1
00:00:52,880 --> 00:01:02,360
Senator Carla Torres-Aluna, commissioner Damian Perez, commissioner Julio Rodriguez, commissioner

2
00:01:02,360 --> 00:01:08,940
Peter Hernandez for the record is absent, and for the record chair, Stephen Belong, it's

3
00:01:08,940 --> 00:01:14,760
also absent. Thank you. And commissioners, is there someone who'd like to lead us

4
00:01:34,280 --> 00:01:43,760
in the

5
00:01:43,760 --> 00:01:50,340
public comment for an item that's not on the agenda within the subject matter jurisdiction

6
00:01:50,340 --> 00:01:51,220
of the commission.

7
00:01:51,760 --> 00:01:56,600
Spear cards are available in the lobby and are to be completed given to staff before

8
00:01:56,600 --> 00:01:57,220
speaking.

9
00:01:59,060 --> 00:02:03,020
When the commission secretary calls your name, please come to the podium, state your name,

10
00:02:03,580 --> 00:02:05,540
city for the records, speak to the commission.

11
00:02:05,800 --> 00:02:09,900
If you're joining us by Zoom, click on the bottom of your screen to raise your hand.

12
00:02:09,900 --> 00:02:19,240
If you're joining us by Zoom using a cell phone press star 9 each speaker will be limited to three minutes with a maximum of 30 minutes per subject

13
00:02:19,240 --> 00:02:26,020
Please note that the state law prohibits a commission from discussing or taking action on any item on the agenda.

14
00:02:31,140 --> 00:02:31,740
Yes, speakers.

15
00:02:35,230 --> 00:02:38,930
Do we have so we can move on to consent items?

16
00:02:39,610 --> 00:02:46,610
Do we have questions from the commission on items on the consent agenda or are there any items that the commission would like to pull?

17
00:02:46,610 --> 00:02:47,490
Do

18
00:02:53,540 --> 00:02:57,820
we have staff? Do we have any public comments on items from the consent agenda?

19
00:03:01,440 --> 00:03:05,740
Yes, speakers. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda?

20
00:03:09,400 --> 00:03:18,500
Motion to approve. All second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? No

21
00:03:18,500 --> 00:03:24,200
abstentions? Motion carries. And moving on to public hearings, may we have the

22
00:03:24,200 --> 00:03:27,160
staff report for item 6.1.

23
00:03:28,120 --> 00:03:33,940
Good evening. The project before you is an amendment to

24
00:03:33,940 --> 00:03:38,120
tentative map 2021-5 for the creamer province

25
00:03:39,480 --> 00:03:40,320
subdivision.

26
00:03:46,040 --> 00:03:47,660
So this is the location of the project.

27
00:03:48,500 --> 00:03:54,060
It's along Chapel Road and Pacific Way and just south

28
00:03:54,060 --> 00:03:56,660
west of Highway 25.

29
00:03:59,550 --> 00:04:05,970
So the project location, the project is an approximately 18.24 acre

30
00:04:05,970 --> 00:04:12,650
vacant lot currently. It's in the low density residential performance overlay zoning district.

31
00:04:13,170 --> 00:04:20,610
This zoning district allows for single-family detached units, but it also allows for modified

32
00:04:20,610 --> 00:04:23,510
by development standards with approval

33
00:04:23,510 --> 00:04:26,330
of the conditional use permit for a planning and development.

34
00:04:26,990 --> 00:04:29,850
This project does have, when it was originally approved,

35
00:04:31,190 --> 00:04:33,090
as attended about 2021-5,

36
00:04:33,430 --> 00:04:35,390
does have an approved conditional use permit

37
00:04:35,390 --> 00:04:37,030
for that planning and development.

38
00:04:38,650 --> 00:04:42,850
So this project is part of the Chapel Road Master Plan,

39
00:04:43,430 --> 00:04:48,290
which includes other housing developments

40
00:04:48,290 --> 00:04:56,750
and a commercial component, which offers different public benefits like commercial component,

41
00:04:57,590 --> 00:05:03,650
proposed dog parks, other parks, bike paths, knocking paths, things like that.

42
00:05:03,890 --> 00:05:11,530
So the project description, so the project is proposing to amend Canada Map 2021-5,

43
00:05:11,850 --> 00:05:16,610
which was formally approved as a single family residential subdivision, known as Cramer Commons.

44
00:05:17,390 --> 00:05:24,990
What the amendment will do is it will reduce the total unit count, unit lot count from 90 to 86 lots.

45
00:05:25,670 --> 00:05:33,670
It'll designate 70 lots for single-family detached and 16 lots for duet single-family homes.

46
00:05:34,430 --> 00:05:40,350
This parcel B will be designated as a location for a required sanitary sewer solicitation.

47
00:05:41,110 --> 00:05:48,570
The streets will be a real line to allow for the relocation of the 16 duet style lots.

48
00:05:49,490 --> 00:05:57,750
The 16 duet style lots are being moved and the next slide will show the map but the duet

49
00:05:57,750 --> 00:06:04,390
style lots are being moved from the northern part of the parcel to the southern part of the property

50
00:06:04,390 --> 00:06:11,050
and that so they can better achieve sound litigation requirements because as is approved,

51
00:06:11,370 --> 00:06:17,490
the homes are closer to Highway 25. And then also as part of the amendment,

52
00:06:18,630 --> 00:06:26,290
the park will increase from about an acre and a half to three acres. Access will continue as is

53
00:06:26,290 --> 00:06:33,230
currently approved under TM 2021-5 where primary access will be along Chapel Road and then

54
00:06:33,230 --> 00:06:35,430
you have secondary access along Pacific Way.

55
00:06:37,250 --> 00:06:43,260
So this is the proposed map, says a laser, isn't it?

56
00:06:44,640 --> 00:06:45,840
And it doesn't really show on that.

57
00:06:47,220 --> 00:06:53,300
Anyway, so the lots running along the southern part of the property, there's 16 lots there.

58
00:06:53,300 --> 00:06:58,680
There's, I think there's 20 lots there, but 16 of those lots are for the duets.

59
00:07:00,100 --> 00:07:06,480
They've been relocated from the very northern part running along Highway 25.

60
00:07:07,180 --> 00:07:09,460
Those lots are now single family detached.

61
00:07:10,420 --> 00:07:21,640
Also, the park runs from the southeast portion of the parcel and it runs along Highway 25

62
00:07:21,640 --> 00:07:26,380
to the northwest part of the parcel.

63
00:07:26,640 --> 00:07:31,520
If you can make out on the map, it says parcel A, that's the part.

64
00:07:34,740 --> 00:07:43,640
So as I mentioned, the 10th of the map 2021-5 was also approved with conditional permit

65
00:07:43,640 --> 00:07:50,020
2022-2 for the planning of development, and with that it was created project specific development

66
00:07:50,020 --> 00:07:56,720
standards and those development standards are not changing, just the map is being amended.

67
00:07:58,200 --> 00:08:07,800
So briefly, this table shows the development standards for the R1 zoning district, the

68
00:08:07,800 --> 00:08:12,840
low density residential, that's on the left, and then there's the approved project specific

69
00:08:12,840 --> 00:08:14,280
development standards on the right.

70
00:08:14,280 --> 00:08:21,260
So for example, the minimum lot size will go from 5,500 square feet, now it's 4,400 square

71
00:08:21,260 --> 00:08:25,120
feet, and the average lot size is about 4,500 square feet.

72
00:08:26,060 --> 00:08:31,840
And then you can see that the development standards have changed slightly from R1 to the

73
00:08:31,840 --> 00:08:33,380
project specific development standards.

74
00:08:35,280 --> 00:08:43,600
And so this one is specific to the single family detached lots, and this table is specific

75
00:08:43,600 --> 00:08:50,720
to the development standards of the duet style lots. Minimum lot size, 5500, and then under

76
00:08:50,720 --> 00:08:59,720
for the duet project specific development standards, the minimum lot size is 3,000, or 60, with

77
00:08:59,720 --> 00:09:02,220
an average lot size, 3,000, or 3,000, or 93.

78
00:09:04,260 --> 00:09:07,140
So a little bit more about the amendment.

79
00:09:07,140 --> 00:09:17,640
The project was previously approved under resolution 2022-22, that was for the 10th of the map.

80
00:09:18,840 --> 00:09:24,680
And the project has been granted an automatic extension under AB 2729.

81
00:09:25,740 --> 00:09:32,980
And with the new extension date, the current extension date would have been November 17, 2025.

82
00:09:32,980 --> 00:09:43,520
it's since been extended to, excuse me, November 17th, 2024, it's now been extended to May 17th, 2026.

83
00:09:45,140 --> 00:09:52,400
Also being amended, along with the map, are the conditions to make them project specific, to be reflective of the amendments.

84
00:09:52,400 --> 00:10:06,360
So a couple of the conditions that are changing, this is the condition, former condition 11 reflects the timing of construction for the duets in the single family.

85
00:10:07,700 --> 00:10:18,880
So the building permits for the 16 duet units must be issued prior to the issuance of the building permit for the 35th single family detachment.

86
00:10:18,880 --> 00:10:27,680
And occupancy must be granted for all 16 units ahead of occupancy for the 70th single

87
00:10:27,680 --> 00:10:28,980
family detached unit.

88
00:10:29,600 --> 00:10:36,720
So that condition is just being revised to reflect the reduced lock count.

89
00:10:37,960 --> 00:10:47,520
Also condition 81, that's been revised to reflect the current fair share cost for

90
00:10:49,100 --> 00:10:50,620
infrastructure improvements.

91
00:10:52,860 --> 00:10:57,760
So the project is complied with the general plan. It's in the

92
00:10:57,760 --> 00:11:04,820
low density residential general plan designation which it's intended to promote and protect

93
00:11:04,820 --> 00:11:10,580
single-family neighborhoods while providing sites for single-family detached units. Also zero

94
00:11:10,580 --> 00:11:17,180
lot-line single-family units and plan unit developments. As I mentioned this project does have

95
00:11:17,180 --> 00:11:23,800
conditionally used permit for a plan unit development that was approved with the

96
00:11:23,800 --> 00:11:32,380
tentative map 2025-1. The project also meets the is within the required

97
00:11:32,380 --> 00:11:38,460
density of one to eight dwelling units per acre. It's approximately 4.72

98
00:11:38,460 --> 00:11:46,100
dwelling units per acre. It also complies with the health and safety goals set

99
00:11:46,100 --> 00:11:53,040
forth in the health and safety element, namely for noise reduction because of the location,

100
00:11:55,200 --> 00:12:02,480
because the parcel of butts, highway 25, there's noise requirements for this.

101
00:12:03,060 --> 00:12:16,080
So the applicant had, when they originally applied, they submitted a noise study and that

102
00:12:16,080 --> 00:12:24,940
measures and then also attenuation measures that the applicant would put forth for the project.

103
00:12:26,400 --> 00:12:37,200
And then those noise requirements also complied with the health and safety element goals.

104
00:12:37,800 --> 00:12:44,580
One of those requirements is that a berm along, as opposed to a sound wall, a berm along

105
00:12:44,580 --> 00:12:50,260
highway 25 would be a minimum of 10 feet tall, and then also that when the applicant

106
00:12:50,260 --> 00:12:58,740
applies for the site and architectural for the duets that they have to provide documentation

107
00:12:58,740 --> 00:13:05,320
showing that further noise attenuation would be implemented during the design and development

108
00:13:05,320 --> 00:13:08,180
of the state individual units.

109
00:13:09,560 --> 00:13:13,700
The project is complied with the zoning code.

110
00:13:14,440 --> 00:13:16,540
Again, I mentioned it's in the low-density residential

111
00:13:16,540 --> 00:13:19,680
performance overlay zoning district, which

112
00:13:19,680 --> 00:13:23,400
paussers development, that means a range of densities

113
00:13:24,680 --> 00:13:27,060
that complies with the general plan that

114
00:13:27,060 --> 00:13:31,400
has flexible standards and implement policies

115
00:13:31,400 --> 00:13:34,640
and programs of the general plan.

116
00:13:36,760 --> 00:13:47,400
Again, this project complies with the zoning code because it's got specific, it has an

117
00:13:47,400 --> 00:13:52,220
approved, conditionally used permit for the plan unit development that designates specific

118
00:13:52,220 --> 00:13:53,720
project development standards.

119
00:13:53,720 --> 00:13:53,920
projects.

120
00:13:55,980 --> 00:14:04,480
The project is in compliance with CEQA. So for the Chapel Road master plan,

121
00:14:05,750 --> 00:14:10,820
there was the City of Hollister certified the Environmental Impact Report for that project.

122
00:14:12,080 --> 00:14:22,160
That project studied a certain number of homes, 10 in the map 2021-5 was included in that

123
00:14:22,160 --> 00:14:31,120
and still continues to meet what was studied even with the amendments and no further study is required.

124
00:14:33,000 --> 00:14:43,740
So just to summarize, the project amends 10 to the map 2021-5, which had been previously approved and adopted.

125
00:14:43,740 --> 00:14:51,700
and many of these amendments relocating the duet lots to the south is to meet noise

126
00:14:51,700 --> 00:14:59,300
requirements, mitigations, and then attenuation. The project as proposed is consistent with

127
00:14:59,300 --> 00:14:59,720
for low density.

128
00:15:16,080 --> 00:15:29,880
So, you have a couple of options. You can, one, adopt a resolution, approving tentative map 2021-5 amendment. Subject to the Finance and Conditions Conditions Conditioning in the

129
00:15:29,880 --> 00:15:34,320
draft resolution. You can adopt a resolution approving a tentative

130
00:15:34,320 --> 00:15:40,600
tentative map 2021-5 amendment with findings or conditions of approval as

131
00:15:40,600 --> 00:15:46,240
modified by the commission. You can deny the project or you can continue to

132
00:15:46,240 --> 00:15:50,660
hear and direct staff to provide additional information or clarification if

133
00:15:50,660 --> 00:15:54,040
that's needed. Staff does recommend option one.

134
00:15:56,390 --> 00:15:58,030
Thank you. Do we have questions

135
00:15:58,030 --> 00:15:58,730
from the commission?

136
00:16:04,720 --> 00:16:10,620
Just for clarification. So the changes would be the duets, correct?

137
00:16:10,800 --> 00:16:18,900
It sounds like reducing the single family home's for duets, basically.

138
00:16:19,440 --> 00:16:24,620
So the duets were already approved as part of 10 to the map, 20, 20, 25. You're just reducing

139
00:16:25,020 --> 00:16:30,000
the total walk count. And that was mainly so they could relocate the duet lots from the

140
00:16:30,000 --> 00:16:31,480
north part of the parcel to the south.

141
00:16:31,820 --> 00:16:32,440
Got it.

142
00:16:32,540 --> 00:16:32,660
Okay.

143
00:16:32,940 --> 00:16:33,020
Yeah.

144
00:16:33,160 --> 00:16:35,700
So the duet lock count isn't changing.

145
00:16:35,980 --> 00:16:36,200
Okay.

146
00:16:36,460 --> 00:16:36,540
Yeah.

147
00:16:37,280 --> 00:16:40,180
The single family detached lock count is changing.

148
00:16:40,480 --> 00:16:40,800
Gotcha.

149
00:16:41,740 --> 00:16:44,700
Is this approval for the entire project which is for the amendment?

150
00:16:45,120 --> 00:16:46,580
Like, what is the scope of their approval?

151
00:16:46,820 --> 00:16:50,080
It's for the amendment because the tenant and the map had already been approved and adopted.

152
00:16:50,680 --> 00:16:50,960
Okay.

153
00:16:51,020 --> 00:16:53,800
So you're basically approving the changes.

154
00:16:54,500 --> 00:16:54,780
What's that?

155
00:16:58,640 --> 00:17:04,260
Yeah, the reduction in units and then the change to the design, which is relocating the

156
00:17:04,260 --> 00:17:10,000
duets. And is the CUP similar to the density bonus?

157
00:17:11,980 --> 00:17:17,460
No, so the conditional use permit for plan development is the way that the city previously

158
00:17:18,440 --> 00:17:24,880
did plan developments, which we've since modified, I believe that was in 2022, we changed the code.

159
00:17:25,560 --> 00:17:32,000
But at the time that this was approved, that was the way that projects would get their own development standards.

160
00:17:32,440 --> 00:17:37,640
So essentially this project kind of has its own zoning because of that CUP.

161
00:17:37,860 --> 00:17:44,080
So they have reduced side yard setbacks, the reduced lock lot size,

162
00:17:44,080 --> 00:17:48,640
which comes with that performance overlay zoning to allow smaller lot size and then they

163
00:17:48,640 --> 00:17:53,060
also needed it for setbacks for the duets because they share a wall so that was a zero

164
00:17:53,060 --> 00:17:58,560
law line. So it has slightly different standards from your standard R1 zoning because of that

165
00:17:58,560 --> 00:18:02,820
PUD and that's still valid because the map is still valid and like Brandon mentioned in his

166
00:18:02,820 --> 00:18:08,000
report they qualified for an automatic 18 month extension. So the current map is still valid

167
00:18:08,000 --> 00:18:12,620
until next May and then this would be amending it so instead of the current map they would

168
00:18:12,620 --> 00:18:15,360
be moving forward through the process to develop this map.

169
00:18:19,410 --> 00:18:19,930
Other questions?

170
00:18:20,510 --> 00:18:23,930
Sanchez, even from the unit reduction or what's not on the do it? So it wasn't the single family.

171
00:18:24,670 --> 00:18:25,830
Single family, let's go.

172
00:18:28,260 --> 00:18:33,820
I have a question. I'm just curious why this is to reduce the noise.

173
00:18:34,020 --> 00:18:39,800
This is to mitigate the noise. Was that the purpose? Generally to, yeah, to better mitigate

174
00:18:39,800 --> 00:18:47,600
the potential noise impacts. So my follow-up question is I'm just curious. We know the 25 has been there.

175
00:18:47,940 --> 00:18:50,880
Why wasn't that a consideration from the beginning, do you know?

176
00:18:51,820 --> 00:18:52,700
I'm sorry, 25.

177
00:18:53,140 --> 00:18:58,400
I can speak to the original approval a little bit.

178
00:18:58,620 --> 00:19:04,740
I think that at the time that this project was originally being reviewed, the city was

179
00:19:04,740 --> 00:19:09,720
not processing the site architectural design of the duets at the same time as the map.

180
00:19:10,180 --> 00:19:11,200
This is a modern semiddle.

181
00:19:11,380 --> 00:19:16,180
We would make sure those design were incorporated into the project so we could review it as a

182
00:19:16,180 --> 00:19:20,980
whole. But part of the Chapel Road master plan overall, which

183
00:19:20,980 --> 00:19:25,580
this is just one of 13 lots that's within it, was the goals of

184
00:19:25,580 --> 00:19:29,400
the council were to avoid sound rolls on 25. And so there was

185
00:19:29,400 --> 00:19:34,420
always a berm requirement instead to mitigate noise. But there

186
00:19:34,420 --> 00:19:38,420
was also a desire to have homes fronting onto that linear

187
00:19:38,420 --> 00:19:41,600
parkway to avoid them, you know, backing into it so that they

188
00:19:41,600 --> 00:19:45,380
had more direct access and the view of it. So this part, this

189
00:19:45,380 --> 00:19:52,800
This parcel in particular needed additional noise analysis and it seems through the applicants

190
00:19:52,800 --> 00:19:59,080
working on getting towards their civil and their specific and prevent plan semiddles to

191
00:19:59,080 --> 00:20:04,680
the city to develop the map that in order to design those duet lots to meet the noise study

192
00:20:04,680 --> 00:20:08,380
that they did and the requirements for the duets because they have a slightly different

193
00:20:08,380 --> 00:20:10,680
noise requirement than the detached single family.

194
00:20:10,960 --> 00:20:14,820
It made more sense for them to propose this amendment so that they can move the duets

195
00:20:14,820 --> 00:20:20,960
better meet that noise analysis. Thank you for explaining. Other questions before we go to

196
00:20:20,960 --> 00:20:26,360
the public hearing? Yeah we're just kind of a question follow a question with the noise.

197
00:20:27,240 --> 00:20:31,760
So I do know on Highway 25 and this may be completely be going out of the purview of

198
00:20:31,760 --> 00:20:37,780
the scope of this but I still it's important I think to get this on record. So I know Highway 25,

199
00:20:37,780 --> 00:20:43,120
The sound walls that are on Highway 25, that's a Calt Transmitigation, right?

200
00:20:43,300 --> 00:20:46,100
Those big sound walls that are built?

201
00:20:47,140 --> 00:20:49,980
It's not necessarily a Calt Transmitigation.

202
00:20:50,160 --> 00:20:53,080
It would have been to mitigate noise in those subdivisions.

203
00:20:53,220 --> 00:20:55,260
So we have the Cerratos of Division to the south.

204
00:20:55,540 --> 00:21:01,100
And when the Chapel Road Master Plan was going through the annexation process and the EIR,

205
00:21:01,500 --> 00:21:06,080
part of the Council's direction was that they did not want to continue the sound wall corridor

206
00:21:06,080 --> 00:21:11,000
that we have as we move north and so this project and other projects in the

207
00:21:11,000 --> 00:21:15,800
Chapel Road Master Plan area are obligated to mitigate noise from the highway

208
00:21:15,800 --> 00:21:19,900
still because that's required to develop but in a way that doesn't include

209
00:21:19,900 --> 00:21:24,680
sound walls because that was the city's desire. Okay yeah I'm a did some all among the

210
00:21:24,680 --> 00:21:28,980
opposite like yeah but now that makes sense yeah so it was you know all these past

211
00:21:28,980 --> 00:21:32,400
developments that are currently built created the sound wall corridor and the

212
00:21:32,400 --> 00:21:35,820
city wanted to move away from that as we continued to develop on and around

213
00:21:35,820 --> 00:21:39,480
on Highway 25, so this project is not putting in a sound wall.

214
00:21:39,780 --> 00:21:41,040
Oh, it also links for the clarification.

215
00:21:41,880 --> 00:21:43,980
Then just that one more question with the,

216
00:21:44,200 --> 00:21:45,740
which city council was that?

217
00:21:46,140 --> 00:21:49,680
Is that a recent or this would have been in 2018, 2019.

218
00:21:51,740 --> 00:21:55,420
So the annexation was in 2019,

219
00:21:55,820 --> 00:21:59,600
the Chapel Road Master Plan EIR began in 2015.

220
00:21:59,600 --> 00:22:03,920
So it's been quite a few years that not this map in itself,

221
00:22:03,920 --> 00:22:06,720
but the Chapel Road Project overall has been considered.

222
00:22:07,320 --> 00:22:08,280
Thank you.

223
00:22:10,600 --> 00:22:14,740
The project was considered an infill project when it was first proposed.

224
00:22:15,840 --> 00:22:22,440
It was a hot topic because ultimately it's still towards the extent of the outskirts of the town.

225
00:22:24,580 --> 00:22:33,440
So it's upon interpretation, I guess, which whoever has the legal backing has been the issue.

226
00:22:34,960 --> 00:22:42,380
Thank you. Let's go ahead and open the public hearing at 622. And do we have a presentation

227
00:22:42,380 --> 00:22:43,880
from the applicant on the site?

228
00:22:45,380 --> 00:22:47,220
We do. Yeah, we have the applicant on it.

229
00:22:47,220 --> 00:22:50,560
Oh, yes, we have Peter Smith online.

230
00:23:04,590 --> 00:23:04,890
Can you?

231
00:23:06,610 --> 00:23:07,890
Mr. Peter Smith?

232
00:23:09,210 --> 00:23:10,250
It's really quiet.

233
00:23:10,690 --> 00:23:12,630
Can we give maybe our system hang on?

234
00:23:12,950 --> 00:23:17,450
YouTube can interpret that? Give us a minute, Mr. Smith.

235
00:23:21,550 --> 00:23:22,730
I could hear it on this one.

236
00:23:27,610 --> 00:23:31,390
You could hear it, too? Yeah, all right.

237
00:23:34,600 --> 00:23:41,360
If you could just see if your sound comes out, I think we're just having an issue on our

238
00:23:41,360 --> 00:23:46,840
speakers on our end, but we can hear you. We might not have the best recording, but if you could just,

239
00:23:48,900 --> 00:23:50,860
What if I put the microphone there?

240
00:23:51,620 --> 00:23:52,240
We can hear you.

241
00:23:53,760 --> 00:23:55,300
It's just very quiet.

242
00:23:56,040 --> 00:23:57,020
I think we can move forward.

243
00:23:57,220 --> 00:23:58,740
I think it's just very quiet.

244
00:23:58,980 --> 00:23:59,700
But I think it'll be okay.

245
00:24:00,180 --> 00:24:01,120
Go ahead. You'll have five minutes.

246
00:24:01,680 --> 00:24:02,320
I'll talk loud.

247
00:24:24,830 --> 00:24:27,750
Does anyone have any questions for the applicant?

248
00:24:32,230 --> 00:24:34,650
No, it looks like we do not have any questions.

249
00:24:35,230 --> 00:24:37,050
I think the only thing I noticed,

250
00:24:37,050 --> 00:24:39,030
which was a positive is the

251
00:24:40,190 --> 00:24:41,710
in one of the slides

252
00:24:41,710 --> 00:24:43,830
It's about the park.

253
00:24:44,830 --> 00:24:49,350
Yeah, the parks increasing from parks increasing about an acre and a half to three acres, I believe.

254
00:24:49,690 --> 00:24:51,010
I believe that's what's on the map.

255
00:24:51,770 --> 00:24:59,730
And was there any other changes besides just the park increasing orders to the applicant.

256
00:25:27,080 --> 00:25:27,520
Thank you.

257
00:25:29,000 --> 00:25:31,740
So no other questions from the commission.

258
00:25:32,540 --> 00:25:33,340
Thank you.

259
00:25:34,700 --> 00:25:35,580
We'll go ahead.

260
00:25:35,680 --> 00:25:37,720
Do we have any public comments on this item?

261
00:25:40,750 --> 00:25:41,970
We have no additional comments.

262
00:25:41,970 --> 00:25:46,610
Okay, and then we will go ahead and close the public hearing at 625.

263
00:25:47,230 --> 00:25:50,350
Is there any further discussion from the commission on this item?

264
00:25:58,620 --> 00:25:58,900
Thank you.

265
00:25:59,320 --> 00:25:59,840
I'll make it.

266
00:26:00,180 --> 00:26:00,920
What do you all think?

267
00:26:01,360 --> 00:26:06,860
I'll make a motion to adopt the agenda item 6.1 for the amendment on the tentative map.

268
00:26:08,980 --> 00:26:16,700
2021, five, grammar, common subdivision to reduce slot count from 91 to 86 slots and relocate the duet units.

269
00:26:19,040 --> 00:26:25,540
second. Okay. Do we want to go ahead and vote or is there any discussion?

270
00:26:26,580 --> 00:26:30,940
We're good. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed?

271
00:26:32,240 --> 00:26:39,660
Abstentions? Motion carries. Item 7. So Madam Chair, really quick before we move on to the item.

272
00:26:39,800 --> 00:26:45,720
I just you weren't at the past meeting and so just a quick update, you know,

273
00:26:45,720 --> 00:26:52,000
So, ultimately saw the agenda and I didn't get a chance and I apologize for being late.

274
00:26:52,100 --> 00:26:58,520
I had a very busy day, but the minutes were incorrect because they didn't have any input

275
00:26:59,480 --> 00:27:05,440
which brings it to my next point that the inputs and the other commissioners that are present

276
00:27:05,440 --> 00:27:12,100
were here where I made recommendations, basically recommendations to send to the city council

277
00:27:12,100 --> 00:27:16,800
on the men mean the planning process or at least considering a little bit more transparency.

278
00:27:17,820 --> 00:27:21,760
And I would argue efficiency had sounded like the commission agreed.

279
00:27:22,620 --> 00:27:25,940
And there's no minutes reflecting any of that information.

280
00:27:27,140 --> 00:27:34,620
And then also there's, and I know the city council attorney would said that they would consider,

281
00:27:34,780 --> 00:27:38,400
she would consider basically whatever the agenda items that I had made recommendations

282
00:27:38,400 --> 00:27:53,260
If there was any legal issues, got no information on whether that was an issue or not, which I would argue it wasn't, but regardless, the final point is there was no added, you know, we all agreed.

283
00:27:53,600 --> 00:28:04,360
And so there was no added agenda item that talked about these because it was really supposed to be a discussion on the policy, the policy considerations or recommendations to the city council.

284
00:28:04,360 --> 00:28:08,760
So, I'm really disappointed, you know, I don't understand.

285
00:28:08,960 --> 00:28:11,880
There's no really excuse in my mind why this didn't come forward.

286
00:28:13,060 --> 00:28:18,840
So, and I did talk to City Councilman Rosendez about it, and he's going to definitely address

287
00:28:18,840 --> 00:28:19,160
it.

288
00:28:19,780 --> 00:28:26,500
So, I mean, I mean, I'd be even interested in maybe suspending the rules, and I'm NDB Agenda

289
00:28:26,500 --> 00:28:28,880
to include that item, because I think it's really important.

290
00:28:29,080 --> 00:28:33,080
I mean, if we really want to see economic development, which is technically the goal of the general

291
00:28:33,080 --> 00:28:37,420
plan and ultimately the city council in adopting it, then we need to address these issues.

292
00:28:37,660 --> 00:28:40,480
I keep getting calls about issues with the planning process yet.

293
00:28:40,980 --> 00:28:45,980
We got a presentation which I appreciate, but now we're looking into remedies and somehow

294
00:28:45,980 --> 00:28:48,660
we're at spin sideline which I don't appreciate.

295
00:28:49,640 --> 00:28:56,300
So procedurally, are we, is your request to amend the, to go back and look at the minutes?

296
00:28:57,520 --> 00:29:01,280
understanding was that what we're asking for was out of our scope out of our

297
00:29:01,280 --> 00:29:05,680
by-laws so maybe that's why they've been to make it in that was my assumption and I

298
00:29:05,680 --> 00:29:10,260
appreciate that but ultimately there was no there was no follow-up right that

299
00:29:10,260 --> 00:29:13,700
was that that was the commitment it's a recorded meeting you can pull it up

300
00:29:13,700 --> 00:29:17,920
yourself hey we're gonna let you know if there's any issues I mean at the end of

301
00:29:17,920 --> 00:29:22,040
the day we're asking for recommendations right we're not actually making

302
00:29:22,040 --> 00:29:27,440
policy ourselves. They could say, go fly a kite, right? But it doesn't, at the end of

303
00:29:27,440 --> 00:29:30,460
the day, it's like it's something that it was a consideration, because we had a thorough

304
00:29:30,460 --> 00:29:35,780
discussion about it. There's a whole reason for a whole agenda, a generalized conversation

305
00:29:35,780 --> 00:29:41,140
about all these different issues. We even had applicants here, even giving their input

306
00:29:41,140 --> 00:29:46,580
about the potential amendments. And so it's just false flat. I mean, as far as I'm concerned,

307
00:29:47,140 --> 00:29:56,340
If that's the way the Planning Commission wants to run things and staff, then personally, I think I could use my time better if our input doesn't matter, right?

308
00:29:56,580 --> 00:29:59,980
At that point, it should be just the fact that the city point-

309
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:29,980
The planning department making decisions without the authority of the planning commissioners that are volunteers in this position. And I do remember that we had asked some similar questions two months ago. As we were asking about policy and so it sounds like it followed up. Is there a way, I guess, then procedurally, how do we go back? And so you can reconsider approval of the minutes is that what you're asking. So to reconsider an item that's been approved.

310
00:30:29,980 --> 00:30:36,680
somebody who voted in favor needs to make a motion to reconsider take a vote to reconsider if there's a majority vote

311
00:30:36,680 --> 00:30:42,060
Then you can go back and reconsider that item. Okay. Is there so that would be

312
00:30:42,760 --> 00:30:47,820
Is there a sort of all make a motion if we could reconsider it has to be somebody who voted in favor

313
00:30:47,820 --> 00:30:53,440
So any of the other three can make the motion to reconsider the

314
00:30:53,440 --> 00:31:00,320
Reconciter the minutes you're saying for seven to open it up and add these items back

315
00:31:00,320 --> 00:31:09,380
Yeah, you'll just go back to the consent item 5.1 and just redo what you already did, essentially.

316
00:31:09,720 --> 00:31:13,660
So the chair will first show vote to reconsider if there's a majority that votes yes.

317
00:31:14,460 --> 00:31:22,240
The chair will say will now open item 5.1 and just basically redo the item that you've already done.

318
00:31:22,420 --> 00:31:22,980
For the agenda.

319
00:31:24,680 --> 00:31:28,160
So reconsider amending the agenda 5.1, right?

320
00:31:28,160 --> 00:31:32,160
was it five point yeah I'll you're ultimately going to make two votes the

321
00:31:32,160 --> 00:31:35,820
first one will be like do we all want to reconsider it yes or no and then if

322
00:31:35,820 --> 00:31:40,680
you vote yes then you'll go back reconsider it and take a vote. Oh gosh it I like

323
00:31:40,680 --> 00:31:49,240
to make a motion to open up agenda item 5.1 approving the October 23rd 20 25

324
00:31:49,240 --> 00:31:58,980
minutes. Second. All in favor? All right. Okay, so now we go ahead and we have

325
00:31:58,980 --> 00:32:03,500
the discussion about the agenda. Yeah, and redo the whole thing just like you

326
00:32:03,500 --> 00:32:06,840
would have. So and I'll try to be I don't want to hold people up right we all

327
00:32:06,840 --> 00:32:12,320
have busy lives but these were the considerations and roughly right that was a

328
00:32:12,320 --> 00:32:16,500
whole goal is I give rough recommendations you know the professionals in the

329
00:32:16,500 --> 00:32:21,960
room can help clean it up and present them as potential recommendations to the city council.

330
00:32:22,200 --> 00:32:27,700
So in the beginning of the conversation, I remember mentioning that for the sake of clarity

331
00:32:27,700 --> 00:32:32,440
for an applicant right that was partly the issue was applicants come, they apply and there

332
00:32:32,440 --> 00:32:37,280
was even discussions about a $1,500 required review fee.

333
00:32:37,280 --> 00:32:51,980
And so and technically it was almost like a non it was there was no there was no like record keeping and there definitely was any any real formality to the meeting.

334
00:32:52,520 --> 00:33:01,620
So I had asked for like an addendum number one is an addendum that actually explains the rights to the applicant and lets them know what they can expect as far as the process goes.

335
00:33:01,620 --> 00:33:08,480
number two was we don't I personally I made them sentiment that I don't agree

336
00:33:08,480 --> 00:33:12,400
with a fee if there's not any seriousness to it and even regardless of it I

337
00:33:12,400 --> 00:33:15,400
still think it's an important stage right because an applicant comes are

338
00:33:15,400 --> 00:33:19,640
expecting ultimately like they really want to invest in this community they

339
00:33:19,640 --> 00:33:23,360
want to pay the fees because they want to get direction on the planning process

340
00:33:23,360 --> 00:33:27,800
making sure they're following the law and but there was no record keep it even

341
00:33:27,800 --> 00:33:31,380
the city manager had mentioned that they didn't keep records I completely

342
00:33:31,380 --> 00:33:34,440
disagree with that. We should know what's going on from the first time in the communications,

343
00:33:35,000 --> 00:33:38,740
especially when they don't money and they're already, anytime someone don't to check, they're

344
00:33:38,740 --> 00:33:43,700
not just putting $5,500 down there, they're probably like buying the property, they're already

345
00:33:43,700 --> 00:33:49,060
securing things, so there should be a time clock from that time, and that's why there needs

346
00:33:49,060 --> 00:33:54,340
to be record keeping of that preliminary review, and basically, I don't think there should

347
00:33:54,340 --> 00:33:54,860
be a cost.

348
00:33:55,120 --> 00:33:58,760
Can I make a suggestion because really what we're talking about is inaccurate minutes.

349
00:33:58,760 --> 00:34:03,780
And so I tell me I'm making my recommendation, so if I could finish.

350
00:34:04,300 --> 00:34:13,680
Well, so, but if the minutes need to be amended, maybe the best approach would be for staff to go back and listen to the meeting again and amend the minutes.

351
00:34:14,200 --> 00:34:23,820
Well, so if it's okay with you, I actually, if it's okay with the Planning Commission, I'd like to vocalize them to repeat it so there's no ambiguity, right?

352
00:34:23,820 --> 00:34:26,620
These are the items that you would like reflect in the minutes.

353
00:34:27,160 --> 00:34:38,500
So, and then three to five days, I asked and again this is not hard and fast, but some kind of a response time that's one of the things that applicants would basically get upset about.

354
00:34:38,680 --> 00:34:50,520
It's like they take two weeks sometimes or a month to respond. So some kind of required response time and then by default, especially if there's no real response, there needs to be a trigger for an early appeal process.

355
00:34:50,520 --> 00:34:57,100
a lot of the times we don't even know how to understand what's the breakdown, especially

356
00:34:57,100 --> 00:35:02,800
when a lot of time lapses and ultimately I firmly believe that you bring up your trigger

357
00:35:02,800 --> 00:35:06,820
and early appeal process, that you know right away from the front end, what's going on

358
00:35:06,820 --> 00:35:11,700
because we'll get that information, right, because we're deciding at the long distance, right,

359
00:35:11,760 --> 00:35:13,400
by the time a lot of the issues have developed.

360
00:35:14,660 --> 00:35:19,020
And I would argue there should be at least a two week trigger, right, so it's been two weeks

361
00:35:19,020 --> 00:35:23,720
no response fine, then the applicant has the right to bring it forward to the planning commission.

362
00:35:25,100 --> 00:35:30,480
And then one of the last things was just like an organizational flow chart, right?

363
00:35:30,780 --> 00:35:35,440
Something that kind of maybe that could include it that basically explains what is the process

364
00:35:35,440 --> 00:35:39,760
who's involved, you know, who's the authority in the room when it comes to the architectural

365
00:35:39,760 --> 00:35:45,180
review or the design and the standards and ultimately the legal requirements and evaluations

366
00:35:45,180 --> 00:35:49,480
of municipal code, or potential if you don't follow these rules, like all this stuff needs

367
00:35:49,480 --> 00:35:54,040
to be on the front and so the applicant really knows how to scope out their project and

368
00:35:54,040 --> 00:35:55,840
cost and everything, right?

369
00:35:56,240 --> 00:36:01,040
I keep getting calls that, like I've done a ton of money into this, Peter, and I still don't

370
00:36:01,040 --> 00:36:03,020
know what's going on, like that to me is crazy.

371
00:36:04,320 --> 00:36:08,520
I, for the sake of economic development, I think these things would actually improve commercial

372
00:36:08,520 --> 00:36:09,400
projects for sure.

373
00:36:10,640 --> 00:36:16,700
So I think we all heard the items that I think you want to be reflected in the minutes.

374
00:36:18,000 --> 00:36:26,140
So then with that, then do we have a motion, we make a motion to approve the minutes as amended?

375
00:36:27,180 --> 00:36:29,920
If you agree with my statement.

376
00:36:30,300 --> 00:36:32,280
If we can get a motion.

377
00:36:33,780 --> 00:36:40,200
I'll make a motion to adopt the minutes as restated by Commissioner Hernandez.

378
00:36:41,820 --> 00:36:42,860
I have a question, though.

379
00:36:43,400 --> 00:36:45,040
So, what should we expect in the minutes then?

380
00:36:45,560 --> 00:36:48,500
Because they're probably generally a discussion held close.

381
00:36:49,400 --> 00:36:54,880
So, when we have discussions, ultimately, like, where are we expecting those details to be literally in this document?

382
00:36:55,060 --> 00:36:55,700
Because they haven't been.

383
00:36:56,100 --> 00:36:58,540
I'm just wondering if it's supposed to be.

384
00:36:58,540 --> 00:37:21,880
So, generally, we take action minutes, we don't take verbatim minutes, but it sounds like, I've written down that Commissioner Hernandez would like it to be reflected in the minutes, the discussion of an I've written down five recommendations and so what staff will do is add them.

385
00:37:21,880 --> 00:37:22,240
So,

386
00:37:24,420 --> 00:37:34,300
concern regarding a $1,500 review fee, a request to write down people's rights on—I'm

387
00:37:34,300 --> 00:37:42,380
not sure if that's on an application, but we can re-review the discussion that a recommendation

388
00:37:42,380 --> 00:37:51,560
for a 3-to-5-day response time, an early appeal process, and that there should be an organizational

389
00:37:51,560 --> 00:38:00,980
So essentially we'll amend the minutes to reflect that those recommendations were made as part or were part of the discussion.

390
00:38:01,640 --> 00:38:10,440
And I can type up an email and forward it to, you know, to staff and, you know, I know that there's brown act requirements.

391
00:38:10,640 --> 00:38:15,080
So ultimately that they can at least clean it up and send it to you.

392
00:38:15,240 --> 00:38:18,000
But I mean, it's already publicly stated, right?

393
00:38:18,000 --> 00:38:25,280
One of the things that was mentioned was the required documentation of the process, which is extremely important.

394
00:38:25,960 --> 00:38:33,160
I also just wanted to also add to that, I don't know if you guys would be interested,

395
00:38:33,300 --> 00:38:39,920
and I can retract this motion, but it's going to be a whole another month before this gets done.

396
00:38:40,400 --> 00:38:41,560
It sounds like correct.

397
00:38:42,320 --> 00:38:44,580
Okay, that's the thing. Is that correct?

398
00:38:44,580 --> 00:38:47,020
I suppose it would depend.

399
00:38:47,320 --> 00:38:52,680
So your motion right now is to amend the minutes and approve them.

400
00:38:52,800 --> 00:38:54,320
So we would just amend them.

401
00:38:54,520 --> 00:38:59,320
And if I've not stated these now six items correctly, we will.

402
00:39:00,960 --> 00:39:06,880
I would ask for correction, however, if your motion is to have staff amend them and bring

403
00:39:06,880 --> 00:39:08,080
them back to you.

404
00:39:08,280 --> 00:39:09,140
So your question?

405
00:39:09,140 --> 00:39:09,880
That would take.

406
00:39:09,880 --> 00:39:23,040
So it's actually seven items and it would reflect, it should reflect in today's agenda meeting because by amending it, we are actually adding these minutes into the October 23rd.

407
00:39:23,500 --> 00:39:28,140
So you should have that in record on file through the city website.

408
00:39:28,140 --> 00:39:34,500
Is this not, is this impact because the minutes, the minutes from what you're saying, we're

409
00:39:34,500 --> 00:39:36,560
not reflected correctly, does this,

410
00:39:39,110 --> 00:39:41,430
will you, no action was taken, you're saying?

411
00:39:42,250 --> 00:39:48,790
No, also the other thing to clarify, you know, with all due respect to Director Kelly,

412
00:39:49,690 --> 00:39:56,710
the reality is, and the experience that I've had in elected office, you don't, you don't

413
00:39:56,710 --> 00:39:57,870
just take action minutes.

414
00:39:57,870 --> 00:40:02,830
So you take minutes of the discussion, so you know the direction, because technically

415
00:40:02,830 --> 00:40:06,950
any kind of recommendation is still action because it's recommended, right?

416
00:40:07,050 --> 00:40:11,630
So if there's a vote that supports something that's a recommendation, you can consider

417
00:40:11,630 --> 00:40:16,910
that an action because it ultimately has to, by default, it's a voted item and it's, it

418
00:40:16,910 --> 00:40:22,270
goes forward to whatever the recommendation is, whether it's a, to agenda is another item,

419
00:40:22,270 --> 00:40:28,070
have a discussion or actually have bring up forward a vote, it still is something you record.

420
00:40:28,290 --> 00:40:31,890
I'm used to having minutes that at least have summaries on every single item.

421
00:40:33,050 --> 00:40:39,990
Commissioner said this, this was what he wanted, the commission disagreed, he was voted down,

422
00:40:40,290 --> 00:40:47,670
she was voted down, or they were all the UNMCA food, so you know what that item, otherwise

423
00:40:47,670 --> 00:40:56,190
Otherwise minutes give zero direction as far as what was the context of any meeting and then the whatever the direction was from that meeting.

424
00:40:56,770 --> 00:41:00,090
So I appreciate that question.

425
00:41:00,450 --> 00:41:10,710
Can I or are you okay because I think for me then now I want to clarify so first you know let's amend the minutes right we'll do that as procedurally.

426
00:41:10,710 --> 00:41:20,570
But or maybe even before I would like to know were those items part of like you're saying an action item that you requested.

427
00:41:20,770 --> 00:41:21,750
Like as a commissioner.

428
00:41:22,510 --> 00:41:29,510
Okay, and then that would be, then I think yes, then it would be something that we would want to know.

429
00:41:29,790 --> 00:41:31,990
Like, where do we go from there?

430
00:41:32,950 --> 00:41:36,730
Is that going to, and obviously we're going to have to wait another month.

431
00:41:36,730 --> 00:41:45,390
And that's exactly the frustration I think of the community is, you know, a month, it's

432
00:41:45,390 --> 00:41:46,590
a long time for some people.

433
00:41:46,930 --> 00:41:50,550
And then if we're making, you know, and I don't think it's anybody's about blaming

434
00:41:50,550 --> 00:41:57,150
anybody, but either way, if a mistake or something didn't get recorded properly, it pushes the,

435
00:41:57,290 --> 00:42:02,570
you know, what can tangibly be fixed or be done to a whole another month.

436
00:42:04,070 --> 00:42:12,840
And there were a lot of frustrated citizens in the community who really felt like the process

437
00:42:12,840 --> 00:42:17,320
needs to be cleaned up and just to kind of, you know, not to belabor the point, but,

438
00:42:18,300 --> 00:42:23,360
you know, the economy is really rough right now and nobody's going to want to be opening

439
00:42:23,360 --> 00:42:29,540
a business with if the planning process is confusing or there's some ambiguity.

440
00:42:29,540 --> 00:42:32,440
And like I said, this is not an attack on anyone, but

441
00:42:33,700 --> 00:42:36,820
I'm almost in favor of, and then if you guys are, you know,

442
00:42:37,000 --> 00:42:40,960
favor of coming back even sooner than pushing it back a month

443
00:42:40,960 --> 00:42:43,220
because I think the community deserves.

444
00:42:44,380 --> 00:42:46,800
I just want to remind you that this item is about the

445
00:42:46,800 --> 00:42:48,160
minutes from the last meeting.

446
00:42:48,380 --> 00:42:51,060
And so if we don't want to get off agenda and start discussing

447
00:42:51,060 --> 00:42:54,140
another topic that's not on the agenda, there is an

448
00:42:54,140 --> 00:42:56,740
opportunity at the end of the meeting on the agenda for

449
00:42:56,740 --> 00:43:02,620
commissioners to buy consensus, request items for a future agenda, and that would be a

450
00:43:02,620 --> 00:43:06,080
more appropriate time to talk about what you want to talk about in the future. This item

451
00:43:06,080 --> 00:43:08,140
is really just about the minutes from the last.

452
00:43:08,140 --> 00:43:13,220
I just want to clarify an expectation for future meetings. There was a style of maintenance

453
00:43:13,220 --> 00:43:19,580
being taken, which was, you know, action-based pretty much, and now I believe what we're asking

454
00:43:19,580 --> 00:43:24,680
for is to have more summaries in the minutes that we're approving. That is a change in practice,

455
00:43:25,400 --> 00:43:30,980
So we can, we should talk about that at the end as an idol to bring back to a featured meeting.

456
00:43:31,380 --> 00:43:32,100
That's what's going to be.

457
00:43:32,240 --> 00:43:32,940
Well, no, right?

458
00:43:33,040 --> 00:43:38,880
To clarify, when I ask to suspend the rules, if you read the bylaws, the consistency

459
00:43:38,880 --> 00:43:45,760
in the bylaws say technically the majority has the authority to adjust or amend their own

460
00:43:45,760 --> 00:43:54,660
meeting because it's the meeting of the commission, it's not the meeting of the city, it's not

461
00:43:54,660 --> 00:44:06,880
You can give the direction, you can suspend the rules, you can say, we're going to add this item in because it should have been added in because that was the request from the prior meeting, from what the city attorney is recommending, it's basically pushing it out another month, right?

462
00:44:07,280 --> 00:44:17,380
This was requested and we've already been leading in this direction, technically speaking, a mistake from the city staff whether intentional or not by default delays the will of the commission.

463
00:44:17,380 --> 00:44:22,040
You can suspend Rosenberg's rules of order, which is what you did when you reconsidered

464
00:44:22,040 --> 00:44:24,320
this item, but you cannot suspend the Brown Act.

465
00:44:24,800 --> 00:44:28,040
And the Brown Act says that you may only speak about things that are on the agenda.

466
00:44:28,600 --> 00:44:36,340
Well, so technically the violation would have been from the fact that there was already a publicly

467
00:44:36,340 --> 00:44:41,720
duly-noticed meeting that made those recommendations and they weren't put into the agenda, they weren't

468
00:44:41,720 --> 00:44:44,640
even considered, and they weren't even added into the minutes.

469
00:44:44,880 --> 00:44:46,040
So there's already a violation.

470
00:44:46,040 --> 00:44:47,560
That is not a brown act violation.

471
00:44:49,240 --> 00:44:51,880
Regardless, because I get it, brown act is about electives.

472
00:44:52,260 --> 00:44:53,500
It still is a violation.

473
00:44:53,720 --> 00:44:56,800
When the brown act is about appointed officials as well,

474
00:44:56,940 --> 00:44:58,280
so you are subject to the brown act.

475
00:44:58,560 --> 00:44:59,980
I think your expectations were...

476
00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:29,680
Amendment is what happened. It was in a violation of law, our rule, but just I would say it's at least an ethical violation because it was it was an ask and it was very so here's the thing city attorney, right? I'll do respect. You specifically stated and I would recommend everybody to pull up the meeting. You said, I don't know if you can do that commissioner. The reality is your quad, you know, I heard, you know, Miss Kelly mentioned were quasi judicial, right? So trying to restate our authority understood.

477
00:45:29,680 --> 00:45:36,020
I'm not asking for a policy vote on the municipal code what I'm asking for is a recommendation

478
00:45:36,020 --> 00:45:37,220
to send to the council.

479
00:45:37,600 --> 00:45:40,860
You said, I'm not sure if you can do that, I'll look into it and we will get back

480
00:45:40,860 --> 00:45:41,100
you.

481
00:45:41,780 --> 00:45:43,380
Nothing of that sort happened.

482
00:45:44,660 --> 00:45:51,100
So can I expect I did say that and I didn't intend to prepare that myself so I maybe there

483
00:45:51,100 --> 00:45:56,440
was the expectation was that it would be back at this meeting and maybe that's not what

484
00:45:56,440 --> 00:45:56,740
stuff.

485
00:45:56,740 --> 00:45:59,800
That's why that's why I stated that's what the commission had said.

486
00:45:59,800 --> 00:46:08,060
But again, this item is just considering the minutes and so there's an opportunity at the end of the meeting to buy consensus.

487
00:46:08,480 --> 00:46:08,600
Right.

488
00:46:09,040 --> 00:46:13,600
Recommend items for a future agenda, which is what that's what I was alluding to earlier.

489
00:46:13,880 --> 00:46:19,400
Because I think the items you mentioned, I think we're all would love answers to.

490
00:46:19,580 --> 00:46:25,160
So in this spirit of moving forward and acknowledging that I think, you know,

491
00:46:25,160 --> 00:46:28,480
We've gotten validation that yes, those things were stated.

492
00:46:29,020 --> 00:46:30,880
Yes, those are items that we want to look at.

493
00:46:31,200 --> 00:46:34,640
For now, procedurally, we will approve with the amendments.

494
00:46:35,000 --> 00:46:37,320
If we have a second, I'm not telling you all what to do,

495
00:46:37,400 --> 00:46:38,620
but if we have a first and second.

496
00:46:39,240 --> 00:46:42,540
And then at the end, let's all remember to bring this up

497
00:46:42,540 --> 00:46:43,620
as an action item.

498
00:46:45,160 --> 00:46:46,680
I don't know if I can.

499
00:46:47,040 --> 00:46:47,420
Yes, yes.

500
00:46:47,680 --> 00:46:51,700
And like, OK, just to ensure you, you know,

501
00:46:51,780 --> 00:46:53,080
the commissioner understands my intentions,

502
00:46:53,580 --> 00:46:56,860
I really do want to increase and encourage the integrity of the commission.

503
00:46:57,540 --> 00:47:01,900
When things like this happen that break down the will and ultimately the momentum that

504
00:47:01,900 --> 00:47:06,740
the commission is trying to create and solving these issues, then by default you're disintegrating

505
00:47:06,740 --> 00:47:07,280
the integrity.

506
00:47:07,420 --> 00:47:10,760
You have no reason to come if what you're saying has no value, right?

507
00:47:10,840 --> 00:47:11,700
In your disregard it.

508
00:47:12,060 --> 00:47:15,560
I'm not saying that's what happened, but that's definitely at least the visual, right?

509
00:47:15,680 --> 00:47:19,660
The optics is, is there was no regard, it's not even in the minutes, it's not even on

510
00:47:19,660 --> 00:47:24,620
agenda like by default and so you know we've had almost a month I've had zero

511
00:47:24,620 --> 00:47:29,340
communication city staff never reached out so I would imagine that would be a

512
00:47:29,340 --> 00:47:34,960
serious thing but if it's not serious then why am I here so we will address it

513
00:47:34,960 --> 00:47:39,660
then so first we have we have a motion on the table and that was I think it was

514
00:47:39,660 --> 00:47:45,340
uh what I said the motion was to approve the minutes with the amendments and then

515
00:47:45,340 --> 00:47:48,940
And I did read out five, and then there was one added.

516
00:47:50,060 --> 00:47:56,800
So if what I've read out is what the commission wants to put in the minutes, that's a motion

517
00:47:56,800 --> 00:47:57,320
on the floor.

518
00:47:57,520 --> 00:48:01,720
And then what will happen is staff will just revise them, they'll be approved, as amended.

519
00:48:02,540 --> 00:48:02,740
Okay.

520
00:48:03,620 --> 00:48:06,440
So to clarify again, that was seven, I said seven.

521
00:48:08,240 --> 00:48:10,300
I could read them again, and I could read them briefly.

522
00:48:10,300 --> 00:48:14,900
and addendum, know your rights. Number one, number two, zero fee preliminary

523
00:48:14,900 --> 00:48:20,060
re-process at the front end. Number three, three to five day required response

524
00:48:20,060 --> 00:48:26,220
times. Number four, early appeal process. Number five, triggered after that

525
00:48:26,220 --> 00:48:30,820
there's a trigger after two weeks of no response that early appeal. Number six,

526
00:48:30,940 --> 00:48:34,560
an organizational flow chart, right, with authority who responds to what

527
00:48:34,560 --> 00:48:38,180
position or what portion of the process. And number seven is required

528
00:48:38,180 --> 00:48:48,960
documentation throughout. Okay so we have a motion. Do we have a second? Second and all in

529
00:48:48,960 --> 00:48:58,920
favor? Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Abstention. Okay motion carries on that and then we will finish our

530
00:48:58,920 --> 00:49:04,520
agenda and then we'll come back in our commission reports. Okay thank you everyone.

531
00:49:05,420 --> 00:49:11,880
7.1 review of proposed phase 3 zoning ordinance amendment language of city of

532
00:49:11,880 --> 00:49:18,420
Hollister zoning ordinance and can we have the staff report please this item is

533
00:49:18,420 --> 00:49:24,160
a continuation of the overhaul of the zoning ordinance phase two was recently

534
00:49:24,160 --> 00:49:28,620
adopted by the city council and those amendments have taken effect and that was

535
00:49:28,620 --> 00:49:33,900
related to cleaning up the use tables some legislative requirements as well as

536
00:49:33,900 --> 00:49:37,860
create making sure there were definitions for each use listed in the zoning ordinance.

537
00:49:38,540 --> 00:49:43,980
Right now, the staff in the Planning Commission is currently reviewing Phase 3, which is the

538
00:49:43,980 --> 00:49:45,800
revision of permitting requirements.

539
00:49:46,880 --> 00:49:51,020
And this is the second study session that will be held regarding this phase.

540
00:49:53,200 --> 00:49:57,580
Tonight you are just looking at two chapters, site and architectural review and conditional

541
00:49:57,580 --> 00:49:58,140
use permits.

542
00:50:02,070 --> 00:50:12,130
Site and Architectural Review is for improvements that are typically done to the exterior of a property and there are some other exceptions that go along with that.

543
00:50:13,030 --> 00:50:18,990
Currently, the requirements for site and architectural reviews are found in several sections of the zoning ordinance.

544
00:50:19,510 --> 00:50:27,870
So, anyone reviewing the zoning ordinance would have to know where to look to find out if they required either an administrative permit review or a site and architectural review.

545
00:50:27,870 --> 00:50:33,530
right now the way the code works is that it splits exterior improvements into three different

546
00:50:33,530 --> 00:50:41,050
permit types. So there is administrative permit review over the counter and those are for very

547
00:50:41,050 --> 00:50:46,690
minor items and there is no noticing of those improvements. Then there's administrative permit

548
00:50:46,690 --> 00:50:54,170
review which the city currently uses as both a permit for a minor conditional use permit as well as a

549
00:50:54,170 --> 00:50:59,030
minor improvement to the exterior of the building, so it gets a little confusing for all involved.

550
00:51:00,150 --> 00:51:08,010
And again, even with administrative permit reviews, it's both in that section of the code as well as the requirements for permits are scattered throughout.

551
00:51:08,690 --> 00:51:16,330
So it is hard to determine even for staff where the appropriate section is and what does require a permit.

552
00:51:17,170 --> 00:51:22,910
In order to clean it up and make it easier on everyone, staff is proposing to eliminate

553
00:51:22,910 --> 00:51:24,910
the administrative permit review type.

554
00:51:25,690 --> 00:51:30,650
And then all exterior improvements would be within the SNA section and then all uses

555
00:51:30,650 --> 00:51:34,890
that are considered a conditional use permit would be in the condition use permit section.

556
00:51:35,230 --> 00:51:37,650
So there clearly can be clearly found.

557
00:51:38,590 --> 00:51:45,210
With the changes to the site and a protector review chapter, the current administrative permit

558
00:51:45,210 --> 00:51:48,850
review over the counter would change to administrative site and architectural review.

559
00:51:49,410 --> 00:51:54,250
And the way the new site and architectural review chapter has been designed is it lists

560
00:51:54,250 --> 00:51:56,470
everything that requires a permit under that permit type.

561
00:51:57,550 --> 00:52:02,830
So for administrative site and architectural reviews, these are considered very minor projects,

562
00:52:02,830 --> 00:52:09,590
but which the city needs to verify and review to make sure that they do meet the cone so

563
00:52:09,590 --> 00:52:13,010
that someone doesn't do a costly improvement and they have ejected in with the city and

564
00:52:13,010 --> 00:52:14,090
then they have to fix it.

565
00:52:14,090 --> 00:52:24,510
So these are typically reviewed in under five days most are done over the counter if not the same day but we do do these very quickly.

566
00:52:25,430 --> 00:52:34,890
Some of the examples for things that would qualify for an over the counter are the removal or addition of up to two doors and windows murals painted on a building.

567
00:52:34,890 --> 00:52:40,890
That's a mural that's art project, not a sign, that would be a different project.

568
00:52:41,570 --> 00:52:43,910
And then minor accessory structures.

569
00:52:44,270 --> 00:52:47,990
So those would all be wrapped into that very quick review where we're just checking some

570
00:52:47,990 --> 00:52:49,890
minimal things, and then we would approve it quickly.

571
00:52:50,570 --> 00:52:53,610
And there's no noticing, so it does take effect pretty quickly.

572
00:52:55,050 --> 00:53:00,390
Minor site and architectural review is what is currently listed in the zoning ordinance

573
00:53:00,390 --> 00:53:01,930
as administrative permit review.

574
00:53:03,410 --> 00:53:09,390
So these types of projects are considered to be a little bit more intensive and what

575
00:53:09,390 --> 00:53:15,490
they're proposing and what the process for that is, of course, they're going to apply.

576
00:53:15,730 --> 00:53:19,390
We do have a checklist online that lists everything that you need to submit for any project

577
00:53:19,890 --> 00:53:22,590
and we do route it to our development review committee.

578
00:53:23,330 --> 00:53:27,990
So everyone within the DRC will look at the project and either will comment on it or provide

579
00:53:27,990 --> 00:53:28,450
conditions.

580
00:53:29,290 --> 00:53:34,950
So some of the examples that you can see up there, we have a conversion to another use,

581
00:53:35,750 --> 00:53:41,350
conversion to another use, building might review it and say I reviewed the plans, I had these concerns,

582
00:53:41,670 --> 00:53:46,210
or I reviewed the plans and I have these conditions of approval. Same with fire, fire might say.

583
00:53:46,650 --> 00:53:50,550
I reviewed the plans, you have to add fire sprinklers, or whatever the case may be during their view.

584
00:53:51,690 --> 00:53:55,550
These do require noticing, so once they are complete, we do notice it,

585
00:53:55,550 --> 00:54:01,370
So everyone within 300 feet of the project gets notified of the upcoming project and they're invited to

586
00:54:01,370 --> 00:54:05,770
discuss it with staff if they chose to and then it is approved at staff level.

587
00:54:06,450 --> 00:54:09,750
And any any of these decisions can be appealed to the planning commission.

588
00:54:10,670 --> 00:54:16,250
One thing that staff is recommending is that housing developments with up to 10 units

589
00:54:16,250 --> 00:54:21,110
now be staff level review. That falls in line with the state seeking to

590
00:54:21,110 --> 00:54:27,770
to streamline residential developments within the city and 10 units is a lower number.

591
00:54:28,110 --> 00:54:40,790
We do see conversions and other minor projects where they do have more than what is allowed right now and it requires planning commission review, even if there was three units and that's a longer process and we'd like to streamline that process further.

592
00:54:44,100 --> 00:54:48,860
And then we would have major site and architectural review, which is the same as our site and architectural review now.

593
00:54:48,860 --> 00:54:55,280
you know, these are projects that have the potential to create citywide impacts or impacts on the neighborhood

594
00:54:55,860 --> 00:55:01,260
and it's appropriate to review them during a public hearing and notice public hearing so everyone has the opportunity to speak.

595
00:55:02,120 --> 00:55:12,980
Again, it's processed the same way that we would process the minor, certain architecture review where we do route it to the city's DRC and there are comments provided.

596
00:55:14,240 --> 00:55:17,400
And then once complete, we schedule it for planning commission.

597
00:55:17,400 --> 00:55:38,060
Examples of these types of projects are major facade remodels, so that would be Heritage Plaza, which is undergoing a massive overhaul that changes the entire look of that shopping center, that one before the planning commission, a new drive-through, drive-throughs can tend to have significant impacts depending on the layout and traffic, and then of course new structures.

598
00:55:39,160 --> 00:55:46,640
So any new commercial building, industrial building, housing development with 11 or more units would come before the planning commission.

599
00:55:46,640 --> 00:55:47,220
And

600
00:55:50,480 --> 00:56:09,100
then along with these changes, conditional use permits, we do have an existing chapter for conditional use permits, but as I mentioned, we would like to shift it so that there are now minor and major conditional use permits, minor conditional use permits would be the same as what we require for administrative permit reviews right now.

601
00:56:09,100 --> 00:56:16,140
And if you recall, in the use tables, we list what requires an APR and those are uses and

602
00:56:16,140 --> 00:56:19,360
then what requires a CUP and then those are uses from the planning commission.

603
00:56:20,720 --> 00:56:25,360
So what we are proposing is that then the use tables get modified again and the APR comes

604
00:56:25,360 --> 00:56:29,960
off and it becomes a minor conditional use permit, which is really the appropriate use type.

605
00:56:30,780 --> 00:56:34,860
Because what you are looking at with both a minor and then a regular conditional use permit

606
00:56:34,860 --> 00:56:39,380
is the use and determining what are the impacts on the surrounding area.

607
00:56:40,260 --> 00:56:49,920
Miner are, what the title implies, they are uses that maybe staff needs to look at it

608
00:56:49,920 --> 00:56:55,680
to make sure there's enough parking or to make sure that the minor nature of that business

609
00:56:55,680 --> 00:56:57,260
doesn't affect the surrounding area.

610
00:56:57,260 --> 00:57:04,120
Again, they will be noticed, again, similar to minor site and architecture reviews.

611
00:57:04,720 --> 00:57:10,080
And then, major are the uses which staff is concerned could have a major impact on the city.

612
00:57:10,560 --> 00:57:16,760
So a bar or nightclub would be one, there's alcohol sales, there's security concerns, there's lighting concerns.

613
00:57:17,100 --> 00:57:20,600
So that would go for the planning commission during a publicly noticed hearing.

614
00:57:20,600 --> 00:57:25,940
And again, it gives people the opportunity to speak before the planning commission, who would then issue the decision.

615
00:57:25,940 --> 00:57:30,340
for the minor, the notice goes out and then the director would make a decision on that.

616
00:57:34,280 --> 00:57:39,580
So based on tonight, if you have feedback from your questions, the draft chapters will

617
00:57:39,580 --> 00:57:41,520
get amended as recommended.

618
00:57:41,940 --> 00:57:48,260
We continue to move along and phase three is underway and so we have a few more study sessions.

619
00:57:48,820 --> 00:57:53,160
And then once we are all complete, they'll be wrapped together in one public hearing to then

620
00:57:53,160 --> 00:57:57,460
move on towards the City Council and then after that phase four, which is the biggest portion

621
00:57:57,460 --> 00:58:02,080
of our overall will begin. Thank you. Do we have questions from the commission?

622
00:58:02,780 --> 00:58:05,240
So yeah, well, will that look like the biggest overhaul?

623
00:58:05,520 --> 00:58:09,440
The biggest overhaul is the rest of the zoning ordinance. So landscaping, parking,

624
00:58:11,100 --> 00:58:13,960
so the phases are just the different portions of the code.

625
00:58:14,260 --> 00:58:20,000
Yes, so what we did because to overhaul an entire zoning ordinance at one time is a lot of work

626
00:58:20,480 --> 00:58:24,680
and we have the general plan going on at the same time as well as housing element. We've broken

627
00:58:24,680 --> 00:58:30,320
it up into bite-sized pieces so that we can clean up the code as we move along so that we're not waiting

628
00:58:30,320 --> 00:58:36,240
two, three, four years down the road. We know the code is problematic. There are inconsistencies

629
00:58:36,240 --> 00:58:44,400
within it which we've discussed. It is not user-friendly whatsoever. It is very hard to read. There are

630
00:58:44,960 --> 00:58:50,760
things we need to do to make it more usable for both staff and the public because not everyone does

631
00:58:50,760 --> 00:58:54,500
want to call staff and ask a question. Sometimes they do just want to look it up online.

632
00:58:55,400 --> 00:58:59,560
And so we want to make sure that they can understand what the laws of the city are.

633
00:59:00,020 --> 00:59:05,960
So that's our overall goal. And as we do pieces, it's to make sure to get the zoning ordinance

634
00:59:05,960 --> 00:59:13,900
in line with being more customer service-friendly and tightening up some of these permit requirements

635
00:59:13,900 --> 00:59:17,460
so it's not so confusing and really moving in a direction to help everyone out.

636
00:59:18,960 --> 00:59:47,160
With this phase and the permany requirements that will definitely help out staff as well as the public and then with the next sections it is the biggest section because we're talking again landscaping parking that will take quite a while but these are the ones that we have worked on so far are the most important that we've identified and I think just to add Commissioner Hernandez a couple months ago. I think I'm not sure if you were here yet but you might have been but I think that's when they started talking about these

637
00:59:47,160 --> 00:59:52,740
pieces and really validates what you were talking about earlier about the confusion and where

638
00:59:52,740 --> 00:59:58,840
do we go and who knows what and you know things are not don't make sense and then you know

639
00:59:58,840 --> 00:59:59,900
Why is it taking so long?

640
01:00:00,000 --> 01:00:29,940
All those things, I think really is, I think part of the work that you all are trying to clean up, right, that we, we all know this is happening. And so here, this is, I think, the effort. And I do appreciate that it's in chunks, because it's a lot of information to digest. If I gave you an entire zoning ordinance at once, you would say, what are you doing? Yeah. And just to add, and the phases are what staff is kind of identified as being able to repeal.

641
01:00:29,940 --> 01:00:37,200
a certain section and adopted the chunk at the same time, so phase one is ongoing as needed,

642
01:00:37,300 --> 01:00:41,660
but it was some state laws that we needed to update and implement into our code, which we've

643
01:00:41,660 --> 01:00:48,900
adopted a few chapters to use as V9 over the years. Phase two, I think we pulled out the use tables,

644
01:00:49,140 --> 01:00:53,520
was what we decided phase two was. I think it was originally three phases, it's become four.

645
01:00:54,140 --> 01:00:59,400
Once we get into four, it'll become more, but phase three is our procedures chapters, which

646
01:00:59,940 --> 01:01:15,780
We have to come to you with a few chapters at a time so we can really talk about them individually, but what'll happen is once we've come to you for all these study sessions for phase three, we will come back to you with a repeal in a place procedures ordinance that has all these chapters you've been reviewing over the months.

647
01:01:16,920 --> 01:01:20,100
How did you come to these three categories or are these three

648
01:01:20,100 --> 01:01:22,640
perfect for tonight?

649
01:01:23,020 --> 01:01:31,760
Yeah, so if you recall the last meeting we went over I think specific plans, review

650
01:01:31,760 --> 01:01:33,380
procedures, there's a couple others.

651
01:01:33,700 --> 01:01:39,980
So what we did was we took the existing 17.24 and the permit requirements that are jammed

652
01:01:39,980 --> 01:01:44,580
into there and we've essentially pulled it out, so now each one has its own chapter with

653
01:01:44,580 --> 01:01:48,780
the title can be easily seen in the table of contents on the zoning ordinance and we're

654
01:01:48,780 --> 01:01:53,020
just going piece by piece. The two that you're seeing tonight, we just pulled together,

655
01:01:53,380 --> 01:02:00,640
we have others drafted. The two that we pulled tonight are essentially the ones that we will

656
01:02:00,640 --> 01:02:05,920
use the most. And so it requires, we wanted an in-depth review of these two that are really

657
01:02:05,920 --> 01:02:11,160
the permitting chapters. What requires a permit for this city so that you can see that. And

658
01:02:11,160 --> 01:02:12,580
because it is such a change going from,

659
01:02:13,020 --> 01:02:15,060
even though it's just really a title,

660
01:02:15,200 --> 01:02:17,300
but we're going from administrative permit reviews,

661
01:02:17,300 --> 01:02:20,040
which are now function as a conditional use permit,

662
01:02:20,340 --> 01:02:21,680
or an exterior improvement,

663
01:02:22,060 --> 01:02:23,680
and we're changing it to just site

664
01:02:23,680 --> 01:02:25,620
and architectural review and conditional use permit right now.

665
01:02:26,520 --> 01:02:28,360
But also the change of,

666
01:02:28,540 --> 01:02:30,760
so it's not just the names, the titles, right?

667
01:02:30,780 --> 01:02:35,160
But also the, like the specifics of the housing development.

668
01:02:35,460 --> 01:02:37,260
So there are a few changes in there

669
01:02:37,260 --> 01:02:38,540
where we're trying to streamline review

670
01:02:38,540 --> 01:02:40,060
to make it faster for people, right?

671
01:02:40,060 --> 01:02:47,660
So there is the change to 10, and under would be staff level review for residential dwellings.

672
01:02:47,660 --> 01:02:56,980
We're also recommending that additions that are not visible from the public right of way to commercial buildings be allowed to be staff level because they're not going to be seen.

673
01:02:57,300 --> 01:03:08,440
You'll never see it. There really is no impact other than site circulation and then the biggest change though is instead of putting the requirements for permits.

674
01:03:09,500 --> 01:03:18,700
In every chapter in that zoning ordinance, they're now in one list within within the site and architecture review chapter, which honestly will make it easier for everyone.

675
01:03:20,220 --> 01:03:29,500
Yeah, so from the design review perspective, what we're proposing in this craft shopper is really that change to have the three different levels of site and architecture review.

676
01:03:30,120 --> 01:03:36,620
And yeah, that the 10 units are less and small commercial projects is is a big change, but that is staff's recommendation.

677
01:03:36,620 --> 01:03:40,200
and that's what we're here to get your feedback on.

678
01:03:40,600 --> 01:03:43,600
But we're recommending to both be in line with streamlining

679
01:03:43,600 --> 01:03:45,680
and state laws as they continue to change.

680
01:03:45,860 --> 01:03:47,080
These things are coming down the pipeline.

681
01:03:47,140 --> 01:03:49,820
We might get forced to these things, so get ahead of it

682
01:03:49,820 --> 01:03:51,040
and get it the way that we want it.

683
01:03:51,340 --> 01:03:52,720
But also we just think of staff.

684
01:03:53,140 --> 01:03:56,960
We see a lot of these minor projects get hung up in this long process

685
01:03:56,960 --> 01:04:00,700
when if we implement through phase four

686
01:04:00,700 --> 01:04:02,980
through the design review process of the code

687
01:04:02,980 --> 01:04:06,040
and implementing codes that are satisfying to the council

688
01:04:06,040 --> 01:04:09,780
and commission for landscaping and parking and those types of things, staff can just

689
01:04:10,360 --> 01:04:14,020
meet the code, yet meet the code on these smaller projects, and the ultimate goal would

690
01:04:14,020 --> 01:04:15,900
be to facilitate these things in the future.

691
01:04:17,960 --> 01:04:23,900
What is the biggest change that you see on these zoning amendments?

692
01:04:27,420 --> 01:04:34,380
Right now, based on where we're at, let's say right now, is mostly a function of formatting

693
01:04:34,380 --> 01:04:37,380
at this point and cleaning up the language.

694
01:04:37,380 --> 01:04:42,520
within site with this too that you're looking at tonight, the biggest change

695
01:04:42,520 --> 01:04:47,920
really is changing what we're calling a permit to another name, which you know

696
01:04:47,920 --> 01:04:52,940
just sounds scary but it is just moving it to the appropriate permit type. And

697
01:04:52,940 --> 01:04:58,680
then within these uses as we've listed there are two different items that we're

698
01:04:58,680 --> 01:05:04,280
recommending get downgraded in their review level. So like the ten and under

699
01:05:04,280 --> 01:05:11,000
for residential dwellings and the smaller additions to commercial buildings and those will speed up the process for them.

700
01:05:11,980 --> 01:05:16,600
Minor facade or models would still remain at staff. We don't tend to have too many of them.

701
01:05:16,880 --> 01:05:23,500
There's a few here and there. Mostly what we see is a major like Heritage Plaza. They change the entire design of that.

702
01:05:23,800 --> 01:05:32,300
And then changing a door out in a window out. It's basically over the counter and then allowing for that over the counter permit type

703
01:05:32,300 --> 01:05:34,480
but also allow for minor modifications

704
01:05:34,480 --> 01:05:38,160
that don't impact anyone to an approved plan set.

705
01:05:38,580 --> 01:05:40,140
So, I don't know, at the back of the building,

706
01:05:40,140 --> 01:05:42,520
they have to change out a roll-up door to a regular door.

707
01:05:42,640 --> 01:05:43,860
They can just do the over-the-counter

708
01:05:43,860 --> 01:05:45,100
and be done quickly,

709
01:05:45,300 --> 01:05:47,820
rather than requiring a full-scale review.

710
01:05:48,320 --> 01:05:52,340
Yeah, right now for commercial changes

711
01:05:52,860 --> 01:05:54,800
for moving doors and windows.

712
01:05:55,500 --> 01:05:58,580
Up to two is allowed at staff level

713
01:05:58,580 --> 01:06:00,360
through that administrative permit review process,

714
01:06:00,360 --> 01:06:07,060
which is this kind of mid-level process whereas anything else is full site

715
01:06:07,060 --> 01:06:11,060
architectural reveal. What we're proposing is kind of a shift of both of those

716
01:06:11,060 --> 01:06:16,760
down where really minor changes like relocating up to two doors or windows is

717
01:06:16,760 --> 01:06:19,740
going to be downgraded to that administrative site architectural

718
01:06:19,740 --> 01:06:26,460
reveal and then some of those major what's major now but it might be relocating

719
01:06:26,460 --> 01:06:31,840
five windows, you know, just like minor changes to maybe they're stuck going

720
01:06:31,840 --> 01:06:36,020
a commercial building. Those types of things, we're proposing get downgraded

721
01:06:36,020 --> 01:06:41,780
to that mid-level review. There's nothing that we're proposing where the

722
01:06:41,780 --> 01:06:48,760
review increases, let's say. We're trying to make it easier for everyone to get

723
01:06:48,760 --> 01:06:52,360
through the process yet through it quickly and then those things that are really

724
01:06:52,360 --> 01:06:55,480
important to the community. So a new residential subdivision which you'd have to

725
01:06:55,480 --> 01:07:02,400
see anyways because of the map, or a 350 unit apartment complex still goes to the planning

726
01:07:02,400 --> 01:07:06,220
commission, which is the appropriate body. But for these minor things, it makes sense

727
01:07:06,220 --> 01:07:06,680
to do that.

728
01:07:07,240 --> 01:07:11,200
So, and that's part of the law changes. It's more of ministerial.

729
01:07:12,040 --> 01:07:16,660
No. So, the way that the state of California is moving towards residential developments

730
01:07:16,660 --> 01:07:23,560
is that residential projects are becoming more, there is not a lot of say that you have.

731
01:07:23,560 --> 01:07:35,400
And so what we're seeing is the state is requiring streamline review of certain residential projects and for 10 units and less those are really very minor within the city.

732
01:07:35,840 --> 01:07:46,380
I mean, we're used to looking at subdivisions that are significantly higher. So with 10 or less, we are recommending that that be more at the staff level.

733
01:07:46,380 --> 01:07:51,900
Now if there is a map associated with that so everyone was nine units and there is a tentative map

734
01:07:51,900 --> 01:07:56,720
That has to go to planning commission that would not be within our purview and that comes from the state

735
01:07:56,720 --> 01:07:57,900
but in general

736
01:07:59,200 --> 01:08:03,700
I'm not sure if you understood what I was saying in general like I ministerial meaning

737
01:08:04,580 --> 01:08:10,560
We can't technically vote on it because state law dictates and therefore it trumps any voice that we have yeah

738
01:08:10,560 --> 01:08:14,380
So in essence, we have less and less local control

739
01:08:15,060 --> 01:08:17,460
and all I'm trying to point to the reality, right?

740
01:08:17,800 --> 01:08:20,580
And for the sake of small town,

741
01:08:21,040 --> 01:08:23,960
San Benito County, the city of Hollister, very rural,

742
01:08:25,340 --> 01:08:28,820
we already lose a lot of voice, right?

743
01:08:29,460 --> 01:08:30,880
Representative Lee, and if you think about the reality

744
01:08:30,880 --> 01:08:34,160
of what that means with the loss of input

745
01:08:34,160 --> 01:08:37,140
when it comes to the housing element in the general plan,

746
01:08:37,640 --> 01:08:41,020
then you're by default, have no choice if urbanization

747
01:08:41,020 --> 01:08:44,260
and becomes a defacto, you're forced into it.

748
01:08:45,800 --> 01:08:47,960
And that, in and of itself, I would argue is a problem

749
01:08:47,960 --> 01:08:49,920
that most community members don't understand

750
01:08:49,920 --> 01:08:50,720
or don't know about.

751
01:08:52,580 --> 01:08:56,920
And I would like to see, you know,

752
01:08:56,980 --> 01:08:58,620
with housing developments up to 10 units,

753
01:08:59,040 --> 01:08:59,880
so it sounds like it's like,

754
01:09:02,000 --> 01:09:06,020
how long, what's the turnaround time for something like that,

755
01:09:06,140 --> 01:09:06,840
because that sounds like.

756
01:09:06,840 --> 01:09:16,260
So any residential development, any residential development, so it's tentative map and the apartment complex, it doesn't matter any residential development.

757
01:09:16,500 --> 01:09:24,480
The state requires city staff to review the application and to provide comments within 30 days.

758
01:09:25,060 --> 01:09:28,520
If we do not, the application is deemed complete and it moves forward.

759
01:09:29,220 --> 01:09:38,040
I would like to also kind of set those same state standards, to also something feasible, of course, for commercial.

760
01:09:38,680 --> 01:09:42,900
So we actually do, as just a matter of role, we follow the 30 days.

761
01:09:43,300 --> 01:09:43,540
Awesome.

762
01:09:43,700 --> 01:09:45,520
Yeah, we follow 30 days on everything.

763
01:09:45,700 --> 01:09:53,320
It's easier for not only the planning staff, it's easier for our development review committee to know that they're getting a two week review that meets into planning.

764
01:09:53,320 --> 01:10:03,220
So just for every application that planning is processing, we're following a 30-day review period on a completeness schedule commercial or residential, it's easier than tracking two different.

765
01:10:03,420 --> 01:10:08,960
Yes, it's just easier to follow the 30 days and as a rule of practice, we follow that. I know not all cities do.

766
01:10:10,160 --> 01:10:19,960
For example, I have an application and right now it came in, it got assigned to me within a couple days and it got routed for two week review because that allows.

767
01:10:19,960 --> 01:10:22,260
in case anyone's a little tardy on their comments,

768
01:10:22,760 --> 01:10:24,040
and then I have to put them all together

769
01:10:24,040 --> 01:10:27,580
in one clear and concise letter, and then it gets to them.

770
01:10:27,740 --> 01:10:31,020
And we almost always exceed that 30 days,

771
01:10:31,020 --> 01:10:32,800
because the one thing you don't want to do as a planner

772
01:10:33,280 --> 01:10:34,920
is to miss that 30-day window,

773
01:10:35,060 --> 01:10:37,140
because then especially for residential projects,

774
01:10:37,660 --> 01:10:39,360
it's now complete, there is nothing you can say.

775
01:10:39,540 --> 01:10:39,700
Right.

776
01:10:40,780 --> 01:10:43,120
I mean, at the end of the day, even if you did say something

777
01:10:43,120 --> 01:10:46,720
for housing development, you do say something,

778
01:10:47,420 --> 01:10:49,660
what's the next remedy at that point anyway?

779
01:10:49,660 --> 01:11:19,540
So for like a housing development, let's say they submitted a map and there's no utility plans in there and so we're not sure how are the lines working, how do the streets work, how does this work together if I don't ask for it within that first 30 days and it has to be everything I can't ask for three items and then pick a new three items on the second review and so as planners it's just easier to follow those rules for every project because it allows for consistency and you're not constantly

780
01:11:19,540 --> 01:11:22,680
thinking, well, what is this project? What is the deadline? What do I have to tell

781
01:11:22,680 --> 01:11:27,220
them? And also for customer service, they're going to want to know I need a floor

782
01:11:27,220 --> 01:11:31,800
plan. I need a, you know, whatever it is, an elevation of the rear. So we give it

783
01:11:31,800 --> 01:11:38,260
to them all at once. I will say that sometimes, pretend they forget to give us a

784
01:11:38,260 --> 01:11:41,340
floor plan and you say, I need the floor plan and the floor plan has to have, you

785
01:11:41,340 --> 01:11:45,900
know, the square footage and you still, you know, dimension this room and we

786
01:11:45,900 --> 01:11:48,960
will get a recent middle and it'll be a floor plan and they haven't given us the

787
01:11:48,960 --> 01:11:52,320
dimensions, and they haven't given us the square footage, so it's another incomplete

788
01:11:52,320 --> 01:11:53,440
because they don't follow the list.

789
01:11:53,860 --> 01:11:56,780
But that is why we give them a list, so they can literally check it off and then turn

790
01:11:56,780 --> 01:11:57,040
it in.

791
01:11:57,260 --> 01:12:03,260
What's the worst case scenario if an applicant turns something in and they can have a utility

792
01:12:03,260 --> 01:12:03,700
plan?

793
01:12:04,900 --> 01:12:06,180
What happens in that?

794
01:12:06,680 --> 01:12:11,020
It depends on the type of project, so this is the situation for any project.

795
01:12:11,760 --> 01:12:16,920
Some things that they forget to submit can be conditioned and some they just can't because

796
01:12:16,920 --> 01:12:19,320
is we need to look at it for whatever reason.

797
01:12:20,040 --> 01:12:22,860
So for example, if I have a new commercial building

798
01:12:22,860 --> 01:12:25,680
coming in and they don't show the location

799
01:12:25,680 --> 01:12:29,220
of the trash enclosure, then it's going to be incomplete

800
01:12:29,220 --> 01:12:30,240
that you need to show it.

801
01:12:30,360 --> 01:12:31,880
And the reason that we can't condition that one

802
01:12:31,880 --> 01:12:32,780
is for several reasons.

803
01:12:32,980 --> 01:12:35,920
One, we need to make sure that it meets the size requirements

804
01:12:35,920 --> 01:12:37,020
for ecology for pickup.

805
01:12:37,580 --> 01:12:40,480
Two, we wanna make sure that wherever that trash enclosure

806
01:12:40,480 --> 01:12:44,300
is going, that it can actually be serviced.

807
01:12:44,300 --> 01:12:50,420
and three does that impact circulation at all because what we have seen is when it goes forward,

808
01:12:51,260 --> 01:12:56,980
the site then has to get changed and the way the code works is they have to come back to

809
01:12:56,980 --> 01:13:01,260
planning commission if they're messing with the site and changing that circulation. So that to

810
01:13:01,260 --> 01:13:06,940
them is a disadvantage to move forward. If there is something that we have asked for and we feel like

811
01:13:06,940 --> 01:13:14,120
it could be pushed to a later date, we make it a condition of approval. So I think in some cases

812
01:13:14,300 --> 01:13:18,500
is the landscape plan was incorrect and didn't have the proper tree sizes, so there's

813
01:13:18,500 --> 01:13:20,200
a condition of approval that says you're going to change it.

814
01:13:20,240 --> 01:13:24,640
Just to interrupt, what I'm trying to get at is, because of you guys are under this immense

815
01:13:24,640 --> 01:13:29,300
pressure, if you get, you know, I get it, you guys are busy, there's a lot of stuff.

816
01:13:30,260 --> 01:13:36,720
And there's no, it doesn't meet the, what do they call those trees?

817
01:13:36,940 --> 01:13:37,720
What do they call that?

818
01:13:37,900 --> 01:13:42,940
There's a tree ordinance or there's a, whatever ordinance you get what I'm getting at, there's

819
01:13:42,940 --> 01:13:45,180
is not enough? What do they call that, trees?

820
01:13:45,380 --> 01:13:46,260
Enough, street trees?

821
01:13:46,700 --> 01:13:48,200
I think I understand a question.

822
01:13:48,580 --> 01:13:51,640
So if we miss the 38-Eye and it's deemed complete

823
01:13:51,640 --> 01:13:54,920
or whatever it might have been, then what happened

824
01:13:54,920 --> 01:13:56,640
is we'd move it through the process.

825
01:13:56,880 --> 01:13:58,200
So if it was something that was coming to the commission,

826
01:13:58,420 --> 01:14:00,040
then we'd move through the process of bringing it forward

827
01:14:00,040 --> 01:14:00,740
to the commission.

828
01:14:01,540 --> 01:14:05,560
And then we would talk about whether it means the code or not.

829
01:14:06,140 --> 01:14:09,400
But if it was a commercial, you'd have a lot more discretion

830
01:14:09,400 --> 01:14:11,440
on whether you could deny a commercial project

831
01:14:11,440 --> 01:14:15,200
to have them revise it to meet the code, but if it was something that was deemed complete

832
01:14:15,200 --> 01:14:19,980
and is a housing project, if the standard that it's not meeting isn't objective and even

833
01:14:19,980 --> 01:14:22,680
then you're going to have a lot less say.

834
01:14:22,960 --> 01:14:28,580
So staff is really diligent about hitting that 30-day deadline, but also making sure we're

835
01:14:28,580 --> 01:14:34,940
thorough in those first 30 days to make sure we're not having incomplete applications so that

836
01:14:34,940 --> 01:14:38,840
we can make sure we thoroughly are able to review the concept against code.

837
01:14:38,840 --> 01:14:46,340
Okay, but it would come forward and then there would be a potential discussion about whether it's code or not it sounds like and it's my assumption that

838
01:14:47,040 --> 01:14:52,700
De facto you're gonna end up having a priority of residential because of the strict requirements

839
01:14:53,240 --> 01:14:59,800
Over commercial and then the only other reason why I still don't understand on the commercial side because if you meet your

840
01:15:00,000 --> 01:15:29,340
We're applying the same standards. Why is there so much issues on the commercial side? And I really don't hear issues on the housing side. So I think in this city especially most of what the planning commission looking at is just a subdivision map and engineers can crank those out and those standards are in the subdivision map back in the subdivision ordinance. And then they have to meet development standards and those are pretty straightforward, right? There's not much they have to do there. And then that's it. They don't have to show us the design, they don't show us the landscaping plan.

841
01:15:29,340 --> 01:15:29,960
and nothing.

842
01:15:30,480 --> 01:15:33,260
So that is essentially for those types of projects

843
01:15:33,760 --> 01:15:36,280
easier to get through to plan a commission.

844
01:15:37,000 --> 01:15:40,180
And most of the engineers that are doing that,

845
01:15:40,460 --> 01:15:41,860
they're doing tons and tons and tons,

846
01:15:41,860 --> 01:15:42,740
they know how that works.

847
01:15:43,960 --> 01:15:46,640
Most map-back requirements are statewide.

848
01:15:48,060 --> 01:15:50,480
With other sorts of projects that we see,

849
01:15:50,800 --> 01:15:52,520
what we are running into, I think,

850
01:15:52,520 --> 01:15:54,620
part of the confusion may be that

851
01:15:55,580 --> 01:16:11,560
When people are trying to modify an exterior building, there are different things that come into play, and also if you're modifying this site and it is an older site, there are definitely other extended circumstances that come into play.

852
01:16:11,740 --> 01:16:17,280
So if I'm trying to stick a trash enclosure in the middle of an alley, that's not your alley we're going to make a comment.

853
01:16:17,280 --> 01:16:32,300
If I need to put in a trash enclosure and I'm trying to stick it in a fire lane, you are going to get a comment and I think that's the other part is our code is very hard to read and that's what we're trying to fix to make it easier for everyone.

854
01:16:32,900 --> 01:16:39,520
Most commercial projects that I have had with the exception of Heritage Plaza that did take a while do do move through very quickly.

855
01:16:40,080 --> 01:16:44,000
Heritage Plaza took quite a while because there was two problems.

856
01:16:44,000 --> 01:16:49,340
one that applicant wasn't responsive and it took the designer a while to modify the plans

857
01:16:49,340 --> 01:16:54,640
and two they could not figure out where to place their trash enclosure and that helped them up as well.

858
01:16:55,600 --> 01:17:01,980
Yeah we have a lot of sites in the city especially our commercial sites, existing commercial sites

859
01:17:01,980 --> 01:17:09,640
that are constrained by the fact that they were built so long ago that they don't meet the code now

860
01:17:09,640 --> 01:17:38,820
So when you want to do an upgrade, it's difficult because you have to bring the site into compliance and so it's a challenge with parking and landscaping and trash enclosures is a difficult one to so we have a lot of issues with existing sites and trying to make them work into the changes and that happens a lot with our commercial and then we don't see too many multifamily residential, but they tend to take a while as well and the process to get through comments.

861
01:17:38,820 --> 01:17:48,080
Well, and I would agree with that and I mean even to be consistent with that what you know the director Kellyanne mentioned basically.

862
01:17:48,540 --> 01:18:04,960
I mean I've heard of plenty of issues that there's if there's any discretion to address the issue it's on the side of the planning not on the business right so they're they're they're lack of understanding or maybe.

863
01:18:05,900 --> 01:18:09,640
the fact that meeting it to code and trying to bring it up, right?

864
01:18:09,940 --> 01:18:13,380
Like, I've noticed, and I've had so many people tell me, like,

865
01:18:14,060 --> 01:18:16,640
how you ask the question is the most important.

866
01:18:16,840 --> 01:18:18,180
Because if you ask the wrong way,

867
01:18:18,420 --> 01:18:20,360
they're going to trigger all these requirements,

868
01:18:20,840 --> 01:18:23,560
and all of a sudden you're in a ton of money, right?

869
01:18:23,780 --> 01:18:26,080
And it's, and because there's discretion,

870
01:18:27,660 --> 01:18:33,180
technically, there's less, it becomes easy to downgrade

871
01:18:33,180 --> 01:18:39,080
priority-wise that project, whereas if it's cut and paste or whatever on the

872
01:18:39,080 --> 01:18:43,760
residential side, it's a lot easier for that to become de facto, like it's

873
01:18:43,760 --> 01:18:47,440
gonna end up getting to basically push through, right? Maybe because it's easy to

874
01:18:47,440 --> 01:18:51,580
comply, whatever that means, it just sounds like there really is no strong

875
01:18:51,580 --> 01:18:56,640
support on the commercial end, right? Because the front end of it, and I mean I'm

876
01:18:56,640 --> 01:19:01,500
just stating specifically, and I'm getting, I'm seeing the head disagreeing with me,

877
01:19:02,340 --> 01:19:06,820
I'm just, I'm seeing there's so many different circumstances that I've gotten calls on scenarios

878
01:19:06,820 --> 01:19:12,040
where literally it's like I'm trying to reach out and I'm getting no response or I, you

879
01:19:12,040 --> 01:19:16,980
know, I'm, I'm, they're saying that I abandoned the project and I'm, here's my email, how

880
01:19:16,980 --> 01:19:17,560
did I abandon?

881
01:19:17,700 --> 01:19:22,560
I'm responding and I'm, you know, so there's all these just nuanced issues, it's just hard

882
01:19:22,560 --> 01:19:23,600
to not imagine, right?

883
01:19:24,520 --> 01:19:26,560
Unless all these people are liars, they're calling me.

884
01:19:26,560 --> 01:19:29,560
But I think it's a specific example, it's hard to say,

885
01:19:29,760 --> 01:19:31,700
because in the planning process,

886
01:19:31,700 --> 01:19:32,700
it's not just planning, right?

887
01:19:32,920 --> 01:19:35,020
Engineering's involved, players involved,

888
01:19:35,480 --> 01:19:39,120
the college is involved, building a new airport.

889
01:19:40,300 --> 01:19:42,020
I think the best example is the one

890
01:19:42,020 --> 01:19:44,180
that we ended up basically troubleshooting

891
01:19:44,180 --> 01:19:46,100
ultimately on the dius right here,

892
01:19:46,660 --> 01:19:49,420
where that feedlot came forward

893
01:19:49,420 --> 01:19:52,040
and we had to ask a ton of questions that we dug in.

894
01:19:52,480 --> 01:19:55,300
And all we asked was, oh, so you actually,

895
01:19:55,300 --> 01:20:01,700
as long as you don't change the ground and the material then as long as you leave it

896
01:20:01,700 --> 01:20:07,840
undisturbed and if there's any grating that that's the same material then there's no violation

897
01:20:07,840 --> 01:20:13,220
and the engineer said no there's no violation okay so if we amended it to include do not change

898
01:20:13,220 --> 01:20:20,620
the material then then it'll pass yes it'll pass we voted and we agreed and project moved forward

899
01:20:20,620 --> 01:20:23,740
So, we had the troubleshoot in the fall of that issue.

900
01:20:23,960 --> 01:20:26,160
I do want to get us planning issues.

901
01:20:26,520 --> 01:20:28,840
So, the hard thing I think that is hard to understand with

902
01:20:28,840 --> 01:20:32,440
planning review is that we do involve all the departments

903
01:20:32,440 --> 01:20:35,320
because what we don't want to have happen is you come with

904
01:20:35,320 --> 01:20:37,140
your beautiful commercial building to planning commission

905
01:20:37,140 --> 01:20:39,920
and you approve it and then it goes to engineering

906
01:20:39,920 --> 01:20:41,520
for grading and improvement plans and they say

907
01:20:41,520 --> 01:20:42,600
absolutely not redesign.

908
01:20:43,460 --> 01:20:44,780
Nobody wants to go through that.

909
01:20:44,880 --> 01:20:47,180
That is a very expensive mistake.

910
01:20:47,660 --> 01:20:53,820
So we involve departments because different departments are looking at different things.

911
01:20:54,080 --> 01:21:01,400
Fire is looking from a life safety standpoint, engineering is looking at their requirements of such as that project.

912
01:21:01,660 --> 01:21:03,980
And then planning is looking at what does the zoning ordinance say.

913
01:21:04,460 --> 01:21:09,060
So if the zoning ordinance says, I don't know, it has to be 10 feet from the property line.

914
01:21:09,200 --> 01:21:10,880
It has to be 10 feet from the property line.

915
01:21:11,000 --> 01:21:16,360
If the zoning ordinance says you will have a tree every 30 feet on center, you have to have a tree every 30 feet on center.

916
01:21:16,360 --> 01:21:18,260
And so that is what planning sticks to.

917
01:21:18,440 --> 01:21:20,280
We are sticking to the code.

918
01:21:21,200 --> 01:21:23,320
And with commercial, there's a little bit of leeway

919
01:21:23,320 --> 01:21:26,220
with design, but we usually take it to you

920
01:21:26,220 --> 01:21:26,920
for your opinion.

921
01:21:28,240 --> 01:21:30,460
But other departments have their own things

922
01:21:30,460 --> 01:21:31,360
that they're looking at.

923
01:21:31,380 --> 01:21:33,000
Yeah, I agree.

924
01:21:33,680 --> 01:21:35,260
That seems very challenging.

925
01:21:35,420 --> 01:21:36,860
Who is leaving the project ultimately?

926
01:21:37,080 --> 01:21:38,100
Is there so many departments on our own?

927
01:21:38,120 --> 01:21:39,840
Ultimately, the planner leads the project,

928
01:21:39,840 --> 01:21:42,440
because they're bringing it either at the planning stage.

929
01:21:42,700 --> 01:21:45,140
The planner leads the project and the planning stage.

930
01:21:45,140 --> 01:21:51,180
Yeah, so if a department tells me that that is their requirement, then that's the requirement

931
01:21:51,180 --> 01:21:55,660
I will alert the applicant that that is the requirement and they are free to call engineering

932
01:21:55,660 --> 01:21:59,680
They get if they get a letter and pretend they're complete. We have no issues

933
01:21:59,680 --> 01:22:04,580
Obviously, they're gonna get a notice for me seeing their complete, but if they get a letter from staff

934
01:22:05,180 --> 01:22:11,320
That letter says these are the the comments that we've received and I'm listing them out for you

935
01:22:11,320 --> 01:22:17,860
And these are the departments that made that comment and then you can contact them and that department may then later call me and say I

936
01:22:17,860 --> 01:22:26,080
Remove said comment and I'll you know make a note of it and said comment is removed and that's how that process works and sometimes they say take it to the

937
01:22:26,080 --> 01:22:35,340
Commission and recommend denial because of the parking and then we bring it to you so yeah, I mean it's it's on a whole separate conversation.

938
01:22:35,340 --> 01:22:48,340
There literally was, I'm pretty positive, Director Kelly had mentioned, literally that technically speaking it's almost like secret Santa because the left doesn't, you know, the one hand doesn't talk to the other hand.

939
01:22:48,860 --> 01:22:51,320
Like, because you had what code enforcement having an issue.

940
01:22:51,500 --> 01:22:51,700
Yes.

941
01:22:52,520 --> 01:22:55,320
And they're like, I'm doing what the plan is telling me.

942
01:22:55,420 --> 01:22:59,280
I'm actually following the rules, but I'm getting fined and now I have $3,000 in fines.

943
01:22:59,280 --> 01:23:01,980
And they're like, well, that's not our department, so it's your problem kind of thing.

944
01:23:01,980 --> 01:23:07,660
And it's like at a certain point like it just comes to a head right the project by itself blows up because there is no

945
01:23:08,240 --> 01:23:09,960
continuity that I know there's no communication

946
01:23:10,780 --> 01:23:16,140
And ultimately yeah, it's a lot of frustration. I just want to add on that. I'm not an elected official

947
01:23:16,140 --> 01:23:20,780
But I think so I can't give direction to you guys, but I think what I

948
01:23:23,680 --> 01:23:27,080
Don't want to speak for the council, but I can always speak for myself

949
01:23:27,080 --> 01:23:31,120
I think what we're trying to get at because I get it housing is more modular correct

950
01:23:31,120 --> 01:23:35,180
It's new developments are easier because they're modular.

951
01:23:35,480 --> 01:23:37,380
In other words, it's just kind of one go.

952
01:23:37,920 --> 01:23:38,780
These guys are really good.

953
01:23:38,940 --> 01:23:39,620
It can't be homes.

954
01:23:39,760 --> 01:23:41,100
They build thousands of these things.

955
01:23:41,180 --> 01:23:41,940
They're modular.

956
01:23:42,360 --> 01:23:43,260
So for you guys.

957
01:23:43,380 --> 01:23:45,620
Is that the ones I made big errors over it?

958
01:23:46,160 --> 01:23:47,920
Cross-room, can I ask a little bit?

959
01:23:49,220 --> 01:23:50,320
Which one was that one?

960
01:23:51,260 --> 01:23:51,960
Type-room homes.

961
01:23:52,280 --> 01:23:54,200
But you understand, they're more modular.

962
01:23:54,520 --> 01:23:55,780
It's kind of one-in-go.

963
01:23:56,380 --> 01:23:57,700
They're professionals about it.

964
01:23:57,900 --> 01:24:00,420
When you have a small business, it's

965
01:24:00,420 --> 01:24:07,200
It's going to be more, okay, like as Peter's point, it almost seems like, like an old

966
01:24:07,200 --> 01:24:11,640
supervisor once said, sometimes it's easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission.

967
01:24:12,580 --> 01:24:18,780
And I'm not, that's not advice, you know, but because once you do something, you open this

968
01:24:18,780 --> 01:24:22,680
Pandora's box because you're not up to code for here, you're not up to code to here, you

969
01:24:22,680 --> 01:24:27,520
have to do these modifications, you need a ramp, whatever it may be, but it sounds like

970
01:24:27,520 --> 01:24:35,840
Newer developments are going to be inherently easier for the planning department engineering.

971
01:24:36,820 --> 01:24:44,300
It depends. I mean obviously residential subdivision, again, we're working with a formula.

972
01:24:45,420 --> 01:24:54,480
A ground up commercial project, right, on vacant land, can still have many issues from

973
01:24:54,480 --> 01:24:58,320
the first get go because sometimes the circulation does not work.

974
01:24:59,040 --> 01:25:03,980
And just because they've had an expert design it doesn't mean it's going to work in the

975
01:25:03,980 --> 01:25:07,100
context of the city and so they'll get comments on that.

976
01:25:07,500 --> 01:25:12,080
It is harder when you're in older business and you want to do anything to your property

977
01:25:12,080 --> 01:25:23,940
because if I am a tenant, and I upgrade the inside of my building, which for the most part that doesn't involve planning, but you have to come to current building code and there's nothing we can do. That's a state regulation.

978
01:25:25,160 --> 01:25:41,900
And I think just to carry on, I can't speak for the planning, I'm not planning the commission or the city council, but I think what we're trying to say is there was an applicant that came in and we troubleshoot it.

979
01:25:41,900 --> 01:25:47,600
it. All they had to do was one minor adjustment and everything went away. And I think that's

980
01:25:47,600 --> 01:25:52,160
the frustration is, is, is I personally would have liked to see more discretion from the

981
01:25:52,160 --> 01:25:56,400
planners like, Hey, why don't you tell the applicant not to do this? Or maybe you didn't

982
01:25:56,400 --> 01:26:03,800
know, but I think it's a discretion of like, somebody could get hooked up on one minor thing.

983
01:26:04,200 --> 01:26:09,420
And that's the frustration, I think that, but I personally think is, is, is they almost

984
01:26:09,420 --> 01:26:14,720
walk themselves into this, and I think that's the first, and I get that's not your job,

985
01:26:14,900 --> 01:26:20,880
it's like your job is just to see what they submitted, but it's like, I mean, I will try not

986
01:26:20,880 --> 01:26:27,180
to speak to this project specifically, but there was a lot of conversations between the planning

987
01:26:27,180 --> 01:26:33,100
department and the engineering department throughout this process of how to make that comment, go away,

988
01:26:33,100 --> 01:26:42,940
and engineering was standing firm on it so we could not change the comments to the applicant and then it changed the commission.

989
01:26:44,540 --> 01:26:57,260
So I do understand your frustration. I think part of where we're trying to go with what's within our zoning code and within the planning department's ability to reflect changes is to work on these procedures.

990
01:26:57,260 --> 01:27:15,620
and then ultimately, as we get into Phase 4 and really are talking about design and talking about zoning regulations to make amendments, the whole code, like Erica said, needs to be repealed and replaced with a modern code because we do have outdated standards.

991
01:27:15,620 --> 01:27:22,700
As we get into those standards, that's going to be really nuanced conversations that we're having with the commission.

992
01:27:22,940 --> 01:27:24,780
You know, we're going to be talking to you about trees.

993
01:27:25,080 --> 01:27:29,940
And that's going to be Eric's favorite study session because she's really in the landscaping.

994
01:27:30,120 --> 01:27:35,500
But what our ultimate goal, and this is a long project, it is a face project.

995
01:27:35,560 --> 01:27:41,380
We're going to be having study sessions talking about one chapter at a time, two chapters at a time for a while with you guys.

996
01:27:41,380 --> 01:27:49,940
But the ultimate goal is we need as a city to have these updated standards so that staff can apply them.

997
01:27:50,220 --> 01:27:57,020
Now, is it going to solve all our problems? No, because we have Title 16 and we have Title 15 and we have building codes

998
01:27:57,020 --> 01:28:01,560
and these types of things that also are impacting projects as they come through.

999
01:28:02,180 --> 01:28:09,600
But where we have power as planning department, the planning division, the planning commission is to fix our zoning issues

1000
01:28:09,600 --> 01:28:12,540
and talk about what requires planning permits,

1001
01:28:13,260 --> 01:28:16,740
what conditions we can put on projects to make them,

1002
01:28:17,160 --> 01:28:19,980
you know, if we have a standard set of conditions

1003
01:28:19,980 --> 01:28:21,220
from planning perspective,

1004
01:28:21,320 --> 01:28:23,120
then we don't have to talk about whether or not

1005
01:28:23,120 --> 01:28:24,400
they'll meet those things, right?

1006
01:28:24,660 --> 01:28:27,860
So that's where we're trying to go with these zoning upgrades,

1007
01:28:28,120 --> 01:28:31,500
with these study sessions, fixing our planning procedures,

1008
01:28:31,840 --> 01:28:34,800
working on our planning permits, downgrading them,

1009
01:28:34,960 --> 01:28:37,920
and then ultimately, as we get into phase four,

1010
01:28:37,920 --> 01:28:45,040
which hopefully will kick off more so after the general plans adopted because then we can work

1011
01:28:45,040 --> 01:28:50,580
on zoning that needs new general plan policy, right? Because if right now the general plan says

1012
01:28:50,580 --> 01:28:54,420
one thing in regard to landscaping and then in the future the general plan says something else,

1013
01:28:54,420 --> 01:29:00,220
then we've got to change the code anyway. So design requirements, zoning requirements, that's that

1014
01:29:00,220 --> 01:29:04,920
phase four that's going to follow once we have general plan policy to implement with new code.

1015
01:29:04,920 --> 01:29:33,620
But I think that we do hear you, we do hear applicants internally, we are working on better communication with our fellow departments and our fellow agencies, but where planning has per view is kind of at the planning stage, our job is to kind of say, what are your requirements, what are your requirements, what are your requirements and try to package those things together, it's harder for us, though we do try to facilitate, you know, conflict.

1016
01:29:33,620 --> 01:29:37,500
It's harder for us to say you can't have that requirement in sharing department.

1017
01:29:37,700 --> 01:29:42,940
You can't have that requirement for our department because that's why they have their

1018
01:29:42,940 --> 01:29:44,660
purview and their requirements as well, right?

1019
01:29:44,800 --> 01:29:47,000
We kind of have to mesh those into our permits.

1020
01:29:47,360 --> 01:29:51,560
And if a project is denied in 10th century commission, they don't have to pay anything, right?

1021
01:29:51,620 --> 01:29:55,720
It's like the 3,000 fee for an appeal, was it 3,000 or 5,000?

1022
01:29:55,720 --> 01:29:59,540
The project is brought like a signar in touch with you.

1023
01:30:00,210 --> 01:30:29,550
If we get to a point where between staff and the applicant, we can't make a recommendation for approval. It will still come to the commission. It would be the only thing that would be an appeal where there's an additional fee for processing an appeal is if, let's say it was a staff level decision. In this example, minor SNA, right, in our new co-policy, minor SNA is approved or is denied, then someone could appeal that to the commission that's processing the appeal application.

1024
01:30:29,550 --> 01:30:31,950
but for a major site and architecture review,

1025
01:30:32,070 --> 01:30:33,410
that would still be before the commission,

1026
01:30:33,730 --> 01:30:35,730
so whatever the recommendation might be,

1027
01:30:35,870 --> 01:30:36,570
that's not a fee.

1028
01:30:37,230 --> 01:30:39,170
The decision is still at the commission,

1029
01:30:39,430 --> 01:30:41,110
whether it's a recommendation for approval

1030
01:30:41,110 --> 01:30:42,770
or denial or just consideration.

1031
01:30:43,170 --> 01:30:45,090
And by staff, you mean staff with a planning department?

1032
01:30:46,170 --> 01:30:48,710
It would be the community development director

1033
01:30:48,710 --> 01:30:55,710
or for probably the lesser of major and minor

1034
01:30:55,710 --> 01:30:57,470
or minor and administrative.

1035
01:30:57,810 --> 01:30:59,010
It would be staff level, yes.

1036
01:30:59,530 --> 01:31:04,610
designated, but ultimately it was come under the community development directors as the

1037
01:31:04,610 --> 01:31:04,810
staff.

1038
01:31:07,690 --> 01:31:14,690
I see all the attachments of the email communication, the multiple requests to meet with certain

1039
01:31:14,690 --> 01:31:19,570
individuals, certain departments, and then to the refusal, right, just holding strong.

1040
01:31:20,350 --> 01:31:25,950
And I feel like that's something that it's not really a process, it's more of a personal

1041
01:31:25,950 --> 01:31:26,550
choice, right?

1042
01:31:27,190 --> 01:31:40,210
And like this last project again, it was through talking to the individual holding up the project and picking up on the cues of how things were being presented that we were able to dig in and figure out, okay, that's the issue there.

1043
01:31:40,810 --> 01:31:47,830
And I recall the engineer from the applicant asking very related questions and asking for immediate clarity.

1044
01:31:47,830 --> 01:31:52,110
And but you kind of enforce it in between something outside of your department, right?

1045
01:31:52,450 --> 01:32:00,470
But I understand it's a challenge, but I think it's, I don't know if this will address that, but that's more, that's another item, I think.

1046
01:32:00,810 --> 01:32:02,570
Okay, maybe we put that on the auction.

1047
01:32:02,990 --> 01:32:16,570
Maybe, again, if I'm just saying like this could only do so much, but there's still individual decisions that are made that fold up, things for businesses and for new businesses or projects, but that's the separate conversation I think.

1048
01:32:16,570 --> 01:32:20,970
We do continue to try to work on that process to make it easier for everyone.

1049
01:32:21,750 --> 01:32:27,370
In the last two years maybe, we've created a comprehensive list of all the

1050
01:32:27,370 --> 01:32:31,370
submittal requirements that's supposed on our website and people can easily go down the list

1051
01:32:31,370 --> 01:32:36,490
and check it off, what applies to them, and that has actually sped up the review of most projects.

1052
01:32:37,010 --> 01:32:43,010
We continue to post additional information or focused applications so that people can get through the process

1053
01:32:43,010 --> 01:32:47,870
us more quickly, so now we have a conditional use permit application that really guides people

1054
01:32:47,870 --> 01:32:52,990
into answering questions on that application form, whereas what we found before was people

1055
01:32:52,990 --> 01:32:55,950
give us a submittal and we're missing half the information we actually need to process

1056
01:32:55,950 --> 01:32:59,050
it, so we're guiding them through the process to make it easier.

1057
01:33:00,670 --> 01:33:07,010
It is kind of a fact of the way this goes that people will submit and they will omit a lot

1058
01:33:07,010 --> 01:33:11,030
of the necessary information, and we will have to ask them to resummit.

1059
01:33:11,030 --> 01:33:15,810
recent medals do typically tend to go faster unless it was they did not listen to anything we had

1060
01:33:15,810 --> 01:33:22,070
and they basically are reapplying on the second round. So we do tend to do the second round faster.

1061
01:33:22,630 --> 01:33:27,990
Most of my projects have gone quite quickly to you. The polytechnic academy was held up because we're

1062
01:33:27,990 --> 01:33:33,290
waiting on a focus traffic analysis that takes time to prepare and review and then I think I've had

1063
01:33:33,290 --> 01:33:39,450
the conditional use point for the San Benino billiards and that went through two reviews because

1064
01:33:41,030 --> 01:33:47,130
The first review is missing vital information and so we need that information to properly conditions but so for today

1065
01:33:47,830 --> 01:33:49,570
Right, we're looking at today

1066
01:33:50,590 --> 01:33:52,670
Do you have any comments on this?

1067
01:33:56,330 --> 01:34:00,810
Comment do is there any public comments on this item?

1068
01:34:02,650 --> 01:34:05,670
We do not have any public comments. Okay. Thank you

1069
01:34:05,670 --> 01:34:09,610
And is there any further discussion or emotion on this item? I

1070
01:34:13,350 --> 01:34:14,390
don't have any more discussion

1071
01:34:14,390 --> 01:34:19,950
but I'll make a motion if we're already to what would that motion be?

1072
01:34:19,950 --> 01:34:23,430
I was just going to say I don't and I don't know what that is about.

1073
01:34:23,650 --> 01:34:24,310
I was out of make.

1074
01:34:24,770 --> 01:34:24,990
Absolutely.

1075
01:34:25,590 --> 01:34:26,290
Thank you.

1076
01:34:26,910 --> 01:34:29,570
It's not till what final phase or whatever.

1077
01:34:30,210 --> 01:34:34,390
So yeah, so we're slowly and this is going in pieces and your next one will probably be

1078
01:34:34,390 --> 01:34:39,250
along like the previous one was and then once we're all done it gets wrapped together into

1079
01:34:39,250 --> 01:34:42,010
one for a review and recommendation.

1080
01:34:42,430 --> 01:34:42,950
Thank you.

1081
01:34:42,950 --> 01:34:49,210
So then let's move on, I think this is where we can talk about our action 8.1 planning commission reports.

1082
01:34:50,050 --> 01:34:57,870
Is there any reports and is this our opportunity then to also request?

1083
01:34:58,530 --> 01:35:07,990
Yeah, so if you look at your agenda, it says that this is the time for commission to refer public or commission questions to staff.

1084
01:35:07,990 --> 01:35:14,370
Request staff to report to the commission on a matter at a future meeting or direct staff to place a matter on a future agenda

1085
01:35:14,370 --> 01:35:19,530
And then so anything nothing would be discussed tonight, but rather brought back at a future meeting

1086
01:35:19,530 --> 01:35:22,070
So who would like to start?

1087
01:35:22,430 --> 01:35:28,430
So I yeah, I obviously would appreciate to bring these the recommendations back or the seven items

1088
01:35:28,430 --> 01:35:32,070
For discussion ultimately for vetting and ultimately

1089
01:35:32,070 --> 01:35:42,850
to tighten up the recommendations to be forwarded to the council for their consideration and then you know at that point it's at their discretion adoption.

1090
01:35:44,150 --> 01:36:00,690
So that's my recommendation but we're on the infirm what is it on the commission reports reports so one just final point on I think kind of putting a cap on the whole discussion or at least on my end is speaking to councilman

1091
01:36:00,690 --> 01:36:06,050
as and kind of obviously paying attention to meetings and sensing the consideration of the council

1092
01:36:06,050 --> 01:36:13,130
or at least what I would imagine sounds like the will of the body in general is there's the big

1093
01:36:13,130 --> 01:36:18,930
sense of urgency for economic development. We need to grow our economy. We need to focus on commercial

1094
01:36:19,730 --> 01:36:26,490
small business, creating opportunity or at least facilitating opportunity and they're at the high

1095
01:36:26,490 --> 01:36:31,250
And we're dealing with obviously a huge deficit at the federal level, and now it seems

1096
01:36:31,250 --> 01:36:38,170
to be the LAO had just mentioned that there was an $80 billion deficit expected this next

1097
01:36:38,170 --> 01:36:38,450
year.

1098
01:36:38,970 --> 01:36:43,810
So the bottom line is it looks like the trend is going upwards in the deficit, which the

1099
01:36:44,810 --> 01:36:48,910
oversimplified interpretation means, at the local level, there's going to be resources cut

1100
01:36:49,350 --> 01:36:55,950
or there'll be less revenue for our local economy to address the city services and the things

1101
01:36:55,950 --> 01:37:02,370
necessary. So that being said, that's why they're wanting to see where we are with commercial

1102
01:37:02,370 --> 01:37:05,970
development and how do we get to where we need to be to grow. That's what, you know, the

1103
01:37:05,970 --> 01:37:11,490
bike relays another example. Where do we need to be? So that's why I think these things have to

1104
01:37:11,490 --> 01:37:18,170
have a sense of urgency. I wouldn't maybe like to at least consider having a maybe another reporter

1105
01:37:18,170 --> 01:37:23,990
presentation on the current layout of the land of what is our zoning as it applies to commercial,

1106
01:37:23,990 --> 01:37:40,830
what are the amount of projects that we have that are in the queue, which ones have not been able to go through, maybe potential issues, and maybe even what is the potential of these economic projects if they actually get fulfilled right if they actually get passed and ultimately come into our community.

1107
01:37:41,570 --> 01:37:46,910
Something that kind of gives us at least a better understanding and I think that could also filter back to the council.

1108
01:37:46,910 --> 01:37:49,210
Like summary of current applicants.

1109
01:37:49,330 --> 01:37:50,810
Current applicants, yeah.

1110
01:37:51,090 --> 01:37:53,510
I mean, I didn't know if an error was coming in to our backyard

1111
01:37:53,510 --> 01:37:55,530
until it was pretty much coming out.

1112
01:37:55,690 --> 01:37:56,210
Right.

1113
01:37:56,670 --> 01:37:57,070
I agree.

1114
01:37:58,010 --> 01:37:59,290
Just on one clarification.

1115
01:37:59,810 --> 01:38:01,230
So what was the action item?

1116
01:38:01,770 --> 01:38:04,430
I'm sorry, just someone can refresh.

1117
01:38:05,330 --> 01:38:09,050
You gave recommendation last two recommendations.

1118
01:38:09,630 --> 01:38:13,110
So the first one was the seven items for the review process.

1119
01:38:13,870 --> 01:38:16,450
And you wanted to see that implemented

1120
01:38:16,450 --> 01:38:32,770
Or you said no, so that would be a recommendation for us to have a conversation about it at the next meeting, and that way we can basically make sure that they're, you know, through the attorney and ultimately staff to clean up the language to make sure that it goes forward as certain recommendations from the council.

1121
01:38:33,030 --> 01:38:35,370
So that should have been reflected today.

1122
01:38:35,630 --> 01:38:37,830
That would have been today if it would have come forward today, yeah.

1123
01:38:38,370 --> 01:38:39,490
Is that your interpretation?

1124
01:38:39,490 --> 01:38:42,410
I don't know, I just want to make sure we're all on the same page.

1125
01:38:42,910 --> 01:38:46,190
So should it, Mr. Hernandez felt like it should have been reflected today?

1126
01:38:46,410 --> 01:38:48,650
I don't know, did you guys get that interpretation?

1127
01:38:48,870 --> 01:38:49,830
I just want to make sure-

1128
01:38:49,830 --> 01:38:54,030
Well, I understand the reflection today.

1129
01:38:54,570 --> 01:39:01,890
I think where staff was at at the last meeting and we will reflect it in the minutes that that was the reflection.

1130
01:39:01,990 --> 01:39:06,550
But where staff was at at the meeting and where I think we'll have to continue to be at is that

1131
01:39:06,550 --> 01:39:13,050
But as far as discussions of the body of the planning commission, we can only have a discussion

1132
01:39:13,050 --> 01:39:16,310
about things that are within the purview of the planning commission.

1133
01:39:16,490 --> 01:39:22,450
But what we can do is provide an additional memo to the memo that was provided if there's

1134
01:39:22,450 --> 01:39:28,710
more that we can just informationally provide you about these things so at least that can give

1135
01:39:28,710 --> 01:39:29,230
a response.

1136
01:39:29,230 --> 01:39:36,990
Because I'm just going to use the there was something you want actionable something tangible. I mean I so I sound like I'm going to say it again.

1137
01:39:37,710 --> 01:39:45,010
It's just putting these recommendations into a basically something that gets forwarded to the council.

1138
01:39:46,210 --> 01:39:54,490
And gives them the discretion to consider those as potential amendments to their policies right because we're not policy makers they are.

1139
01:39:54,490 --> 01:40:00,570
And that way they can start to implement it into the planning process if that is the will of the City Council's body.

1140
01:40:00,770 --> 01:40:09,070
Yeah, well, I agree with that. I don't know if that's the will of this body this board, but I do agree with your recommendations or our recommendations.

1141
01:40:10,030 --> 01:40:18,650
I mean, and technically it's kind of going into next month to really at that point is to tighten that list up forward it to the council.

1142
01:40:18,650 --> 01:40:22,810
and then at that point on their end they're like okay we know exactly what the

1143
01:40:22,810 --> 01:40:26,910
with the commission wants let's talk about it and we could say yeah we don't

1144
01:40:26,910 --> 01:40:31,870
agree or maybe we should talk about it and on there and they would have to

1145
01:40:31,870 --> 01:40:37,010
go into a whole cleanup process to make it legal and ultimately something that

1146
01:40:37,010 --> 01:40:41,730
they can officially adopt into their process if that's their will right not it's

1147
01:40:41,730 --> 01:40:45,490
not yeah at that point it's we're just handing it off to them for them okay and so

1148
01:40:45,490 --> 01:40:51,170
Right now each of us will add if you have like a report or an additional

1149
01:40:51,170 --> 01:40:53,770
No, I don't have anything else to add.

1150
01:40:53,930 --> 01:41:00,190
And I had made two recommendations. The second one was for another agenda item that actually talked about the actual projects.

1151
01:41:00,770 --> 01:41:07,250
What do we have with the queue? What are the potentials and ultimately if there's any delays or issues, right?

1152
01:41:07,390 --> 01:41:09,250
What are the things that are happening with those projects?

1153
01:41:09,390 --> 01:41:13,930
And just to set expectations on that one, we'll have to keep it very high level, likely not naming the project

1154
01:41:13,930 --> 01:41:20,830
because we can't bring a project that isn't publicly noticed for any sort of discussion.

1155
01:41:21,070 --> 01:41:27,730
So it might be like there's a restaurant, a gas station, so something general and high level if that's brought back.

1156
01:41:28,470 --> 01:41:37,230
One, but even if we had that and then maybe just the number of those projects and, you know, even if we need the industry, I think we could easily

1157
01:41:40,270 --> 01:42:07,210
and I think just two expectations again, I can definitely work on a memo, so at least from an informational perspective, I can address all of these items to the commission with information, but from what the planning commission can discuss, and as it relates specifically to projects that aren't before you, you know, I could work on a high-level list, but we might not be able to discuss it here, but I think it's going to be a good idea.

1158
01:42:07,210 --> 01:42:11,190
or even if it is tangentially planning related,

1159
01:42:11,890 --> 01:42:13,250
like things like fees,

1160
01:42:13,590 --> 01:42:16,250
that even to make a recommendation to the council,

1161
01:42:16,670 --> 01:42:19,450
that is not the body of the planning commissions

1162
01:42:19,450 --> 01:42:22,050
per view to make a recommendation on a fee like that.

1163
01:42:22,470 --> 01:42:26,310
But I can provide information to the planning commission

1164
01:42:26,310 --> 01:42:29,310
informationally about all these items

1165
01:42:29,310 --> 01:42:32,290
and I will bring back what can be brought back

1166
01:42:32,290 --> 01:42:32,810
for discussion.

1167
01:42:34,610 --> 01:42:39,850
another related item I think was the way the minutes are recorded I guess or

1168
01:42:39,850 --> 01:42:45,950
reported that is a change from what you're used to and we want to discuss that

1169
01:42:45,950 --> 01:42:50,630
next meeting just to say just changing the way that's even an option it should be

1170
01:42:50,630 --> 01:42:55,050
I mean that's pretty standard practice in most boards regardless of so putting it on

1171
01:42:55,050 --> 01:43:01,730
the agenda as a discussion item for us okay for next month so we know like what's

1172
01:43:01,730 --> 01:43:02,430
What's the possibility?

1173
01:43:02,550 --> 01:43:03,470
What's the expectation?

1174
01:43:03,890 --> 01:43:04,150
Exactly.

1175
01:43:04,370 --> 01:43:04,830
That's good.

1176
01:43:05,150 --> 01:43:06,090
Anything else?

1177
01:43:07,070 --> 01:43:07,730
For you?

1178
01:43:08,870 --> 01:43:14,630
I mean, yeah, so I'm trying to dissect a little bit what Director Kelly had mentioned

1179
01:43:14,630 --> 01:43:23,250
because I mean, anything that we say is not policy decisions.

1180
01:43:23,870 --> 01:43:28,710
I'm not technically there's no violation until I ask for a vote for something that's not

1181
01:43:28,710 --> 01:43:35,390
even within our own jurisdiction, making recommendations, it's literally just, this is what we're thinking,

1182
01:43:35,930 --> 01:43:41,930
you tell us if we're wrong or if you completely disagree. So, here's the reality, right? Again,

1183
01:43:42,270 --> 01:43:47,670
getting back to what I had mentioned earlier, if this doesn't happen, if there is no real discussion

1184
01:43:47,670 --> 01:43:55,830
about the actual granular elements, councils' elected bodies, especially our very high level

1185
01:43:55,830 --> 01:44:01,750
And the policy, right, they have to get into the weeds a little bit to understand what

1186
01:44:01,750 --> 01:44:05,430
are the intrinsic otherwise you're making a decision that might have a negative impact,

1187
01:44:05,430 --> 01:44:09,890
not even realizing it because you really don't understand the implications of that decision.

1188
01:44:10,310 --> 01:44:15,570
So it's really important that we're able to give recommendations so that they can say, okay,

1189
01:44:15,690 --> 01:44:21,290
we have the info, we have staff, you tell us, and then they can clean up whatever their thinking

1190
01:44:21,290 --> 01:44:26,610
is and then apply that in the policy process and ultimately with the direction or at least

1191
01:44:26,610 --> 01:44:32,670
the guidance of the city attorney, then you make it an actual legal element in your

1192
01:44:32,670 --> 01:44:37,550
own policy process. If we don't even give them anything, they're not good. All I know

1193
01:44:37,550 --> 01:44:42,830
is anytime I talk to Councilman Rosendez and at times when I've talked separately to Mayor

1194
01:44:42,830 --> 01:44:49,450
Stevens, as an example, they only know what we know, which is very little, which means

1195
01:44:49,450 --> 01:44:53,150
they're not able to solve the very problems that we're talking about because they don't know,

1196
01:44:53,350 --> 01:44:55,370
we don't know, then who knows, and besides that.

1197
01:44:56,090 --> 01:44:59,910
And so, if, unless you have, I wanted to add to the request.

1198
01:45:00,000 --> 01:45:29,280
Yes, that you have to do have another on that data report. The general data is there also an opportunity to know how many were denied, how many projects in whatever categories were denied this year. So for example, if there were two restaurants that were denied. Yeah, we can definitely provide anything that's had a decision is a lot easier to give information on than an in process application.

1199
01:45:29,280 --> 01:45:45,200
I suppose what if I could ask just so I make sure that I provide the information that you like what the purpose of that is just to kind of give us and it's because we have just, you know, from what we hear, right?

1200
01:45:45,420 --> 01:45:48,260
So we have a narrative of different people what they tell us.

1201
01:45:48,260 --> 01:45:57,520
But this, yeah, I was going to make it easier, I think, to have what was denied, but maybe

1202
01:45:57,520 --> 01:46:03,840
you guys could even make a list of why it was denied, and it doesn't have to be a nuanced

1203
01:46:03,840 --> 01:46:11,640
list, like each one needs to be complete nuanced, but you could have four categories, one

1204
01:46:11,640 --> 01:46:17,340
maybe use engineering and stuff like that too, something just to give us some kind of indication

1205
01:46:18,070 --> 01:46:27,160
and then if you you know four four five one equals fire two equals circulation whatever you guys

1206
01:46:27,160 --> 01:46:33,380
get general point right and then you'd have the projects so then we can then identify what's holding

1207
01:46:33,380 --> 01:46:38,360
most of these projects up oh it's circulation is holding most of these projects up and then you'd

1208
01:46:38,360 --> 01:46:40,520
have a list of the projects in the next cell,

1209
01:46:40,640 --> 01:46:41,440
however, that would look.

1210
01:46:42,560 --> 01:46:44,720
So I don't know if that makes it easier or over.

1211
01:46:45,280 --> 01:46:47,720
No, I think where I was just going with the question

1212
01:46:47,720 --> 01:46:50,300
and I understand it was, you know,

1213
01:46:50,380 --> 01:46:54,960
this is at all planning applications, correct?

1214
01:46:55,280 --> 01:46:57,380
Yes, okay, so I can definitely do that.

1215
01:46:57,720 --> 01:47:01,200
Also, I, I, from an expectations perspective,

1216
01:47:01,480 --> 01:47:05,140
that I can't give you building and engineering application

1217
01:47:05,140 --> 01:47:07,240
because of that's not the applications we process.

1218
01:47:07,860 --> 01:47:12,500
But I can tell you that there's probably incredible feel that's going to be a handful.

1219
01:47:13,540 --> 01:47:21,420
And I think, and then for me, a follow-up with this discussion we had is also are we going

1220
01:47:21,420 --> 01:47:26,880
to be reviewing in any of these chapters, not just an appeal process, but a complaint process

1221
01:47:26,880 --> 01:47:32,700
of, for example, if there's a specific department that's not getting back to somebody, right?

1222
01:47:32,800 --> 01:47:35,420
Or if there's a specific entity or person.

1223
01:47:35,420 --> 01:47:40,880
and I think with any business, government does what have you, there's always a complaint

1224
01:47:40,880 --> 01:47:41,960
process, right?

1225
01:47:42,120 --> 01:47:46,360
And so I think when people only change when they're held accountable, right?

1226
01:47:46,500 --> 01:47:51,140
If you just, you know, turn around and, oh, no big deal, but if we hold people accountable,

1227
01:47:51,140 --> 01:47:56,920
then people are more apt to follow and respond appropriately, right?

1228
01:47:56,960 --> 01:48:00,920
So I think is there a complaint process or is that part of the things that we would?

1229
01:48:00,920 --> 01:48:12,520
And if it's not in our purviews and I guess it's just informational and then and then we could figure out, you know, with our city council, maybe they need a complete process.

1230
01:48:13,840 --> 01:48:14,660
Does that make sense?

1231
01:48:16,040 --> 01:48:27,780
It does. I'm trying to, well, it's definitely not something in the zoning code. So, and I think from a, what is the process by which to complain about your planning application?

1232
01:48:27,780 --> 01:48:29,660
and that is the appeal process, right?

1233
01:48:29,920 --> 01:48:31,700
So I think complaints,

1234
01:48:32,640 --> 01:48:34,340
it's definitely not something appropriate

1235
01:48:34,340 --> 01:48:35,220
for a zoning ordinance.

1236
01:48:35,480 --> 01:48:37,220
It would be just the, you know,

1237
01:48:37,300 --> 01:48:38,780
I don't know what I'm getting at with the.

1238
01:48:39,060 --> 01:48:41,800
Yeah, I mean, I think you're talking about complaining

1239
01:48:42,240 --> 01:48:43,760
about a particular employee.

1240
01:48:44,240 --> 01:48:46,000
And I think the process with the city

1241
01:48:46,000 --> 01:48:47,500
is the same as it is with any business.

1242
01:48:47,700 --> 01:48:48,880
You're gonna talk to their boss.

1243
01:48:49,140 --> 01:48:50,360
You're gonna talk to the city manager.

1244
01:48:50,960 --> 01:48:53,200
I mean, it's not documented as such in the code,

1245
01:48:53,340 --> 01:48:53,900
not that I've seen.

1246
01:48:54,280 --> 01:48:55,580
Not in the zoning code for sure,

1247
01:48:55,680 --> 01:48:56,960
but I haven't seen it anywhere else

1248
01:48:56,960 --> 01:49:01,100
in the municipal code, but I don't think that it's typically in municipal codes because

1249
01:49:01,100 --> 01:49:02,900
the municipal code is the law, right?

1250
01:49:03,360 --> 01:49:08,280
So a complaint process might be a form on the city's website, or it's just talking

1251
01:49:08,280 --> 01:49:12,140
to the person's boss, like is it like if you go and get that to Rice at a school or?

1252
01:49:12,300 --> 01:49:17,840
You were on the school board, Carla, right, so technically speaking, and I understand the

1253
01:49:17,840 --> 01:49:24,420
reality of privacy elements with speaking about staff, potential liability, but technically

1254
01:49:24,420 --> 01:49:30,640
speaking, that's why whether it's a commissioner, you know, or elected body, they can't have

1255
01:49:30,640 --> 01:49:35,700
a discretionary element to their process to create a close, close session type conversation

1256
01:49:35,700 --> 01:49:40,960
to basically not about it, but technically as the appointed body or even the elected bodies,

1257
01:49:41,340 --> 01:49:46,420
they have a right to that information, you know, they should have the right to discuss it

1258
01:49:46,420 --> 01:49:47,240
to understand it.

1259
01:49:47,320 --> 01:49:52,040
Again, it's all up for the sake of implementing the will of the voters, which are the ones

1260
01:49:52,040 --> 01:49:56,700
the taxpayers that are paying for, yeah, for all the services and putting city

1261
01:49:56,700 --> 01:50:01,660
stuff. Yeah, but okay, thank you for answering it in your right Commissioner

1262
01:50:01,660 --> 01:50:05,900
Hernandez. I was just kind of thinking because we're all kind of circling

1263
01:50:05,900 --> 01:50:14,000
around something, but you know maybe maybe it goes to another entity. So, and I'll

1264
01:50:14,000 --> 01:50:19,400
speak to who I need to speak to at City Council about that. Okay, do we have any

1265
01:50:19,400 --> 01:50:25,780
other but we're good. I was going to make a motion to adjourn. Oh, we have one more.

1266
01:50:25,920 --> 01:50:32,120
Oh, 8.2 planning division reports staff do you have any reports? Yes, I'll just reiterate

1267
01:50:32,120 --> 01:50:39,760
that I will work on at least a memo and bringing back what is within the planning commission's

1268
01:50:39,760 --> 01:50:48,100
discussion per view certainly. And then we are having an objective design standards workshop

1269
01:50:48,100 --> 01:50:53,480
on December 2nd. It's Tuesday. It's a four and Amber Kirkman for

1270
01:50:53,480 --> 01:51:01,060
long on the end time. It either goes till 7.30 or 8.8. So 4 to 8. Tuesday

1271
01:51:01,060 --> 01:51:06,500
December 2nd. It's a pains restaurant in the back room. It's going to be

1272
01:51:06,500 --> 01:51:12,800
essentially a like kind of walk-in come save however long you want. Top to

1273
01:51:12,800 --> 01:51:16,400
staff, talk to our consultants who were working on the project. We are talking

1274
01:51:16,400 --> 01:51:21,060
about objective design standards for new mixed use and residential projects in the downtown

1275
01:51:21,760 --> 01:51:27,440
to implement objective design standards so that we have some local say over how development

1276
01:51:27,440 --> 01:51:34,060
happens in our downtown and then it is going to be there's going to be a presentation at the

1277
01:51:34,060 --> 01:51:38,460
beginning just about the process and then we're going to do another presentation. I believe it's seven

1278
01:51:38,460 --> 01:51:46,380
three same presentation you don't have to go to the presentation and then the whole time you can

1279
01:51:47,300 --> 01:51:54,540
images and things like that. Give feedback and then head out. So December 2nd at 4 p.m. please help us spread the word.

1280
01:51:54,940 --> 01:52:00,740
So the attorney we don't often necessarily be worried too much about Brown Act for that one, because it was a posted meeting kind of.

1281
01:52:00,920 --> 01:52:13,300
It was crashing my mind, but then when Eva described it as a walk in one at a time, talk to staff, it made me feel more comfortable with it, not meeting to be agendas.

1282
01:52:13,300 --> 01:52:20,180
If you're all there at the same time, because it's not really a present, not a meeting where there will be one big discussion, does that make sense?

1283
01:52:20,280 --> 01:52:31,520
Yeah, I guess I'm presenting it for the public and the Commissioner helps read the word, object design hints or standards will return to you as a body when it's drafted as well, but yeah,

1284
01:52:31,640 --> 01:52:36,200
help us read the word to the public and to your constituents and most types of things to help people come.

1285
01:52:36,200 --> 01:52:37,060
Thank you.

1286
01:52:37,140 --> 01:52:43,680
And technically, there is no violation, even if the whole body is there, as long as they're

1287
01:52:43,680 --> 01:52:45,720
not discussing actual business.

1288
01:52:46,620 --> 01:52:53,180
So but the optics is obviously not appealing, which means most bodies will separate at least

1289
01:52:53,180 --> 01:52:56,340
to where it's at most two people next to each other.

1290
01:52:56,880 --> 01:53:00,360
So it's because there's no serial median that way.

1291
01:53:01,200 --> 01:53:03,360
We're not all going to get together and discuss.

1292
01:53:03,900 --> 01:53:11,880
I just want to say that it's nuanced, so that's not necessarily true, but because they

1293
01:53:11,880 --> 01:53:15,620
are talking about something within your jurisdiction, which is design standards.

1294
01:53:16,440 --> 01:53:17,000
And so if you're all—

1295
01:53:17,000 --> 01:53:18,100
No, I know, but—

1296
01:53:18,100 --> 01:53:22,020
It doesn't require you to all—it doesn't require you to necessarily discuss it.

1297
01:53:22,040 --> 01:53:25,840
So if you think about a situation where we're here in this meeting and maybe staff is giving

1298
01:53:25,840 --> 01:53:31,600
a presentation to you about a particular topic and you don't engage in discussion, it still

1299
01:53:31,600 --> 01:53:35,660
need us to be agenda. So it's similar, where you're all hearing the same information that you'll

1300
01:53:36,180 --> 01:53:41,140
eventually come back to your board for decision. But I think the way that you've described it,

1301
01:53:41,340 --> 01:53:47,020
this particular meeting, I think that if you each chose to attend, you wouldn't necessarily do so at

1302
01:53:47,020 --> 01:53:53,920
the same time. You wouldn't necessarily all hear the same discussion. It's community. Yeah, it's a

1303
01:53:53,920 --> 01:53:59,220
community workshop that we were trying to get community feedback in this point in the process. We have

1304
01:53:59,220 --> 01:54:03,860
survey online as well and then so that we can finish drafting and bring it

1305
01:54:03,860 --> 01:54:07,640
before you. And to be clear though technically it's information that's the

1306
01:54:07,640 --> 01:54:11,740
whole public right the whole idea of a ceremony is is it's private and it's

1307
01:54:11,740 --> 01:54:17,000
basically intentionally trying to avoid you know basically trying to collude to

1308
01:54:17,000 --> 01:54:21,260
certain extent behind closed doors. I just know that when the county had their

1309
01:54:21,260 --> 01:54:27,160
meeting about Highway 25 the new VMT requirement the law had passed it now

1310
01:54:27,160 --> 01:54:33,340
change the whole thing with the cost mechanism of the vehicle mass travel, all the supervisors

1311
01:54:33,340 --> 01:54:36,960
were there and they were specifically about a policy but they weren't together, right?

1312
01:54:37,280 --> 01:54:43,980
So, I guess there's disagreeing interpretations of you, but we can attend.

1313
01:54:44,440 --> 01:54:44,520
Yeah.

1314
01:54:47,640 --> 01:54:55,340
It depends on who's holding the meeting, in this case it is the city holding the meeting in

1315
01:54:55,340 --> 01:55:01,280
you're planning commissioners of the city just say hello that's okay are we

1316
01:55:01,280 --> 01:55:06,040
out we don't not have to make a motion to adjourn everyone have a little note

1317
01:55:06,040 --> 01:55:12,920
here that says so we're good so meeting adjourned at 754 thank you thank you

1318
01:55:12,920 --> 01:55:13,360
Thank you, everybody.