVINA.
SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE, WE ADDED, UM, WE AL WE ADDED PROVISION THAT ALLOWS DOORS IN, IN MASSAGE PARLORS AND HEALTH SPAS.
HOWEVER, UM, THE, THE ACTUAL CONCERN WOULD WAS THAT, UM, THERE ARE CERTAIN MASSAGE USES THAT ARE ACCESSORY TO OTHER USES, LIKE, LIKE A HAIR SALON OR A, UM, ACUPUNCTURE BUSINESS THAT THE MASSAGE ROOMS ARE LOCATED IN THE BACK DOOR.
AND THOSE ARE THE, THE ONES THAT ARE ACTUALLY OF CONCERN.
SO THOSE TYPES OF USES ARE, WE'RE NOT GONNA ALLOW DOORS, WE'RE ONLY GONNA ALLOW CURRENTS.
AND THEN, UM, MY FINAL QUESTION IS, UM, IN REGARDS TO, NOW I UNDERSTAND THAT IT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR 500 FEET, UM, AND I BELIEVE THE NOTICES ARE 500 FEET TOO FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, OR THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT WOULD BE 500 FEET, UM, AS MEASURED FROM THE PROPERTY LINE THAT THE PROPOSED WIRELESS FACILITY IS LOCATED ON.
AND THEN, SO OBVIOUSLY, UH, IN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW, OBVIOUSLY, AND, AND FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, OBVIOUSLY I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, ARGUMENT OF 500 FEET, BUT OUT OF, UH, I GUESS IS THAT SOMETHING WE COULD CONSIDER IN REGARDS TO ADDING A ADDITIONAL FEE IN REGARDS TO THE NOTIFICATIONS THAT GO OUT? ASSISTANCE CITY ATTORNEY? SO A SET OF 500 FEET, MAYBE 800 FEET NOTIFICATIONS REQUIREMENT TO CREATE MORE PUBLIC AWARENESS.
SO, UH, BASED ON THE CONSULTANT SURVEY, 500, IN MY EXPERIENCE, 500 FEET IS, IS GENERALLY WHAT'S THE UPPER END GOING BEYOND THAT? YOU START INCREASING THE COST TO THE CARRIER SIGNIFICANTLY, AND, AND IT GETS, UM, INTO THE CITY, INTO THE CITY, IT BECOMES AN ISSUE.
POTENTIALLY, IF YOU MAKE IT TOO EXPENSIVE, THEY, THEY CAN STILL COME BACK AND ARGUE IT'S EFFECTIVELY PROHIBITING THEM.
SO I THINK A FAIR ARGUMENT WOULD BE 800 FEET THAT I THINK THAT'S FAIR, 800 FEET NOTIFICATIONS AND CONTINUE TO HAVE 500 FEET AS THE, THE LINE, BUT AS THE LINE TO ALLOW THE TOWERS.
BUT IN REGARDS TO NOTIFYING PUBLIC, THE RESIDENTS IN GENERAL, I THINK IT SHOULD, I THINK WE SHOULD MEET IN MEET HALFWAY AND I THINK 800 FEET SHOULD BE SOMETHING REASONABLE IF IT'S LEGALLY CHAIR, IF I MAY.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THE, THE REQUIRED MAIL MAILERS, THE NOTIFICATION MAILERS WE'RE ALSO,
[00:45:01]
WE'RE ALSO REQUIRING, UM, SIGNAGE BE POSTED ON THE SITE.SO ANYBODY THAT WALKS BY, WHETHER IT'S RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, CAN SEE THE, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE.
AND IS THERE A REQUIREMENT IN REGARDS TO HOW BIG THAT SIGNAGE TO BE HAS TO BE? YEAH.
AND WHAT IS THAT? DO YOU KNOW? BUT NOTIFICATION IS JUST GRABBING A ADDRESS AND MAILING OUT THAT MAILER, RIGHT? NO.
UM, BUT WE HAVE LIMITED STAFF.
I THOUGHT NOTIFICATION IS WE FOLD THE ENVELOPES OR THE, THE NOTICE, THE, OH MY GOD, MAILERS.
WE PRINT OUT, WE PUT LABELS ON 'EM, WE POST UPDATE IT.
SO THE LIST CAME FROM A VENDOR, THE LIST COMES FROM A VENDOR, AND THEN WE VERIFY THE RADIUS AND THEN WE, WE SEND THEM OUT.
I THINK THERE'S SOME COMP, UH, COMPETITIVE MAIL HOUSES OUT THERE TO DO NO, THAT, THAT USUALLY WHAT HAPPENS IN DIFFERENT CITIES WITH THEIR PLANNING DEPARTMENT, PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT THE STAFF ACTUALLY ENDS UP HAVING TO STUFF THE ENVELOPES.
SO THAT COSTS BIGGER CITIES OUTSOURCED THE APPLICANT THOUGH, RIGHT? THE, THE APPLICANTS.
BUT THE BIGGER ISSUE IS THE, THE MORE TIME STAFF SPENDS DOING THAT, THE LESS TIME WE'RE ABLE TO CONCENTRATE ON OTHER PROJECTS AND OTHER, OTHER APPLICANTS CUSTOMERS AT THE COUNTER AND SO FORTH.
UM, AND ALSO, AND ALSO, UM, THE ISSUE WITH HAVING APPLICANTS DO THE MAIL, THE MAILING, UM, IS THAT WE WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE THEIR WORD FOR IT.
UM, WHEN WE DO THE MAILING, WE KNOW WHEN WE SEND IT OUT, UM, AND WE KNOW WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE, THEY'RE, WE'RE FOLLOWING THE BROWN ACT AND, AND THE CITY'S CODE, YEAH, THEY ACTUALLY DO AN AFFIDAVIT CAN, CAN'T WE CHARGE THEM FOR IT AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GET, YOU CAN GET THE TEMPORARY HELP AND HAVE THEM DO THAT.
WE DO CHARGE, UM, WE DO CHARGE THEM FOR IT.
UM, THE ISSUE IS, IT'S NOT, IS IT'S NOT EASY TO GET THE TEMPORARY HELP TO, FOR, ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS JUST TO DO OUT THE MAILERS.
UM, BECAUSE IN ORDER TO HIRE SOMEBODY TO DO THAT, THEN WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN RFP, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH, UM, CONTRA, UM, GO THROUGH THE CITY'S CITY, I GUESS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SO THAT THEY CAN, UM, REVIEW A CONTRACT.
UM, WE WOULD HAVE TO GET THE CONTRACT SIGNED BY, UM, DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS WITHIN THE CITY.
AND WHEN, WHEN WE, WHEN WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, UM, IT, I GUESS IT DELAYS THE PROCESS ON, ON WHEN THE HEARING CAN BE HELD.
UM, AND IT, IT, IT IMPACTS THE STREAMLINING ACT.
SO PER STATE LAW, WE HA WE ONLY HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME BEFORE WE CAN, FROM THE TIME AN APPLICATION IS COMPLETED, UM, TO TAKE IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
BUT, YOU KNOW, UM, I I HAVE A GOOD QUESTION THOUGH BECAUSE I, I UNDERSTAND THAT IF IT'S IN THE R ONE 6,000 RESIDENTIAL ZONING OBVIOUSLY IS MORE PACKED AND MORE RESIDENTS.
BUT IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE R ONE 40,000 RESIDENTIAL ZONING, YOU MIGHT GET ONLY 10 OR 30 BECAUSE OF THE LOT IS SO HUGE AND THAT YOU MAY NOT, SO 800 FEET, IT DEPEND BY EACH INDIVIDUAL.
UM, I GUESS SITUATIONS, YES, A CERTAIN AREA YOU MIGHT ONLY GET NO MORE THAN 30, 20 OR 30, BUT SOME AREA IN THE R ONE 6,000, MAYBE THERE'S A LOT MORE MM-HMM.
SO, I MEAN, YES, CONCERNING THAT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT OFTEN.
MAYBE WE SHOULD CONSIDER A NOTIFICATION IF YOU'RE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX OR A COMMERCIAL AREA, THEN WE HAVE TO IDENTIFY, WE HAVE TO MAIL OUT NOTICES TO EVERY SINGLE TENANT, UM, PER OUR CODE.
SO THAT ALSO ADDS A ADDS TO IT.
I KNOW THIS IS A, A BIG ISSUE IN DISTRICT FOUR AND FIVE AND THERE'S CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE COMMISSIONER HANG HAS MENTIONED THE LOT'S HUGE, SO NOTIFICATION TO THE HOMEOWNERS ARE REALLY NOT, THEY'RE NOT GETTING IT.
IDEALLY IT'D BE BETTER TO GET, GET MORE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN AN AWARENESS IN THE CAMPAIGN.
NOW THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT THE PLANNING COM, I MEAN THE PLANNING STAFF AND, AND OUR STAFF HERE IN THE CITY WORK TREMENDOUSLY HARD FOR THE WORK THEY DO FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND, AND FOR THE RESIDENTS.
NOW, I THINK ONE OF THIS, ONE OF THE THINGS TO LOOK AT, I THINK IS TO LOOK AT THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH
[00:50:01]
MAYBE OUTSOURCING, UH, THE PO THE OUTSOURCING, SENDING OUT THOSE NOTICES TO A MAIL HOUSE.AND I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF WHAT SHE WAS EXPLAINING MM-HMM.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY THE DIFFERENT CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENTS ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO AN AFFIDAVIT.
THEY HAVE TO TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY ON WHEN THE NOTICES WENT OUT, HOW MANY WENT OUT FOR EACH AND EVERY PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE NOT ABLE AT THIS TIME TO AUTOMATICALLY GIVE TO SOMEBODY ELSE TO DO.
I'M NOT SAYING TO DO THAT TOMORROW.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THERE'S SOLUTIONS TO SOLVING THIS ISSUE AND THAT BECAUSE WE, WE CAN'T PUT A POSTAGE ON A MAIL OR WE CAN'T SEND OUT MAIL, SHOULD NOT BE AN EXCUSE, SHOULD NOT NOTIFY 800 FEET BACK OF RESIDENTS WHO MAY BE IMPACTED REGARDING A PROJECT THAT'S GONNA COME THEIR WAY.
AND SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS THERE SHOULD BE, WE SHOULD LOOK INTO, UH, WHAT ALTERNATIVES THE CITY HAS AT ITS DISPOSAL, UH, TO MEET, TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW, BUT ALSO AT THE SAME TIME SATISFY THE RESIDENTS.
UH, THERE ARE CONCERN WITH ISSUES LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY IN DISTRICT FOUR AND FIVE, WHERE THERE'S, UH, A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF IMPACT GOING ON IN THOSE AREAS.
OTHER THING THAT THE STATE NOW REQUIRES ANY CITY THAT HAS A WEBSITE WHICH IS ACCESSIBLE
AND THERE WAS ALSO THE TIME WHEN THEY WOULD POST IN NEWSPAPERS, BUT THEY LEARNED THAT PEOPLE TEND TO YEAH.
GO ON THE WEBSITE AND LOOK ELECTRONICALLY.
YOU KNOW WHAT, SO THE OTHER THING THAT POSTED, I NEVER WENT ON THE WEBSITE.
I NEVER KNEW IT WAS, THAT ALSO IS THE OTHER OPTION.
NEVER UNTIL I, THE OTHER THING IF I MAY ADD IS, UM, PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO REQUIRE A POSTING SIGNAGE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS IF YOU DRIVE BY IT AND IT'S GONNA IMPACT YOU, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THAT SOMETHING IS COMING UP AND THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING, UH, A CELL TOWER.
AND IF I MAY ADD THAT MINIMUM SIGN SIGNS, THAT MINIMUM SIGN SIZE WOULD BE THREE FEET BY FIVE FEET.
AND THE, UH, THE LETTER OF NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING WOULD BE MANDATED TO BE THREE AND A QUARTER INCHES TALL MINIMUM.
AND, UH, MAYBE THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND THE INTERNSHIP PROGRAM FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SO THEY COULD HELP ON STUFF LIKE THIS.
WE ALREADY HAVE INTERNS IN OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
SO MAYBE WE COULD, MAYBE WITH THIS ADDITIONAL FUNDING COMING IN, THAT THERE MAY BE ROOM TO EXPAND THAT PROGRAM, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING NOTIFICATIONS OUT TO THE RESIDENTS WHO ARE MOST IMPACTED BY PROJECTS LIKE THIS.
SO CHAIR THERE, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY SPECIFIC LAW SPECIFIC TO THE NOTIFICATION RADIUS.
UM, ALL I CAN KNOW IS THAT IN MY EXPERIENCE, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONSULTANT'S EXPERIENCE, 500 IS THE, IS THE NORM.
YOU CAN INCREASE IT IF YOU WANT TO 800.
UM, JUST UNDERSTAND THAT IT, IT'S, UH, IT, IT WILL BE SCRUTINIZED AND, AND WILL BE THE LARGER ONE, UH, THE LARGEST RADIUS THAT I, I'M AWARE OF, WHICH WILL BRING ATTENTION WHAT THE RESULT OF THAT IS.
I, I CAN'T SAY 'CAUSE THERE'S NO SPECIFIC, UH, REGULATION OR CASE LAW ON THAT SPECIFIC ISSUE.
BUT, UM, YEAH, I JUST, I THINK THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE ILL INTENTION OF, UH, PUTTING A BURDEN ON THOSE, UH, PHONE COMPANIES BY REQUIRING EVEN GREATER 500 FEET REQUIREMENT.
WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT WE WANT AWARENESS IN THE PROCESS.
WELL, AND THAT, THAT'S THE OTHER ISSUE IS IF WE ARE SEEING, AND THAT'S SHOULD ACTUALLY PREVENT LAWSUITS FROM OCCURRING BECAUSE IN CIRCUM CIRCUMSTANCES, LIKE LAST TIME, NOW WE'RE, WE'RE IN AN ISSUE NOW.
SO I THINK BY CREATING MORE PUBLIC AWARENESS, THAT PREVENTS LITIGATION IN THE LONG RUN.
UM, AND, AND ALSO YOU SHOULD BE AWARE THAT THIS WOULD ALSO BE APPLIED ONLY TO ONE SPECIFIC UTILITY WITH, YOU KNOW, WIRELESS AS OPPOSED TO ANY OTHER UTILITY, WHICH THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT IS NOT AS, AS LARGE.
AND THEN NOW, UH, IF THERE'S A, IF THERE'S A MOTION OR A SECOND OR ANY ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT THE COMMISSIONER COMMENTS THE COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, UH, ANY YOU GUYS HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 DASH 6 1 3 4, RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 DASH 6 1 3 5, RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 DASH 6 1 3 6.
UH, AND RESOLUTION NUMBER 23 DASH 6 1 3 7.
RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE INITIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE, UH, DECLARATION GENERAL PLAN
[00:55:01]
AMENDMENT NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO TWO, ZONE CHANGE NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO TWO AND CODE AMENDMENT DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE NUMBER 23 DASH ZERO ONE.I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, TO APPROVE THE MOTION, BUT ALSO ADD THE PROVIDER'S TOWERS IN REGARDS TO NOTIFICATIONS FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
THAT THE REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE IN NOTIFICATIONS TO AT LEAST EIGHT 800 FEET RADIUS COMPARED TO 500 FEET RADIUS NOTIFICATIONS.
I MEAN, CAN I MAKE A MOTIONS TO, SO WE, WE HAVE A SUBSTITUTE ON THE
SO IT'D BE APPROPRIATE THIS TIME TO SEE IF THERE'S A SECOND FOR THE SUBSTITUTE.
I'LL SECOND THE SUBSTITUTE WITH, OKAY.
SO, SO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UH, NOW TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE PR, UH, ORIGINAL MOTION.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT'S TO APPROVE, UH, ALL THE RESOLUTIONS, BUT WITH THE ADDITION REVISION OF CHANGING THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT TO 800 FEET.
AND, AND TO BE CLEAR, BEFORE WE, BEFORE WE VOTE, I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT.
UM, I I I WOULD JUST REITERATE THE CONCERNS, UH, THAT THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, UH, PUT OUT THERE, UH, FRANKLY, THE IDEA THAT YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC NOTICE PROVISION OR A SPECIFIC TYPE OF UTILITY THAT IS IN EXCESS OF ANY OTHER NOTICE PROVISION IN THE ENTIRE CITY IS ARE INVITING LITIGATION.
AND I THINK THAT'S A BAD IDEA.
AND I, YEAH, I WILL BE VOTING NO ON THAT, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT I AM IN FAVOR OF EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND, AND I'LL, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE CLEAR THAT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S A LITIGATION ISSUE BECAUSE THE INTENTION OF THIS COMMISSION IS NOT TO DELAY THE PROCESS OF WIRELESS TOWERS, BUT CREATE NOTIFICATION TO THE RESIDENTS TO CREATE PUBLIC AWARENESS IN THE PROCESS.
AND SO WE WELCOME ANY, ANY WIRELESS COMPANY WHO WANTS TO COME TO OUR CITY, UH, WHO WANTS TO DO BUSINESS IN OUR CITY.
UH, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S PUBLIC AWARENESS IN THE PROCESS.
AND, AND I THINK THE LAW IS VERY CLEARER THAT THE CITIES HAVE THAT RIGHT TO DO.
AND SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, PAULINA, CAN YOU DO ROLL CALL? UM, GIMME ONE SEC.
I ALSO WANTED TO ADD THAT, UM, WE'RE THIS PARTICULAR BODY HERE OF AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER AND, UM, IS, AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO, UM, EVEN THOUGH THE FCC IN 1996, IF YOU READ THEIR CODE, WHICH I CAN, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T REALLY KNOW ON TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THEY DID GIVE US, THE FIRST THING THAT THEY GIVE US IS THE GOVERNING A CITY IS BASICALLY IS TO BE ABLE TO DECIDE WHERE THE LOCATION, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE ZONING CODE.
WHERE SHOULD WE PUT THIS THING? THAT'S NUMBER ONE.
THERE ARE THREE ITEMS THAT THEY ALLOW THE CITY AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER OR CITY COUNCILS TO BASICALLY DICTATE WHERE YOU WANT IT.
HOW SHOULD THE STRUCTURAL LOOK? SHOULD IT BE A HUNDRED FEET? SHOULD IT BE 50 FEET? SHOULD IT BE 20 FEET? HOW WIDE THE BASE SHOULD BE? SO THIS CODE IS WHAT THE FIRST THING THE FCC DID IS TO GIVE THE CITY ENTITLEMENT TO SAY, HEY, YOU GO AND FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS THAT YOU WANT IN YOUR CITY AND WHERE YOU WANNA PUT THIS THING AND HOW LARGE AND WHAT IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE FOR YOUR CITY.
SO US AS A BODY, THE FIVE OF US, WE'RE BASICALLY OUR DECISION MAKERS FOR 140,000 OR 120,000 OF WEST CORINO RESIDENTS.
AND WE'RE HERE, WE'RE NOT HERE TO INVITING LAWSUIT, BUT WE ARE HERE MAKING DECISIONS FOR THE ENTIRE RESIDENTS.
SO, AND, AND, AND WE NEED TO MAKE DECISION.
SOME OF THEM ARE NOT EASY, SOME OF 'EM ARE VERY DIFFICULT.
HOWEVER, SOMEHOW ALL OF US NEED TO COME ABOUT, INCLUDING THE LAWYERS AND STAFF.
WE HAVE TO COME TOGETHER TO MAKE A DECISIONS.
AND THIS WILL EMBODY AND ENCOMPASSES THE CODE THAT EVERYONE ELSE WILL ALSO LOOK AT.
AND, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE FCC CODE, THAT'S 30, OH, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY YEARS AGO, 1996.
BUT THE FIRST THING THEY DID WAS TO GIVE ALL THE CITIES, UM, DECISION MAKING IN TERMS OF WHAT TO DO AND HOW TO DO AND, AND, AND WHAT THIS THING SHOULD LOOK LIKE.
SORRY, WHERE ARE WE?
UM, COMMISSIONER HING, WHAT ARE WE DOING? SORRY.
SO THE MOTION WAS
AYE UH, COMMISSIONER LEWIS? NO, UH, COMMISSIONER.
[01:00:01]
UH, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS, OR SORRY, VICE CHAIR WILLIAMS. NO.AND I'LL JUST SAY THAT, UM, IF THE CITY COUNCIL ASK WHY WE MADE THAT DECISION, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STAFF COMMITTEE, PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE WAR, THE, THE CONCERNS WERE, ARE ELABORATED TO THEM.
DO WE NEED TO DO ANYTHING ELSE? OH, WILL IT COME BACK TO US OR THIS IS IT? NO, IT'LL GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR ADOPTION.
WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO COMMISSION REPORTS AND COMMENTS AND MIS MIS ITEMS. WOULD ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO REPORT OR COMMENT ON AN ITEM? SEEING NONE.
[2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT ]
NOW MOVE ON TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORS REPORT.UM, PAULINA, DO YOU HAVE ANY ITEMS TO REPORT? UM, WE HAVE A, UH, OPEN HOUSE THIS SATURDAY, UH, NOVEMBER 4TH AT 6:00 PM AT CAMERON COMMUNITY CENTER.
UM, THE COMMUNITY'S INVITED TO ATTEND.
IT'S JUST TO GET TO KNOW WHAT PROGRAMS AND SERVICES ARE PROVIDED AT THE CENTER.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE OUR VETERANS DAY CELEBRATION ON SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 11TH AT 11:00 AM UM, HERE AT WEST COVINA CITY HALL, AND THERE'LL BE A, UM, FOLLOWED BY A BARBECUE FOR THOSE ATTENDEES.
AND THE NEXT REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE HELD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14TH AT 7:00 PM HERE.
AND, UM, JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT THERE'S A COUPLE ITEMS THAT, UM, WILL BE GOING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL.
UM, WE DID GET AN APPEAL FOR THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, AND THAT'LL BE ON NEXT TUESDAY'S COUNCIL MEETING.
AND AN APPEAL FOR THE, UH, UH, REVOCATION OF ACUP THAT WILL BE GOING IN DECEMBER.
SO THAT'S IT FOR ME THIS EVENING.
SINCE THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO CONSIDER, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 8:02 PM PACIFIC TIME.