* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. OKAY. [00:00:05] ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING [CALL TO ORDER] CROWD. ACCORDING TO THAT CLOCK, WE'RE AN HOUR EARLY, BUT IT'S A LITTLE AFTER SEVEN. WE'RE CALLED THIS MEETING TO ORDER THE WEST. GIVE ME THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR TUESDAY, MARCH 10. UH, FIRST WE WILL, UH, RISE FOR A MOMENT OF SILENT PRAYER MEDITATION, WHICH WILL FOLLOW UP WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, WHICH I WILL LEAD. SO PLEASE RISE. THANK YOU. PLEASE FOLLOW ME IN THE PLEDGE TO THE FLAG. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MR. ANDERSON. MAY WE HAVE A ROLL CALL? PLEASE GIVE ME SCHIERHOLTZ MR. KENNEDY, CAN YOU SHARE HOW KAZ AND CHAIRMAN READ HOLES HERE? NEXT ITEM IS THE APPROVAL [APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular meeting, February 25, 2020] OF MINUTES FOR OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS FEBRUARY 25TH, 2020 COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THOSE MINUTES. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, THOSE MINUTES WILL BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED. THE NEXT ITEM IS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. THIS IS WHEN ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT. I HAVE NO CARDS. I ACTUALLY HAVE NO CARDS AT ALL. SO IF EITHER ONE OF YOU TWO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS US ON A NOT AGENDA ITEM NOW IT'D BE THE TIME. SEE NO ONE RISING. WE WILL CLOSE THE ORAL COMMUNICATION AND MOVE ON TO THE IRREGULAR AGENDA. WE HAVE TWO PUBLIC [2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 20-02 SUBCOMMITTEE FOR DESIGN REVIEW NO. 20-04 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: Javier Hernandez LOCATION: 2915 Hillside Drive REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for the construction a 300-square foot second-story addition and a 300-square foot single-story addition to the existing 5,276-square foot single-story single-family residence (including attached garage). The proposed house will have a total floor area of 5,876-square feet. The project requires a CUP because the house with the proposed addition would exceed the 4,000 square foot maximum unit size by more than 25-percent. Subcommittee for Design Review is required for all second-floor additions and additions that are visible from the street.] HEARINGS. WE WILL GO TO THE FIRST ONE RIGHT NOW. THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NUMBER 20 DASH ZERO TWO SUBCOMMITTEE FOR DESIGN REVIEW NUMBER 20 DASH ZERO FOUR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION. THE APPLICANT IS JAVIER HERNANDEZ. THE LOCATION IS 29 15 HILLSIDE DRIVE. MR. ANDERSON, WHO WILL BE PRESENTING THAT WORK. OUR PLANNING MANAGER, JOANNE BURNS, WILL BE PRESENTING THAT REPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING ON A ROLL CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALSO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A LARGE HOME. UM, THE LARGE HOME IS BECAUSE IT, THE PROPOSAL, THE PROPOSAL EXCEEDS THE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM UNIT SIZE BY GREATER THAN THE THEN 25% THIS THRESHOLD IS 5,000 SQUARE FEET. FOR THIS SITE, THE EXISTING HOUSE IS 5,276 SQUARE FEET. THE PROPOSED ADDITION TOTAL IS 600 SQUARE FEET, 300 ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND 300 ON THE SECOND FLOOR. THE PROPOSED HOUSE WITH THE ADDITION WOULD BE 5,876 SQUARE FEET. THE PROJECT ALSO REQUIRES SUBCOMMITTEE FOR DESIGN REVIEW BECAUSE IT'S A SECOND FLOOR ADDITION AND IT'S ALSO VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. THE PROJECT IS CONSIDERED A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION ONE FIVE THREE ZERO THREE BECAUSE UM, IT'S A, UM, IT'S FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION OR A SMALL CONVERSE CONVERSIONS OF SMALL STRUCTURES. NOTICES OF PUBLIC HEARING WAS SENT TO 28 OWNERS AND OCCUPANTS WITHIN 300 FEET FROM THE SUBJECT SITE. THE NOTICE WAS ALSO PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION. MMM. AT LEAST 10 DAYS PRIOR TO TODAY'S MEETING. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF HILLSIDE DRIVE AND OUTLOOK LANE. UM, AND THE SITE IS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED ON THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ON THE SCREEN. HERE ARE THE SITE PLAN L BUILDING ELEVATIONS IN STREET VIEW. THE, THE PROJECT WILL FILL IN. ALL RIGHT. THIS NOTCH RIGHT ALONG HERE. THIS IS OUTLOOK WAYNE. UM, SO IT, IT W W W IT'S SLIGHTLY BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. SO THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH FROM OUTLOOK LANE. THE NOTCH IS SOMEWHERE AROUND THIS AREA, SO IT'S MINIMALLY VISIBLE BECAUSE THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 10. THE BUILDING PEDIS APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET LOWER THAN THE STREET SIDE. [00:05:01] AND AS FAR AS THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS IS CONCERNED, THIS IS THE GENERAL AREA WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE ADDING. NOW GO AHEAD AND HIGHLIGHT THAT IN GREEN. UM, THERE ARE WINDOWS ALONG ON THE SECOND FLOOR, BUT IT DOES LOOK TOWARDS THE STREET SO THERE WAS NO PRIVACY IMPACTS THERE. UM, AND THE BUILDING MATERIALS AND COLOR IS GOING TO MATCH THE EXISTING HOUSE WITH THAT STAFF FEELS THAT THE PROJECT COMPLIES WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES. OKAY. STAFF DID SURVEY, UM, PROPERTIES WITHIN THE GENERAL AND FOUND THAT THE MEDIAN SIZE, HOW, UM, LAW IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS 19,253 SQUARE FEET. MEDIAN HOUSE SIZE IS 4,568 SQUARE FEET, MEANING FLOOR AREA RATIO IS 24%. THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S, I'M SORRY. I MEAN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEDIAN IS, IS 20,595 SQUARE FEET. HOW SIZE? 5,060. AND THE MEDIAN FLOOR AREA RATIO IS 25%. UM, AND IN COMPARISON TO THE PROJECT SITE, UM, THE PROJECT SITE IS 23,160 SQUARE FEET. UM, AGAIN, THE HOUSE, THE PROPOSED HOUSE SIZE WOULD BE 5,876 SQUARE FEET AND THE FLOOR AREA IS 25%. UM, THE HOUSE RANGE IN, IN THE GENERAL VICINITY IS BETWEEN 4,129 SQUARE FEET IN 5,400, THREE SQUARE FEET. AND THE LOT, THE LOTS RANGE BETWEEN 7,000, 100 SQUARE FEET AND 27,740 SQUARE FEET. ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED HOUSE WOULD BE A PROCESS APPROXIMATELY 28.5% LARGER THAN THE AVERAGE HOUSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROJECT SIDE IS, IS, IS ALSO 20.3% LARGER THAN THE AVERAGE LAW IN THE AREA. AND IT'S ALSO COMPARABLE IN FLOOR AREA RATIO THAN THE AVERAGE. THEY THEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AVERAGE AND MEDIAN. SO WITH THIS, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE PROJECT, UM, AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE, THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SECOND AND UM, THIS, UM, DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONS. IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. THANK YOU. JOANNE. COMMISSIONER HOLDS QUESTION STAFF. WERE THE NEIGHBORS NOTIFIED OF THIS? YES. ANY OBJECTIONS THAT WE RECEIVED? NO. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY LETTERS OR, OR MESSAGES OR PHONE CALLS FROM ANY NEIGHBORS. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF SEEING NONE? I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY PORTION OF THE HEARING. I HAVE NO CARDS. THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE. I DON'T SEE THE APP. OKAY. I HAVE NO CARDS. ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS PROJECT FOR OR AGAINST? NOPE. ALRIGHTY. THEN I WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY PORTION AND WE SHALL MOVE TO COMMISSION DISCUSSION. ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD ON THIS AND THE ISSUES WITH THIS? NOPE. NOPE. CAN WE HAVE THE RESOLUTION? UH, THE RESOLUTION NUMBER, IT IS RESOLUTION IMAGE AND OBVIOUSLY USE FROM IT. SO THE RESOLUTION NUMBER WOULD BE 20 DASH SIX OH TWO NINE. YOU MADE A MOTION. I'LL SECOND IT. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. AND LET ME JUST MAKE A, A BRIEF COMMENT. APPARENTLY THESE, THIS HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE WITH THOSE HOMES WHERE THEY HAVE TAKEN THAT SO-CALLED NOTCH AND KIND OF FILLED IT IN. SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS KIND OF A BENIGN ADDITION IN MY VIEW. SO YEAH, SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT. SO, UH, I GUESS WE'RE GONNA DO A ROLL CALL ON THE MOTION PLEASE. COMMISSIONER HOLTZ. COMMISSIONER HAYNE, COMMISSIONER KENNEDY, MICHELLE CARES AND CHAIRMAN RENTALS. AYE. MOTION PASSES, FIVE ZERO THE ACTIONS FINAL ELICIT FEEL OF THE CITY COUNCIL WITHIN 10 DAYS. [00:10:01] ALL RIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON [3. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 20-03 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION LOCATION: City-wide REQUEST: The proposed code amendments consist of certain amendments to the Zoning section of the West Covina Municipal Code to modify motion picture filming/film permit standards.] TO THE, UH, SECOND PUBLIC HEARING. THIS IS A CODE AMENDMENT NUMBER 20 DASH ZERO THREE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION. THE APPLICANT IS CITY INITIATED. IT'S A CITYWIDE, UH, LOCATION AND THIS IS A PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT CONSISTING OF CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING SECTION OF THE WEST COMMUNITY MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY MOTION PICTURE FILMING AND FILM PERMIT STANDARDS. MR. ANDERSON, WHO WILL BE PRESENTING THIS STAFF REPORT, OUR PLANNING MANAGER, JOANNE BURNS, WILL BE PRESENTING THAT REPORT AS WELL. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. I'LL GO AHEAD AND START OFF WITH THE BACKGROUND TO THE UM, CODE AMENDMENT. ON JANUARY 21ST OF THIS YEAR, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED RESOLUTION NUMBER 2020 DASH ZERO FIVE TO INITIATE A CODE AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO FILM PERMIT STANDARDS ON FEBRUARY, 1120 20 THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A STUDY SESSION AND DIRECTED STAFF TO DRAFT THE ORDINANCE. THE, THE DRAFT CODE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DIRECTION THAT WAS RECEIVED DURING THIS STUDY SESSION. SORRY, I'M HAVING TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES HERE. OKAY. SO ON THE PROJECTOR IS A SCREENSHOT OF WHAT HAS BEEN CHANGED OR WHAT IS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED. UM, SO, SO BASICALLY, UM, WHAT IS BEING CHANGED IS THE TIMEFRAME FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY FILMING AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES FROM THREE DAYS TO FIVE DAYS AND ALSO FILL MEAN IN NON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, WHICH IS CALLED OTHERS' ZONING DISTRICTS FROM FIVE DAYS TO 20 TIMES PER PRODUCTION FILM AND OR APPLICATION IN THE CALENDAR YEAR WITH A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS IN BETWEEN EACH TIME PERIOD. UM, THE PREVIOUS, UM, WAIT TIME WAS THREE MONTHS. UH, SO THAT THE WAIT TIME HAS BEEN REDUCED FROM SEVEN, FROM THREE MONTHS TO SEVEN DAYS. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT IN NUMBER THREE, RIGHT HERE, UM, THE HOURS, UH, THE HOURS OF FILMING HA HAS BEEN REVISED FOR NON FOR NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 6:00 AM TO 11:00 PM. UM, THE CURRENT CODE STATES THAT FILMING IN RESIDENTIAL AND ALSO NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ARE LIMITED TO BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 AM AND 9:00 PM. UM, WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CODE AMENDMENT NUMBER 20 DASH ZERO ONE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. UM, BEFORE I CONCLUDE THE PRESENTATION, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT THIS TOO IS AN, UM, A SEQUEL EXEMPTION, BUT IT'S A GENERAL EXEMPTION, UH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROJECT MMM. INVOLVED. AND ALSO A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING WAS PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER, UH, AT LEAST 10 DAYS PRIOR TO TODAY'S MEETING AS WELL. UM, WITH THIS STAFF CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION. IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? AND WE DID, WE HAD THIS STUDY SESSION AND THIS IS THE RESULT OF THAT STUDY SESSION. WHATEVER WE DO HERE, WE'LL GO ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CODE AMENDMENT. AND I WAS NOTICING IN THE SANFORD REPORT THAT WE HAVEN'T TOUCHED THIS SINCE, SINCE 2000 THIS HAS BEEN 20 YEARS. SO IT'S PROBABLY HIGH TIME WE DO SOMETHING AND YOU KNOW, AND I THINK WE COULD PROBABLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A LOT MORE FILMING AND THAT'S I THINK THE INTENT HERE. SO, UH, WE JUST SAY AN EMOTION. THERE'S NO REZO RIGHT. PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC CAN SEE, SHOULD OPEN UP HEARING, ASK FOR IT. PROBABLY SHOULD. YES. AND CLOSE IT. AND I'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY PORTION. YOU WANT TO SPEAK. OH, FANTASTIC. COME ON UP AND BE SURE YOU FILL OUT A PINK CARD SO WE KNOW WHERE TO FIND YOU AFTER YOU'RE DONE. YOU CAN DO IT AFTER YOU'RE DONE. JUST IDENTIFY YOURSELF AT THE TIME BEING AND LUCAS PURCELL AND A RESIDENT OF WEST COVINA FOR ABOUT 41 YEARS. UH, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. IT SAYS 20 TIMES PER PRODUCTION FILM, ET CETERA, BUT IS THERE A DURATION FOR EACH OF THOSE TIMES? [00:15:02] OKAY. UH, UH, DURATION ON THE NUMBER OF DAYS HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED NOW. SO THAT 20 TIMES CAN BE LIKE 50 DAYS OR IT CAN BE LIKE FIVE DAYS. SO THERE IS NO DURATION. JUST SAY THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE TIME, HAVE A BEAUTIFUL YEAR. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU ADDRESS THE CHAIRMAN AND THEN HE CAN DIRECT ANY QUESTIONS TO US. IT'S THEIR HEARING, NOT OURS. OKAY. DID YOU GET AN ANSWER? SO I, I KNOW YOU WANT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH US, BUT THE CONVERSATION WITH THEM AND THEN THAT'S RIGHT. YOU'RE ADDRESSING THEM. THE MEETING IS THEIR MEETINGS, SO ASK THE QUESTION TO THEM AND THEN THEY CAN, UH, OKAY, SO LET'S 20 TIMES PER YEAR, BUT IS THERE A SET LIMIT OF DURATION ON WHAT EACH OF THESE TIMES IS? CAN THEY JUST SAY ONE TIME IS THE FULL YEAR AND THAT'S IT. WE'LL GET THAT ANSWER FOR YOU. OKAY. YEAH, THAT'S JUST ONE THING I WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU GUYS DIDN'T OVERLOAD. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NO. OKAY. WE'RE NOT SERVING POPCORN OR ANYTHING AND THIS IS ABOUT IT. OH, OKAY. GOOD, GOOD. OKAY. MAYBE WE CAN GET AN ANSWER FROM STAFF OR HIM. I'M A DURATION AT A TIME. A DURATION OR A TIMEFRAME HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THE CODE. SO IT CAN RIGHT NOW IT'S OPEN, IT CAN BE, UM, FROM FIVE DAYS OR LIKE ONE DAY TO 50 DAYS CONSECUTIVELY. UM, RIGHT NOW IT'S FIVE, IT'S FIVE DAYS. SO IN THE CODE TODAY IT'S FIVE DAYS, BUT WHEN WE HAD THE STUDY SESSION YOU, THE DIRECTION WAS JUST TO DO IT 20 TIMES SO WE COULD COME UP WITH A DURATION OR IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, IT'S UP, IT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL OR THE COMMISSION TO THE SITE TO GIVE US DIRECTION. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT COMMENTS? I GUESS HOW OFTEN, HOW ON TIME? UM, HOW OFTEN DOES THIS HAPPEN THOUGH WITH FILM PRODUCTIONS IN WEST COVINA? MMM, RIGHT NOW THERE, I BELIEVE THERE IS ONE PROPERTY THAT HAS FILMING REGULARLY. UM, AND UM, THEY CAN ONLY HAVE FILMING FOR FIVE DAYS STRAIGHT, UM, EVERY THREE MONTHS. SO THEY DO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS TIMEFRAME. I'M ASSUMING THAT IF MORE FILMING IS ALLOWED IN THE CODE, THEN MORE FILMING WOULD BE REQUESTED. LAST YEAR, UH, ABOUT UM, FOUR OR FIVE. FOUR FOR THAT ONE PROPERTY TOTAL, LIKE UM, SIX OR SEVEN. UH, LAST, LAST CALENDAR YEAR WE ISSUED SIX OR SEVEN FILM PERMITS AND FIRED. FOUR OR FIVE OF THEM WERE AT ONE LOCATION. SO PREDOMINANTLY IT'S COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY. PREDOMINANTLY IT'S A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AT ONE LOCATION? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? NOPE. OKAY. NO. OKAY. GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY PORTION. OPEN UP FOR A COMMISSION DISCUSSION. ANY DISCUSSION? ARE WE READY FOR THE RESOLUTION NUMBER? OKAY. RESOLUTION NUMBER PLEASE. THE RESOLUTION NUMBER WOULD BE 20 DASH SIX OH THREE ZERO S DURING YOUR MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY HOLD SECOND BY HAWK. HEZ ROLL CALL PLEASE. COMMISSIONER HOLDS COMMISSIONED HER HEARING. COMMISSIONER KENNEDY. MR CARES AND CHAIRMAN RED HOSE. AYE. MOTION PASSES. FIVE ZERO AND THIS WILL NOT GO ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL? CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NEXT IS NOT HEARING ADAM. [4. Study Session - Design Review Subcommittee Guidelines] IT'S A STUDY SESSION REGARDING THE DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE GUIDELINES MR. ANDERSON MADE. WE HAVE THAT STAFF REPORT PLEASE AND WHO WILL BE PRESENTING IT WILL, I'LL DO THAT MYSELF. ALL RIGHT. YOU MAY RECALL THAT A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO WE DID HAVE A ITEM THAT CAME TO THE COMMISSION. IT HAD BEEN FORWARDED BY A SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTION ABOUT DESIGN AND UH, THE FRONT DOOR AND PORCH WHERE DESIGN AND THE SIDE ELEVATION, NOT THE FRONT ELEVATION. IT WASN'T A CORNER LOT AS AN INTERIOR LOT. SO THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTED US TO LOOK AT UH, UH, THE NEW GUIDELINE TOO TO INCLUDE IN OUR, OUR ONE STORY GUIDELINES. AND SO WE'VE DONE THAT AND WE'VE DRAFTED SOMETHING AND WE BROUGHT, WE'RE BRINGING IT TO HERE FOR YOUR WORDSMITHING I GUESS IS WHAT WE CALL IT. AND I'LL READ [00:20:01] IT FOR YOU. IT'S IN THE FIRST PAGE OF THAT STAFF REPORT IN ITALICS. THE FRONT ELEVATION OF HOUSES SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO ENGAGE THE STREET THROUGH THE PLACEMENT OF A DOOR WINDOWS AND THE FRONT PORCH AS WELL AS OTHER ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES THAT DEFINE THE ELEVATION AS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. SO IT DOES GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A WIGGLE ROOM FOR UH, THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO MAKE SOME INTERPRETATION. UH, BUT IT DOES PUT ALL THOSE THINGS. THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO IT. WE COULD HAVE JUST WRITTEN IT THAT YOU SHALL HAVE A FRONT DOOR ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. WE DIDN'T WRITE IT THAT WAY, BUT IF THAT'S WHY IT'S HERE FOR YOU TO KIND OF CONSIDER. SO I DUNNO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANY COMMENTS ON THAT. DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER ITEM ON THIS? BUT IT'S SEPARATE AND I'D RATHER KIND OF TACK ON ONE AT A TIME. COMMISSIONER HOLES. UM, I THINK THE LAST ONE THAT BROUGHT THIS UP AND ALL THAT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS A, I DON'T WANT TO SAY RELIGIOUS, BUT IT WAS A THING IN THE END, THEIR BACK CULTURAL THING THAT CHANGED IT. UM, IS THAT, ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW THAT IN THE FUTURE? I MEAN IF IT, IF, WELL THAT WILL ALWAYS BE UP TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE COMMISSION BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE SUBCOMMITTEE, THE APPOINTED MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALWAYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO INTERPRET WHAT THE CODES MEANING IS. I SAY CODE, THIS ISN'T A CODE, THIS WILL BE A GUIDELINE. SO AS THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, AS I SAY, IT'S A GUIDELINE IS AN IDEA THAT YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO MEET IT SOMETIMES. UM, AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS WRITTEN. I MEAN WHEN WE WROTE IT, WE PUT THREE THINGS ON THEIR DOOR, WINDOWS AND FRONT PORCH ON THE FRONT ELEVATION. SO, AND IT'S NOT ALL OF THOSE THINGS NECESSARY. IT COULD BE ALL THREE, IT COULD BE TWO OF THE THREE. MAYBE YOU'D EVEN ACCEPT ONE OF THE THREE. UM, I THINK, I THINK, AND I CAN'T ANSWER THIS QUESTION BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ALL THE CULTURAL INS AND OUTS OF THAT PARTICULAR PHILOSOPHY, BUT I THINK IF THAT WOULD'VE BEEN THERE TO BEGIN WITH, YOU WOULD'VE SEEN A DIFFERENT DESIGN COME THROUGH. THAT'S WHAT I THINK WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. BECAUSE THERE, THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO ADDRESS THINGS EVEN IN THAT, UH, EVEN IN THAT PHILOSOPHY. SO THIS WILL HELP THAT SITUATION. IT MAY NOT COMPLETELY ALLEVIATE IT, BUT I THINK IF THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN THERE, IT WOULDN'T HAVE GOT HERE. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A HANDLE THAT SUBCOMMITTEE BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE ALREADY DESIGNED SOMETHING ON THAT FRONT ELEVATION AND MADE IT LOOK LIKE A FRONT ELEVATION. OKAY. YEAH, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE MORE OF THAT IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF POPULATION THAT'S MOVING INTO THE CITY THAT IS HERE. AND THE OTHER THING QUESTION I HAVE, I KNOW THERE'S SOME ISSUES WITH NUMBERS, ADDRESS NUMBERS. ARE WE ALLOWED TO CHANGE THOSE? YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CHANGE THOSE. AND I'M NOT ALLOWED TO SAY, WELL I GUESS I IN SOME WAY. SO THAT'S A, THAT'S A FUNCTION OF THE ENGINEERING DIVISION. OKAY. THEY CAN CHANGE NUMBERS, BUT CLEARLY IF YOU KNOW, IF YOU GUYS ARE HOUSES ON A STREET NEAR YOUR ADDRESS IS TWO AND HERS IS FOUR AND HERS IS SICK. I MEAN, I SHOULDN'T SAY IT THAT WAY. YOU'RE A TWO. SHE'S EIGHT. HE'S 12, HE'S 16 AND HE'S 20. HE CAN'T CHANGE HIS TO FOUR. IT HAS, IT HAS TO MAKE SENSE. OKAY. SO YEAH THAT'S ALREADY BEEN GOING ON FOR AT LEAST 20 YEARS. THAT'S NOT, AND PEOPLE CHANGE ADDRESSES FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, ONE OF WHICH IS THE SAME PHILOSOPHY. BUT THERE ARE OTHER REASONS PEOPLE CHANGE ADDRESSES. BUT THERE'S A WAY IF, IF YOU'RE TWO AND SHE'S EIGHT, YOU HAVE SIX AND MAYBE THE NUMBER BELOW THAT YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO CHANGE TOO CAUSE YOU HAVE TO SAY AN EVEN OR AN ODD NUMBER TWO. OKAY. SO IT'S FUNCTIONING NOW AND IT HAS BEEN FOR SOME TIME. THERE'S, THERE'S A PROCESS TO DO THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I ACTUALLY LIKE TO ADD, UM, I THINK THE LAST DISCUSSION WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WAS REGARDING THE FUNCTION. YES. WHICH HONESTLY, I'M ETHNICALLY CHINESE, BUT I DON'T REALLY KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE FUNG SHOW BECAUSE I LIVE HERE ALL MY LIFE PRETTY MUCH. BUT TO SOME PEOPLE, WELL I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK ON IT BECAUSE I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND IT OR, OR, OR, YOU KNOW, WELL VERSED ON THAT TOPIC. RIGHT. HOWEVER, I THINK WE DO NEED TO INSTEAD OF ALLOWING, WE DO I THINK AS A RESIDENT AND AS A POPULATION THAT IS INCREASINGLY HAVING MORE ETHNICALLY ASIANS LIVING IN OUR COMMUNITY OR PREDOMINANT HISPANIC COMMUNITY, WE DO TAKE, WE SHOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OF SOME SORT. I'M NOT SURE HOW OR WHAT IT CAN BE CONSIST OF, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THAT. NOW WE GOT IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, UM, THEY WANTED TO PUT THE ENTRY DOORS RIGHT NEXT TO THE SIDE YARD AND IT'S TOWARD THE FRONT STILL, BUT WITHIN FIVE FEET OR SO, MY MOM WENT CORRECTLY, BUT IT'S, IT'S FACING TOWARD THE SIDE YARD. I JUST WANT TO RAISE THIS CASE THAT I DO LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I THOUGHT, ODDLY STRANGE DOWN THERE. I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS WHOLE CASE I BROUGHT UP SOMEHOW MOST OF MY NEIGHBORS FRONT YARD IS IN THE [00:25:01] BACK YARD, THE ENTRY DOORS. SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS QUITE INTERESTING. IT'S NOT ETHNICALLY ASIAN, BUT IT JUST, HOW THEY CHOOSE TO BUILD THEIR HOUSE. AND THIS WAS BUILT IN THE 19 I WOULD SAY 30 50 AND SIXTIES SO I DON'T THINK EVERYONE CHOOSE TO PUT THEIR FRONT YARD IN THEIR BACKYARD, BUT I THINK IT DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCE HOW EACH LOT IS UNIQUE TO THE AREA OR I HONESTLY DON'T THINK THEY BUILT IN THE 1930S OR SIXTIES BECAUSE OF FUNCTION. I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT IS THE CASE. HOWEVER, I FIND THAT QUITE INTERESTING BECAUSE WHEN I GO TO MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE, I DON'T SEE THE FRONT YARD FROM THE STREET. I HAVE TO DRIVE INTO THEIR BACKYARD AND FROM THE BACKYARD. THAT'S HOW YOU ENTERED THEIR HOME AND THAT'S WHERE THE TWO BIG DOORS ARE SO THAT THAT'S UNIQUE. SO IT'S NOT JUST ETHNIC. I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT THE ELEVATIONS THE LOT, EVERYTHING INSTEAD OF SAYING OR FORCING A NEIGHBORS OR FORCING SOMEONE TO SAY, HEY LOOK, YOU NEED TO PUT YOUR FRONT DOOR IN YOUR FRONT HOUSE WHEN IT'S FUNCTIONALLY NOT WORKING OUT FOR THEM. WHETHER IT'S A DRIVEWAY, WHETHER IT'S ELEVATION, I DON'T KNOW. AND I THINK WE DO NEED TO TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATIONS INSTEAD OF HAVING THEM BUILT. YOU CAN SAY TO ENTRYWAY ONE, THE ONE THAT THEY HAD TO COMPLY TO THE CODE AND ONE THAT KIND OF MAKES SENSE TO HOW THEY'RE GOING TO LIVE. IT'S UP. WELL THESE, THESE ARE GUIDELINES, THEY'RE NOT THE CODE. SO YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO INTERPRET THEM LIKE YOU SAID, ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. YES. COMMISSIONER HAWKINS. YEAH. UM, I LIKE WHAT WAS DRAFTED UP HERE, UH, MAINLY FOR, UM, THE, UH, THE FIRST PHRASE OF, OF THIS, OF THIS DRAFT IN THAT IT IS ABOUT, UM, A DESIGN THAT ENGAGES THE STREET AND THAT IT HAS, YOU KNOW, THIS AND IN ITS ENTIRETY ENTIRETY, IT DOESN'T REALLY, UM, HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH THE FUNCTION OF, YOU KNOW, HOW IT, HOW ENTRY FRONT ENTRY OF THE HOUSE HAS MADE IT, DID IT MAKES REALLY, NO, REALLY MAKES NO DEFINITIVE STATEMENT ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THE WORD IS, SHOULD, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE DESIGNED BUT TO ENGAGE THE STREET, NOT DESIGNED TO PUT THE FRONT DOOR, UH, ON THE ELEVATION THAT'S FACING THE STREET. SO I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THERE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THAT FRONT ELEVATION THAT'S, THAT'S FACING THE STREET, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, WE'RE JUST DEALING WITH AN AESTHETIC QUESTION OF THAT FRONT ELEVATION FACING THE STREET AND THAT'S IT. HOWEVER, EVERYTHING ELSE FUNCTIONS, WHETHER IT'S A FRONT DOOR ON THE SIDE OR IN THE BACK, IT'S KIND OF IMMATERIAL OR IT DOESN'T EVEN COME INTO QUESTION. AND EVEN IN THIS GUIDELINE. SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY GONNA MATTER. YOU KNOW, HOW PEOPLE DESIGN THINGS. AS LONG AS WE'RE GETTING THE SORT OF, UH, THOUGHTFUL AESTHETIC THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S FACING THE STREET AND CREATES, UH, AN APPEARANCE, UH, THE RIGHT APPEARANCE FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKING THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ATTRACTIVE. YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALL OF THE, I THINK THAT'S REALLY ALL THAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING, I PURSUED, I'M TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY ONE HOUSE AFTER THE OTHER ARRANGE ANY WHICH WAY WITH AN ELEVATION FACING THE STREET THAT IS, YOU KNOW, DRAB OR EVEN UNSIGHTLY. UM, I DON'T THINK WE WANT THAT. SO I THINK THIS W THE WAY IT'S DRAFTED HERE IS, YOU KNOW, SORT OF SUITS MY NEEDS IN TERMS OF WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR. I LIKE IT. YEAH, I AGREE WITH WHAT YOUR, WHAT YOUR COMMENTS ARE. WE WANT TO, UM, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO BE RECOGNIZABLE AS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. AND THIS GIVES US THAT, YOU KNOW, THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY LOOKING AT A SIDE OF A HOUSE, IT SHOULD BE LET'S FACE IN THE STREET, YOU KNOW, SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S BUILT FUNNY. YOU KNOW. SO I I AGREE WITH YOU. I THINK THIS ADDRESSES IT. IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT HITTING ANYBODY OVER THE HEAD WITH IT AND IT'S GIVEN, THERE IS SOME WIGGLE ROOM AND UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE CAN, WE CAN WORK WITH IT AND SOAKING APPLICANTS AND YOU KNOW, DEVELOPERS AND SO FORTH AS THEY COME FORWARD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? UH, THE ONLY OTHER THING I'D THROW IN THERE IS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY REASONS AND ALL THAT. IF, IF, UH, I MEAN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE, THEY DON'T HAVE A PICTURE WHERE THE FRONT OR WHERE THE ENTRANCE IS. AND IS THAT GOING TO CAUSE ANY PROBLEMS WHEN THERE'S A FIRE OR A CALL FOR SAFETY OR ANYTHING? UH, [00:30:01] I THINK W WHEN WE PROVE IT, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. AND ESPECIALLY IF THEY PUT THIS IN THE BACK AND THEY PUT A GATE UP THAT SHE CAN'T GET THROUGH TO GET INTO THE HOUSE TYPE OF THING. SO IT IS SOMETHING WE OUGHT TO LOOK AT WHEN WE'RE APPROVING IT. OKAY. IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYONE'S COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THE WHOLE POINT IS, IS AS GREG WAS POINTING OUT THAT ONE OF THE POINTS IS THAT YOU WANT, IT'S SORT OF LIKE WHEN YOU'RE, WHEN YOU'RE STANDING IN A GROUP OF FRIENDS, YOU ALL WANT TO FACE EACH OTHER BECAUSE THAT'S A NEIGHBORLY THING TO DO. THAT'S HOW YOU BE CONGENIAL. YOU, EVERYBODY TURNS THEIR BACK ON EACH OTHER. THAT'S NOT VERY GOOD FOR SOCIETY IN GENERAL. SO IT'S, IT'S A SMALL AND SYMBOLIC THING, BUT, AND I, AND I GET THE CULTURAL ASPECT, BUT PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES HAVE BEEN COMING FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD AND LIVING IN ENVIRONMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT LIKE THIS FOR, FOR GENERATIONS, FOR, FOR CENTURIES. AND SO I THINK THAT THERE CAN BE SOME, UH, ACCLIMATION TO THAT. AND I JUST THINK IT'S A, IT'S A BETTER WAY TO DEVELOP A COMMUNITY, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE, THERE'S UNITY IN THE WORD COMMUNITY, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING IS DEVELOPING NEIGHBORLINESS. UM, SO, UM, I GUESS WHAT WE COULD SAY, IT HAS TO BE A PRETTY GOOD REASON TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. AND IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE UP TO THE SUB COMMITTEE AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IF IT GETS FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, STAFF'S JUST GOING TO TELL THEM WHAT THE GUIDELINES SAY AND THEN THEY CAN, THEY CAN GO FROM THERE. AND, AND AS COMMISSIONER HANK POINTED OUT, THERE ARE SOME UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE WAY LOTS ARE, UH, DESIGNED A LOT OF TIMES, IF YOU THINK ABOUT LOTS ON, UH, IN, IN THE, YEAH, EXACTLY. TOPOGRAPHICAL AREAS. I THINK SOME OF THOSE HOMES WERE, WHEN THEY WERE BUILT IN THE 30S THERE WAS NO ROAD. OKAY. SO IT WAS ACTUALLY THE FRONT, NOW IT'S THE BACK, LIKE, LIKE IF YOU'RE TALKING WHERE YOU LIVE ON THAT DIRT ROAD, IT'S A VIRGINIA, RIGHT? IS THAT OKAY? WELL, IF YOU GO BACK THROUGH SPRING VALLEY, THOSE, THOSE ARE KIND OF, THEY WERE BUILT BACKWARDS, BUT AT THAT TIME WHEN THEY WERE BUILT IN THE FORTIES, THERE WAS NO ROAD THERE. SO NOW THEY'VE REVERSED IT. SO WHEN YOU COME DOWN THE STREET, YOU'RE ACTUALLY PULLING UP TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. SO YEAH, THERE, THERE'S SOME CIRCUMSTANCES AND THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU MAY WANT TO FIT INTO THE CONTEXT OF WHAT'S GOING ON. BUT, BUT IT DOES LEAVE ROOM. THERE IS ROOM FOR, UH, FOR INTERPRETATION BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND THEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. UM, AND THERE'S ALSO AN ABILITY, WELL, AND THE OTHER THING I GUESS I WOULD SAY IS, THIS MAY SEEM LIKE A MAJOR ISSUE, BUT ESPECIALLY YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN ON THE COUNTS OR THE COMMISSION FOR A LONG TIME. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IT'S EVER COME UP AS AN ISSUE. SO YOU KNOW IT'S NOT, IT HASN'T BEEN PROVED TO BE A MAJOR ISSUE IN 15 YEARS THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING THE SUBCOMMITTEE. IT MAY BE MORE COMMON BUT IT MAY BE SEVEN YEARS BEFORE WE SEE THE ISSUE AGAIN. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING YOU'RE GOING TO BE DEALING WITH EVERY, EVERY MONTH OR ANYTHING. UM, OKAY. THE SECOND ONE IS ONE THAT I, I PUT UNDER THE CATEGORY OF DIDN'T I DO THIS BEFORE AND THAT MAYBE THAT'S JUST CAUSE I'M GETTING OLD AND IT FEELS LIKE I SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE. BUT UM, WE HAVE TWO SETS OF GUIDELINES AND WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE ONE STORY GUIDELINES. WE ALSO HAVE TWO STORY GUIDELINES, THE TWO STORY GUIDELINES AND THEY'RE BOTH ATTACHED FOR REVIEW. IF YOU REMEMBER THE ONE STORY GUIDELINES ARE BASICALLY ABOUT ARCHITECTURAL AND HOW THE BUILDING SHOULD BE DESIGNED WITH THE ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THE SECOND STORY IS MORE ABOUT BUILDING A SECOND STORY IN THE MIDDLE OF A ONE STORY NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE IS THERE SHOULD BE A CONNECTION FROM THE SECOND STORY TO THE ONE STORY. IN OTHER WORDS, THE SECOND STORY, UH, GUIDELINES SHOULD SAY YOU NEED TO DO WHAT THEY DO IN THE FIRST STORY. IN OTHER WORDS, OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE NOT REQUIRING ALTERNATE MATERIALS. YOU WOULDN'T BE REQUIRING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO FACE TO STREET. I SHOULDN'T REQUIRE AND WE WOULDN'T BE SUGGESTING THOSE THINGS. SO WE'RE SUGGESTING A SECOND GUIDELINE WHICH WOULD BE ADDED TO THE TWO STORY HOUSE AND ADDITION THAT WOULD SAY INCORPORATE THE ONE STORY GUIDELINES IN THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FOR TWO STORY HOUSE IN ADDITIONS. THIS IS A SIMPLE THING. I COULD HAVE SWORE I DID THAT BEFORE, BUT EVIDENTLY I DIDN'T. SO THAT JUST, MAYBE THAT'S THE START OF SOMETHING. A DECLINE IN MY MEMORY. I DON'T KNOW. LET'S SEE. EVERYBODY'S GOOD WITH THAT. UM, THAT'S KIND OF A NO BRAINER. YEAH, IT IS KIND OF A NO BRAINER. YEAH. I APOLOGIZE. IT TOOK ME 15 YEARS TO PUT IT IN THERE. BUT IF YOU, UH, I WOULD LIKE EMOTION AS SECOND AND WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WE'LL INCORPORATE THEM INTO ATTACHMENT ONE AND TWO OF THE GUIDELINES. WE'LL INCORPORATE THEM IN AND JUST BRING THOSE BACK. SO YOU GUYS HAVE THE FINAL VERSION. IT'LL BE PUT LIKE, IT'LL BE IN A, LIKE A, WHAT DO WE CALL THIS? A NON HEARING ITEM. BUT W WE WON'T TALK ABOUT IT MUCH. JUST HERE'S THE GUIDELINES WITH THE NEW THINGS IN. IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, LET ME KNOW. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DO. IF WE GET A MOTION IN A SECOND HERE. OKAY. I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE ITEMS OR A SECOND. OKAY. MOTION BY MYSELF. SECOND BY HOC IS ALL IN FAVOR? AYE PASSES. FIVE. OH, OKAY. THAT, UH, WHAT DOES THAT DO? THAT BRINGS US TO THE END OF THAT. WELL, LET'S, UH, ALL RIGHT, WE [COMMISSION REPORTS/COMMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS] ARE AT COMMISSION REPORTS, [00:35:01] COMMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS. ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT? YEAH. UH, IS THERE ANYTHING NEW ON, UH, ON THE, UH, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE NAME OF IT. THE TACO PLACE ON YEAH. DOWNTOWN HERE. YEAH. I CAN'T THINK OF THE NAME. NO. UH, THERE'S RIVEROS NO, THERE'S NOTHING NEW. I, I, AND I THINK IT'S EASY SAYS EXPIRED AT THIS POINT, SO THEY'D HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE US. I THINK AGAIN, THEY SHOULD HAVE USED TO THAT BY NOW. THEY SHOULD BE, THEY SHOULD BE WELL VERSED AT IT. AND SHOULD WE HAVE TWO STAFF REPORTS? WE CAN RELY, YES, WE CAN GO BACK. OKAY. UH, ANY REPORT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT [5. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT:] DIRECTOR'S REPORT, UH, WE HAVE FORTHCOMING ON HERE. WE DO HAVE ITEMS FOR THE 24TH, AND UH, WELL IT DOESN'T SHOW ANY ITEMS. I, I'M FAIRLY CONFIDENT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ITEMS ON THE FIRST MEETING IN APRIL AS WELL. IS THERE A CHANGE TO THE, TO THE NEXT ONE? UH, THERE ARE SOME CHANGES. YEAH. UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT I KNOW THEM ALL. IT'S NOT OF MY HEAD. I THINK THE FIRST ITEM GOT IS THEY'VE TOLD US THEY'RE GOING TO WITHDRAW IT. OKAY. COMMERCIAL CLEANUP WILL BE HERE. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE THERE. IT'LL PROBABLY BE ON THE FIRST MEETING IN, UH, APRIL. BUT THERE'S A COUPLE OTHER THINGS THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ADDED TO THE, INCLUDING WHAT WE JUST DID ON THE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT WILL PROBABLY BE ON THERE. OKAY. SO TWO OUT OF THE THREE THAT WE SHOW HERE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DEAL WITH. CORRECT. OKAY. GOTCHA. OKAY. CITY COUNCIL ACTION. I HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT FOR. CITY COUNCIL ACTION? NOPE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE'VE REACHED THE END OF THE REGULAR AGENDA. IT'S TIME FOR A GERMAN. AND I DO WANT TO, AND I KNOW COMMISSIONER KENNEDY WANTS TO MAKE A COMMENT HERE TOO, BUT I WANT TO, UH, ADJOURN OUR MEETING, UH, IN MEMORY OF AN INDIVIDUAL WHO, UH, RECENTLY PASSED AWAY ABOUT A WEEK AGO WHO, UH, FREQUENTLY ATTENDED CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AND WAS A FREQUENT SPEAKER AT THAT, UH, PODIUM OPPOSITE US HERE. AND, UH, I'M TALKING ABOUT MR FOREST WILKINS WHO LIVED IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR DECADES, 40, 50 YEARS. HE WAS A RETIRED LAPD MOTOR OFFICER AND A, YOU KNOW, HE AND I DIDN'T HAVE BRIANNA ON A LOT OF STUFF, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, HIS HEART WAS ALWAYS IN THE RIGHT PLACE. HE DID HIS RESEARCH. HE DEFINITELY CARED DEEPLY ABOUT THIS COMMUNITY. HE WAS A STRONG RELIGIOUS AND FAMILY MAN AND UH, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T ALWAYS BE AROUND PEOPLE THAT AGREE WITH YOU AND EVERYTHING. YOU KNOW, IT'S NICE TO HAVE SOMEBODY THAT YOU CAN SPAR WITH A LITTLE BIT AND IT MAKES EVERYBODY BETTER AND STRONGER AND SMARTER AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO ADJOURN THE MEETING IN HIS MEMORY AND, UM, I DID NOT SEE IT IN THE PAPER. I WAS INFORMED OF THE SITUATION AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE WISH HIM THE RESTING IN PEACE AND CONDOLENCES TO HIS FAMILY AND WHAT THAT ALL YIELDS. COMMISSIONER CARTER, I WANT TO SEND MY CONDOLENCES. I, I FIRST MET FOR US, UH, I THINK 1975. I WAS A PICK 13 YEARS OLD. UM, I HAD BEEN A BOY SCOUT, I'D BEEN A CUB SCOUT. WE BELOW BOY SCOUT AND THEN, UH, OUR BOY SCOUT TROOP AT A, UM, AT MONTEVISTA WAS BREAKING UP. AND SO WHAT I DID, I, WE WENT AND JOINED THE LDS CHURCH, THE MORMON CHURCH ON MARK ALLEN AND, AND MUDELA, WHICH IS A BALLPARK SECOND WARD. AND WE WENT EVERYWHERE. I MEAN, WE WENT THROUGH ALL THE DESERT DEATHS, VALLEY, EVERYTHING, EVERY ONCE AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH. WE WENT WELL FOR US WAS IN CHARGE OF, UH, THE OTHER, THE OTHER WARD, WHICH WAS I THINK THE CONVENOR THIRD WARD. AND HE WAS A HELL OF A DUDE. I MEAN, HE, HE TOOK THE TIME. HE HAD LIKE 14 KIDS. UH, HE TOOK THE TIME. HE, HE, HE WAS A TEACHER. HE WAS A FAMILY MAN. I MEAN, HE, HE WAS, UH, HE FOUGHT IN VIETNAM. HE WAS A, UH, A MARINE. HE WAS A POLICE OFFICER FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS, IF NOT LONGER. HE WAS A BISHOP OF HIS CHURCH. HE WAS ON THE SCHOOL BOARD THAT HE WAS A STANDUP DUDE. HOWEVER, WE JUST DIDN'T GET ALONG POLITICALLY. BUT THAT'S OKAY. I LOVE THE GUY TO DEATH AND I MAY HE REST IN PEACE, REST, EASY FOREST. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR, NO. OKAY. UH, WITHOUT OBJECTION, WE STAND ADJOURNED. THANK YOU EVERYBODY. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.