[0:17] Uh, good evening, President. It's 7
o'clock and we do have quorum.
[0:22] » All right, then.
[0:25] » Good evening and welcome to the August
18th, 2025 regular meeting of the
[0:30] Alhhamra Planning Commission. Um, we'll
start with a roll call, please.
[0:35] » Chen, present. Dorado
>> here. Gardia
[0:40] » present.
>> Graalva
[0:42] » present.
>> Ho
[0:44] » here.
>> Wararez
[0:46] » here.
>> Maharo.
[0:49] » Garcia
>> here.
[0:51] » Olsson
>> here. Please rise and join me in the
[0:55] flag salute.
[0:59] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
[1:05] republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and
[1:11] justice for all.
[1:19] » All right. Next on our uh is our consent
agenda. Agenda items number one through
[1:24] three. Items listed on the consent
agenda are considered routine and will
[1:29] be enacted, approved, or adopted by one
motion unless a request for removal is
[1:35] received from a commissioner or citizen.
Items removed from the consent calendar
[1:39] shall be considered immediately
following the adoption of the consent
[1:43] agenda. Uh does anyone wish to uh remove
an item from the consent agenda?
[1:52] Then I will hear a motion, please.
[1:57] I'll move to approve.
>> We have a second.
[2:00] » I second.
>> Commissioner Garda has moved to approve
[2:04] and Commissioner Ghavva has moved to
second. Uh, may we have a roll call?
[2:08] » Chen, yes. Dorado,
>> yes.
[2:12] » Garda,
>> yes.
[2:14] » Graova, yes. Hog,
>> I have for July
[2:20] otherwise. Yes.
Wararez,
[2:23] » yes.
>> Maharo,
[2:27] » yes.
>> Garcia,
[2:29] » yes.
>> Olen,
[2:31] » yes.
>> Thank you.
[2:35] Now, agenda item number four is a public
hearing to legalize an addition to an
[2:42] existing automotive repair shop. Is
there a presentation from staff for this
[2:47] item?
>> Yes, assistant planner Avery Tow will be
[2:49] giving the presentation tonight.
[2:54] Good evening, commissioners. Good
evening, chair. Item four before you is
[2:59] conditional use permit CUP 2402 for
Phoenix Auto Care located at 3071 West
[3:06] Valley Boulevard. Phoenix Autocare is
existing auto repair shop operating
[3:10] within the commercial mixeduse zone. Uh
the request tonight is to legalize a
[3:15] 206q ft office and restroom addition
that was constructed without permits.
[3:21] Staff's recommended action is to adopt
resolution number 255 approving the
[3:26] conditional use permit and finding the
project exempt from SQA.
[3:32] This is the project site located in the
northeast intersection of West Valley
[3:36] Boulevard and Westmont Drive. The
property has about 137 ft of frontage
[3:42] along Valley Boulevard and 104 ft of
frontage along Westbond Drive with a 15t
[3:48] wide alleyway along the northern
property line. The surrounding
[3:51] neighborhood consists of a mix of
commercial, office, and residential use.
[4:02] The property has operated as a auto
repair facility since 1981 with Phoenix
[4:08] Autoare as the tenant since 2017. No
changes to the building or use occurred
[4:13] at that time. In March 2024, the city
zoning update reclassified the site from
[4:19] valley specific boulevard uh valley my
bad uh valley boulevard specific plan to
[4:25] CMU commercial mixuse making automotive
repair a non-conforming use at this site
[4:31] between June and September 2023. A 206qt
addition was constructed without
[4:37] permits. A code enforcement case
followed in October 2023 and a planning
[4:42] application was submitted in January
2024 to legalize the addition which had
[4:47] since been reviewed for compliance with
the Alhhamra Municipal Code.
[4:53] The proposed expansion includes a large
office area of approximately 161 square
[4:59] ft and a restroom expansion of about 45
ft. The addition does not include any
[5:05] expansion of the existing repair
garages. Accessibility improvements have
[5:10] been added, including an ADA compliant
ramp, guardrails, and a um accessible
[5:15] restroom. There are 13 on-site parking
spaces, which exceeds the city's minimum
[5:20] requirement of five spaces. One ADA
compliant stall has also been added.
[5:26] The addition's design matches the
existing building in terms of materials,
[5:30] massing, and scale and was approved by
the design review board on June 10th,
[5:35] 2025.
[5:40] Here we have the existing floor plan
outlined um alongside alongside the
[5:46] proposed floor plan. You could see the
area of added square footage outlined in
[5:50] the dotted line. Uh the hatched area on
the proposed ford plan uh denotes
[5:55] woodframe construction and areas of the
building that have been remodeled but do
[5:59] not encompass new square footage. The
office and restroom areas are both
[6:03] expanded to improve employee working
conditions and customer service
[6:07] capacity. Uh the rest of the building
layout remains dedicated to automotive
[6:11] repair operations.
[6:15] These photos show the current conditions
of the site. You could see the addition
[6:20] to be legalized marked with dotted lines
in photo two located as the last photo
[6:25] in the second row of the photo
arrangement. The building is a single
[6:29] story 12 ft in height as well uh well
below the 40ft maximum allowed in the
[6:34] CMU zone and the addition has been
integrated into the design of the
[6:37] existing building.
[6:42] Here are the architectural renderings as
approved by the design review board.
[6:46] They confirmed that the addition is
integrated into the existing building
[6:50] design with consistent materials and
finishes.
[6:56] Because the addition is a expansion of
non-conforming use, it cannot be
[7:00] permitted under the previous cup from
1981. The cup from 1981 only encompasses
[7:06] approval for what was physically
developed on the site at the time. The
[7:11] municipal code allows expansion of a
non-conforming use only with a new
[7:16] conditional use permit. Staff has
determined that with appropriate
[7:19] conditions, the expanded use will remain
consistent with the general plan,
[7:24] compatible with surrounding uses, and
compliant with all applicable
[7:27] development standards.
[7:31] In conclusion, the proposed expansion
improves business functionality um
[7:36] accompasses uh accommodates for expanded
administrative offices, remains
[7:41] consistent with both the operational
history of the site and the surrounding
[7:45] land uses. Staff recommends that the
planning commission adopt resolution
[7:50] number 255 approving the conditional use
permit CUP 2402 to legalize addition and
[7:57] find the project exempt from SQA. Staff
and applicant are available for any
[8:01] questions. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Does the applicant have a
[8:06] presentation?
>> Okay. Commissioners, do you have any
[8:12] technical questions or requests for
clarification from staff based on their
[8:17] presentation?
[8:21] » Yes, I have a a point of clarification.
Um, when I'm looking at the uh
[8:26] conditions for the use,
I'm not sure I see anything that
[8:30] restricts the um the use to only an
office and a restroom. So did I did I
[8:39] miss anything? Is there anything that
that says there's no there's a
[8:42] restriction on the use that that is that
it has to be only office and a restroom.
[8:50] Um so on the floor plans it has been
noted that the expansion is just um for
[8:55] the office and the restroom. Um so this
for this particular expansion it's not
[9:00] expansion of the garages um and it's
something that has been indicated on the
[9:04] submitted floor plans but
>> right but there's no specific um
[9:08] exclusion of use of that 216 ft. The
reason I'm asking is because I' I'd like
[9:15] to know if that's a uh something we
could discuss on whether we can um add
[9:20] to that conditional use permit that the
um that space can only be used as an
[9:27] office and uh and restroom. So there
isn't any expansion of the operations
[9:32] the repair operations into that area.
That's why I'm asking if there's
[9:36] anything that's in the conditional use
uh documents now
[9:42] that prohibits the expansion of
operations.
[9:47] So, it's there's no prohibition
specifically, but if you look at PL6, it
[9:51] it essentially says that the plans
submitted as part of this staff report
[9:55] that are being approved as part of this
conditional use permit that they need to
[9:58] operate in accordance with those plans.
So if they're showing on the plans that
[10:02] it's for office space, approval of this
conditional use permit would require
[10:06] that it be utilized for office space
>> from henceforth and forever more
[10:12] » unless they requested an amendment to
the conditional use permit.
[10:16] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Dorado. Um are
[10:20] there uh is there anyone who has
pre-registered to provide public
[10:24] comment? I see we have one card here. Uh
are there any written comments that have
[10:30] been submitted?
>> Uh we did receive one email uh related
[10:34] to this agenda item. Uh we provided
copies up on the dis for each of the
[10:38] commissioners. Um that email was
submitted by Mr. Lewis McCann.
[10:46] » Um yes and Mr. McCammon has uh submitted
a um request to speak on this item. So
[10:54] Mr. McCammon, you're up.
[10:59] a few things to pass out to you first
before I begin speaking there.
[11:05] And
should be enough copies
[11:10] or uh
[11:14] the staff up here too. There's two items
there.
[11:27] This is this is
[11:35] Yeah.
[11:45] Thank you.
[11:48] Almost.
[12:18] [Music]
[12:42] Okay,
good evening. Luman, 105 North Cordova
[12:47] Street. First off, let me say I think
this u uh project is entirely within
[12:53] order and is non-controversial and you
should pass it. Um my um what I want to
[13:00] talk about this evening is um the map I
noticed in there, which actually doesn't
[13:06] even apply to this project
uh in the sense that it has way more
[13:12] than enough parking on site. So, the
matter of uh the ability to reduce the
[13:19] parking requirement isn't even necessary
item to address. Nonetheless, it's in
[13:24] there and it does um uh it does bring to
mind I've asked before for when when we
[13:34] had the update on state housing laws
that you received recently. I said there
[13:39] really needs to be a followup about the
impact of pending legislation
[13:45] uh in Sacramento on these things. And I
think we do need to go back and review
[13:50] that particularly with the terms like
the definition of what is a major
[13:56] transit stop and things of that nature.
I've seen various items in u that Skagg
[14:04] has put out in their regional
transportation studies adopted initially
[14:09] back in 2020 and uh the stuff that's
coming out of Sacramento
[14:16] uh in which case you really have to
follow the trail of what what does
[14:22] something mean and it'll refer you one
code section to another to another and
[14:28] so forth. Very hard to follow.
But um I have tried to put together some
[14:34] stuff and uh if my email there was
reproduced too, you have a lot more of
[14:38] it. There is one typo I noticed in the
email and it's also in the part here and
[14:45] that is just in uh the last introducing
that last section that last uh uh next
[14:53] last boldfaced line there. It does. It
should be uh
[14:59] California Public Resources Code section
211064.3
[15:05] which matches the code number referred
to above. I had just hadn't caught that
[15:11] typo before I put it out. But at any
rate, uh you'll notice previously when
[15:17] we've had maps distributed, what are the
major transit stops that are we have to
[15:24] be concerned with in approving
developments?
[15:28] Um the three
[15:33] stops along Atlantic Boulevard were the
ones that were highlighted and you were
[15:39] just looking at things within a half
mile of those um yellow dots. Now, this
[15:45] map here has greatly expanded that and
included all these little uh blue
[15:52] circles.
Um some of which are really in my mind
[15:58] very very minor things. In fact, uh if
if you're uh now in major transfer
[16:05] stops, they're talking about
intersections of bus lines. They're not
[16:10] talking about just a one group bus line.
There are things called transit
[16:15] quarters, which could just be the one
route, but if you're talking about
[16:18] transit stop, it it's an intersection,
and they say it's an intersection of two
[16:24] major bus lines.
We just had a study which came before
[16:29] the city council on June 23rd, very
elaborate study,
[16:33] uh, done by a city retained consultant
about the act lines. And one of the
[16:38] pages in that I just unfortunately I
didn't have time to reproduce that also
[16:42] for you, but it's on uh digital page 79
of the uh of the online agenda for that
[16:52] me city council meeting. It talked about
the act blue line and the act green line
[16:58] and it had a column over here in the
end. Is this high frequency?
[17:03] uh and they said 15 minutes or better at
the peak hour and they're using a little
[17:09] bit different criteria and some parts of
state law refer to 15 minutes some parts
[17:13] of state law refer to 20 minutes and on
the act blue line and green line was no
[17:21] but they were referring to a 15minute
thing there uh it's generally about 20
[17:26] minutes sometimes may be a minute or two
over but um
[17:32] at any rate. They don't carry a huge
amount of traffic
[17:37] and I and particularly in the case of
the blue line, you're looking at uh
[17:42] Cordova and u or not Cordova but um uh
Chapel in Maine. There's almost nobody
[17:50] switches from one line to the other
there because they essentially run
[17:53] fairly parallel through most of the city
and everything. Um at any rate, that's
[17:58] that's my five minutes. I just think we
need a um a chance to reiterate that
[18:04] thing if we really need a study as soon
as possible and what's going on with the
[18:08] legislation in Sacramento. How do all
these various things come together from
[18:13] SKAG and the state about the major
transit stops the impact on the city if
[18:20] everything is going to go with this map?
Boy, you can build to the max anywhere
[18:25] in the city. Just throw out our zoning
code.
[18:28] » Thank you.
>> Thank you. Yeah.
[18:31] » Uh, do we have any other um speakers
online?
[18:35] » We do. We have Jennifer Ing.
>> Go ahead, Jennifer.
[18:43] » Good evening, commissioners. My name is
Jennifer Ing. I am a member of our
[18:46] designer review board, but I'm speaking
for myself as an individual. Um, I don't
[18:50] really have an opinion at all regarding
uh this particular property, but I do
[18:55] have the map concerns, and I I want to
thank Lou for pointing those out. I
[18:59] actually completely overlooked it on the
agenda until he sent the email out.
[19:04] Um, I'm not going to repeat everything
that that Lou said, but I have many
[19:08] similar questions. I know we have the
three major transit hubs that are along
[19:12] Atlantic, but all these other, you know,
white dots with the blue outlines, um,
[19:16] I'm not sure what those those are. Um, I
don't think there's a state law that
[19:20] goes along with those yet. So, I'm
really looking for more clarification on
[19:24] what's going on, um, with this this map.
Um, and you know, I again I don't want
[19:30] to duplicate a lot of what L said, so I
will leave it there. And um, Bert would
[19:35] like to speak as well.
>> Hi there. My name is uh, Bert Ing. I'm a
[19:40] resident of Alhhamra. Uh, as just
disclosure, I am uh, a member of the,
[19:46] uh, historic preservation commission.
Uh, and I'm speaking about item number
[19:51] four, not about the actual conditional
use permit, but rather the uh the
[19:56] exhibit uh with the map and the uh the
definitions and delineations of uh the
[20:02] different transit stops. Um uh again, I
want to thank Lou for bringing this to
[20:07] our attention. I uh I didn't see it. Um,
but when I did look at it, a concern
[20:14] that I did have was
what the blue circles really mean. What
[20:20] is the implication
uh of making those blue and how that
[20:26] affects our zoning and how that affects
potentially our historic preservation
[20:31] ordinance from the perspective of uh
preserving homes, preserving
[20:35] neighborhoods. Um, I know that there's a
lot of different Senate bills out there
[20:40] right now. Uh, and a lot of things are
up in the air. Uh, but coming down the
[20:46] pipeline seems like there's, you know,
definitions of, uh, bus stops, transit
[20:52] stops, and so on that actually have
implications to zoning. And I'm curious
[20:57] what that map means that we have, uh, in
that exhibit, and again, what the
[21:02] implications are. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Rang. Do we have any
[21:08] other speakers online?
>> No, we don't.
[21:11] » Okay, cool. Can staff speak to any of
those concerns about the blue circles or
[21:19] the purpose of the the of the blue
circles on the map? Yeah, just to
[21:23] provide some context, um, uh, at a
recent meeting, after a recent planning
[21:27] commission meeting, we had received a
request from a commissioner to in the
[21:30] future include the, um, major transit
stop map as an attachment for your
[21:35] reference. So, that was the reason why
we included it is just for reference, so
[21:39] to help you guys better understand where
these stops are. Um, for the purposes of
[21:43] this project and um, how this project
relates to AB2097.
[21:48] under AB2097,
the project is not required to meet this
[21:53] the city's minimum parking requirements.
So that's why we included the map just
[21:56] to demonstrate that they are providing
parking, but um if there was a desire
[22:01] for the commission to impose stricter
parking requirements or additional
[22:05] parking, we wanted to advise you that
AB2097 precludes us from doing that. Um,
[22:12] with respect to the map, there was an
update to the legislation um, in AB2097
[22:17] that went into effect uh, January 1st of
this year, and it updated the definition
[22:21] of a major transit stop from 15-minute
headways to 20-minute headways. So, with
[22:26] that updated definition, it now includes
additional stops in the city,
[22:30] particularly those on the um, ACT line,
the blue and green line, which do have
[22:34] 20-minute headways. So that is why you
are seeing additional um areas of the
[22:40] city that now qualify as a major transit
stop based on that public resources code
[22:44] definition which was updated earlier
this year. Thank you.
[22:48] I also understand that some of you are
referring or some of our callers are
[22:53] referring to SB uh 79
um which I understand will be there will
[23:00] be a discussion at our next uh city
council meeting on SB79 and its
[23:05] implications. So stay tuned for that.
Uh
[23:12] well hang on just one second. Let me
see.
[23:16] Uh
so we have nobody else wishing to speak
[23:20] then I will close the public testimony
portion of the public hearing and uh
[23:26] first um we'll go to uh see if the
applicant wants to respond to any
[23:31] comment that was made. Okay. And does
staff want to respond to any comment on
[23:36] any public testimony or comments made?
>> Not at this time.
[23:40] » Okay. Then commissioners.
>> Yes. Thank thank you for thank you for
[23:43] your forbearance.
This is a followup to that and I
[23:47] appreciate the uh the background you
gave us. I think the the major point is
[23:52] what about the two major the
intersection of two major routes as a
[23:58] defining uh criteria for a criterion for
designation of major transit stop.
[24:11] » So here's your question. What qualifies
as a major bus route?
[24:15] » No, the intersection. So, right. So, it
says that the intersection of two major
[24:20] bus routes.
>> Correct.
[24:22] » What what defines that if that of what
I'm looking at this I don't see major
[24:28] bus routes intersecting at those at the
blue dots.
[24:33] » So, okay. So are your question is how we
determined those dots are intersecting
[24:38] bus lines
>> not bus lines major intersection because
[24:42] that's the that's the language right two
>> it's the intersection of two major bus
[24:48] routes
>> that's right
[24:49] » yes
>> so intersection not along the along the
[24:52] route but where it intersects that's
what I'm understanding is where they
[24:56] intersect that's what's considered a maj
major bus
[25:00] » yes so that's what's reflected on the
map is it's showing the intersection of
[25:05] ma of major bus routes
>> and and that's the blue dots that's the
[25:10] yellow ones, right?
[25:16] » So both the blue the dots with the white
dots with the blue outline and the
[25:22] yellow dot with the red outline both
reflect the intersection of uh bus
[25:28] routes,
>> major bus routes.
[25:31] » Correct. Yes.
What the difference in in what they're
[25:35] showing is that the the line along
Atlantic um that's based on the the SCAG
[25:44] RTP regional transportation plan
sustainable community strategy transit
[25:47] stops. And then the the ones with the
white circle with the blue outline are
[25:52] just showing all of the transit stops
that meet that uh qualification of the
[25:57] 20-minute headways.
>> Okay.
[26:02] So then that does fall within the
definition of an intersection,
[26:05] » right? Yes.
[26:09] » We have any other commissioners with
Yes.
[26:12] President.
>> All right. Just thank you. Thank you,
[26:15] President Olsson. Just to double click
on that a bit more. Um I'm aware of the
[26:19] Metro line that runs on Atlantic and I'm
aware of the SCAG um major transit stops
[26:24] that were at least depicted before the
definition was revised. Um, and given
[26:30] the revision of the definition, now we
have the apparently the ACT bus lines
[26:34] that now fall within the major transit
stops definition. Um, so I could see why
[26:39] the dots here have circles. The white
dots have circles and the yellow dots
[26:43] have circles in the map. What I'm still
kind of struggling with though is the
[26:46] definition of major transit stop being
that it's the intersection of two or
[26:50] major bus routes. So I don't understand
where the again Atlantic has a corridor
[26:57] and with another bus route intersects
with that Atlantic. That would be an
[27:02] example where they intersect as a major
transit stop according to the code
[27:07] according to this code to
1064.3.
[27:12] Are you saying that every one of these
act bus circles has is reflects reflects
[27:20] two two bus routes intersecting at that
intersection.
[27:24] » Yes. So there's also a metro line that
runs along valley. So it's the the fact
[27:28] that there's a metro line running along
valley plus we have the act lines that
[27:32] » that runs up and north that runs north
and south those ACT lines. So the um I
[27:37] think it's the green line, one of them
is circular and the blue line I think um
[27:41] kind of goes down Fremont. So it's the
intersection intersection of both the
[27:47] act lines and the metro lines.
>> So what you're seeing here is those
[27:51] metro lines on valley metro lines on
Atlantic and AC
[27:56] » correct. Yes.
>> And ACT bus lines running intersecting
[28:00] directions of those like opposite of
what the metro line runs. or having
[28:04] basically to qualify as intersecting, it
just needs to have a stop basically at
[28:08] the same intersection.
>> Even if they're going in the same
[28:10] direction,
>> let's call it overlapping instead of
[28:12] intersecting. How about that?
>> Yeah. So, they're not they're not
[28:16] intersecting in the terms of what I
think of an intersection, different
[28:19] directions of traffic. They're just
could be going parallel. So HCD has
[28:23] provided loose guidance and based on
their loose guidance of how to interpret
[28:27] that it it basically just means that you
have more than one bus line that shares
[28:33] the same stop somewhere at an
intersection.
[28:36] » Okay. And then have we confirmed for
sure that all our ACT bus lines that are
[28:40] reflected here are 20 minutes or less?
>> Yes, that's correct.
[28:43] » Okay. And then uh just one point, I was
the commissioner who asked to have these
[28:47] maps added. So thank you Maya for doing
so. So, I apologize you're getting all
[28:50] these questions as a result of my
request, but that's why I actually
[28:53] wanted to have that those maps added
because there's two terms that have been
[28:57] thrown around in the past. One was um
high uh quality transit areas and that's
[29:03] where the whole corridor is highlighted
and now ACT is included. I don't even
[29:06] know what the map looks like now at this
point. It might just be all blue. And
[29:09] then there's the high quality or I'm
sorry, there's the high uh there's a
[29:14] major transit stop map which before was
just you know essentially maybe maybe
[29:18] two full circles and partials of three
other circles which now has been
[29:22] replaced by what you see in the agenda
today. So again I think it's very
[29:25] informative that you did this. So thank
you for doing that.
[29:30] » We have any other comments or questions?
Commissioner Garda?
[29:33] » Yes. To bring us back to the topic at
hand. I was wondering I had two
[29:37] questions. One is uh on the site plan
there's an area in the alley that looks
[29:44] like it's an easement. Maybe it's an
Edison easement where the power line
[29:49] runs. And I was just wondering um why
it's just like a landscape strip in the
[29:55] back there and if the if the applicant
is responsible for the maintenance of
[29:58] that. Mhm. Um so the site plan submitted
by the applicant shows that there's a
[30:04] existing electrical pole uh located
inside the landscaping strip. Um so
[30:08] based on the plans we could deduce that
there is some sort of eastment to the
[30:11] north of the property uh with the
landscaping belonging to the subject
[30:14] property.
>> So the applicant is responsible for the
[30:18] maintenance of that strip back there
behind the alley on the alley.
[30:21] » That's correct.
>> Okay. And then um my second question was
[30:28] when we're considering the externalities
of this type of use, I'm wondering if we
[30:32] can't um with the applicant's consent
perhaps add a condition restricting the
[30:37] hours of operation to what they've
listed in their application.
[30:44] » Well, maybe we'll have the applicant
come to the podium to respond to see if
[30:47] they'd be amendable to that.
[30:53] So
what do you guys propose?
[30:57] » So right now uh there's restrictions on
hours for construction.
[31:01] » Okay.
>> And it's 7 to 7, but in your application
[31:04] you seem to have more limited hours than
that in particular on Saturdays and I'm
[31:08] wondering if you just would mind having
a a condition imposed that would
[31:12] coincide with the hours of operation
that you have listed on the application.
[31:17] » That's fine.
Just to clarify for the record, so the
[31:21] the hours of operation that the
applicant provided are Monday to Friday,
[31:24] 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Saturday, 9:00
a.m. to 1:30 p.m. and closed on Sundays.
[31:33] » Yes.
[31:37] » And uh I think that's it. Just want to
come to you. Uh, one other thing I just
[31:41] wanted to ask was, uh, there seems to be
a lot of, um, items that are stored on
[31:46] the site that are unrelated to the
automobile repair use, and I'm wondering
[31:51] if, uh, you're amable to removing those
items from the site.
[31:55] » That's not a problem.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[31:57] » Yeah.
[32:01] » We have any other comments or questions
from commissioners?
[32:06] Uh,
all right then. Um, I will now close the
[32:12] public hearing and entertain any motion
on the proposed resolution.
[32:17] » I move that it uh be approved as voiced
or written
[32:23] » with the additional condition.
>> Yes, the additional condition.
[32:26] » The hours of operation.
>> I'll uh
[32:28] » hours of operation and clean up of the
uh
[32:30] » extra things.
>> Yeah, I think that's already in there.
[32:33] Good.
>> Yeah, I'll second that.
[32:35] » Excellent. So, we have uh miss uh a
motion from Commissioner uh Maharo and
[32:43] I'm sorry, Dorado and a second from
Commissioner Gardea. Um do we have can
[32:49] we have a roll call, please?
>> Chen, yes. Dorado,
[32:54] » yes.
>> Garda,
[32:56] » yes.
>> Galva,
[32:58] » yes.
>> Ho,
[33:00] » yes.
>> Wararez,
[33:02] » yes.
>> Moaro,
[33:04] » yes. Garcia,
>> yes.
[33:06] » Olsson,
>> yes.
[33:09] Next, we have oral and congratulations.
>> Yes.
[33:14] » Next, we have oral communications for
non-aggendaized items. This is the time
[33:18] in the meeting when the public may
comment on anything not listed on the
[33:21] agenda. Anyone wishing to address the
commission may fill out a blue card, a
[33:26] speaker request card, and step to the
podium. If you are on Zoom, you may
[33:30] raise your hand using the raise hand
feature on Zoom. If you have called into
[33:34] the meeting, please dial
star9 on your phone's dial pad to raise
[33:39] your hand and star six to unmute
yourself. If you could also state your
[33:43] name for the record, it would be
appreciated. You will have five minutes.
[33:47] Is there anyone wishing to provide
public comments?
[33:54] » We have no one online.
>> All right. Thank you.
[33:57] Uh then we will now continue to general
comments from the planning commission
[34:02] and conference and meeting reports. Uh
do we have
[34:07] uh do commissioners have any comments or
announcements?
[34:14] All right, then we will now continue to
comments from staff. Is there a report
[34:18] from the director of community
development?
[34:20] » Uh there's no report tonight.
>> Right. Thank you. We have now completed
[34:23] all the items on this evening's agenda.
The next regularly scheduled meeting of
[34:27] the Alhhamra Planning Commission will be
held on Monday, September 15th at 7 PM.
[34:33] We are adjourned.
[34:38] » Well, that was easy.
I know it's intense.
[34:50] » Get a headache behind your left eye.
>> Everybody's working. Say,