[1:42] All right. I hereby call the regular meeting of the
[1:46] Planning Commission to order and welcome everybody. This is probably
[1:49] one of the most full houses we've seen in quite
[1:52] some time. So thank you all for coming. Please stand
[1:54] for the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Grayed us tonight. Do
[2:02] you lead us tonight. I pledge allegiance to the fight
[2:08] of the United States of America. And to the Republic
[2:12] for witch it stands, a nation under God, indivisible with
[2:17] liberty and justice for all. Thank you, maybe seated. Will
[2:27] you please call the roll. Commissioner Martin. Here. Commissioner Peace.
[2:32] President. Commissioner Gray. Present. Vice chair divorce. Present. And chair
[2:38] Peters. Present. All right. Secretary, have we received any
[2:48] request to speak on non - agendaised items? We have
[2:51] not. All right. Moving on to the consent calendar. We
[2:55] have one item on the consent calendar that needs approval.
[2:59] May have a motion to approve the consent calendar.
[3:11] All right, we have a motion by commissioner gray, a
[3:14] second by commissioner Martin. Please record your vote.
[3:28] Hi, I believe that that passes. That motion passes unanimously.
[3:35] Unanimously, thank you. All right. Moving on to the public
[3:44] hearing item. We have item number 6. 1 planning application
[3:50] number 20 - 103 Baker Street Warehouse Project. A proposal
[3:57] to develop two warehouse buildings, totaling 1, 451, 000, or
[4:03] 451 square feet and related site improvements on the approximate
[4:08] 140 acre site located at the intersection of Baker Street
[4:13] and Pearce Street. The public hearing is now open and
[4:18] the time is 602. Are there any disclosures from commissioners.
[4:24] No. Secretary, do you have proof of publication that notices
[4:30] as required by law have been given? Yes, ma'am. Did
[4:34] we have the complete file of exhibits correspondence and other
[4:37] documents? Yes, we do. Are there any written communications on
[4:41] this matter. Yes, we've received 20 written communications. They were
[4:45] entered into the public record and distributed to the planning
[4:48] commission and to the public. All right. City staff, please
[4:53] introduce yourself and provide a staff report on this item.
[4:58] Thank you, Chair. And good evening, commissioners. My name is
[5:00] Nancy Winn, Planning Manager with the Community Development Department. The
[5:04] item before you tonight is planning application number 2020 -
[5:07] 103. Which is for the industrial project known as the
[5:11] Baker Street Warehouse Project. So the project site is located
[5:16] at the intersection of Baker and Peer Streets. The site
[5:20] is currently has two different industrial zones. It has M1,
[5:24] which is limited manufacturing, as well as M2, which is
[5:27] general manufacturing. So the project site is currently vacant and
[5:32] undeveloped and encompasses approximately 140 acres. There's our three, so
[5:38] a few different project components. So the first is the
[5:42] warehouse development, which would be 60, about 65 acres, seven
[5:46] acres would be for offsite improvements and a little over
[5:49] 33 acres would be restored for conservation purposes. There's also
[5:52] about a two and a half acre buffer zone in
[5:55] between the warehouse and the rest, the conservation area. So
[5:58] this exhibit here kind of shows those different various components
[6:02] with the red being the warehouse development, the green being
[6:05] the conservation area, and then the oranges are the off
[6:08] - site improvements. And then the sliberal of purple right
[6:11] in between the orange and the green that will act
[6:13] as the buffer zone. So the proposed project is, as
[6:19] I mentioned, an industrial development with two warehouse buildings totaling
[6:23] approximately one million square feet. So the project includes several
[6:27] planning application requests, which I've listed here, and I'll run
[6:30] through quickly. So there's a zone change to change two
[6:34] of the M1 parcels into M2 for zoning consistency. There's
[6:39] a tentative parcel map associated with the project into two
[6:45] parcels. Design review to establish the design for the buildings
[6:49] as well as the project site. The CUP to allow
[6:52] M2 uses within 300 feet of a residential zone, a
[6:56] second CUP request to exceed the 45 - foot building
[7:00] height. And lastly, a development agreement or a DA to
[7:04] specify fee contributions among other items that are above and
[7:07] beyond the development requirements. So this is the site plan,
[7:13] which shows the building one along the property frontage on
[7:17] Peer Street and building two right behind it to the
[7:20] rear of the project site. So the project site would
[7:22] have ample landscaping throughout the site, including a perimeter landscaping
[7:28] that would include large 24 and 36 inch box trees.
[7:34] So as I mentioned in my previous slide, the project
[7:37] is requesting a zone change. Um, in it specifically only
[7:41] affecting two of the M1 parcels, um, so if you
[7:44] look at the current zoning exhibit, it's the, um, lighter
[7:48] blue. And then adjacent, you can see the existing M2.
[7:52] So if you look at the proposed zoning, it will
[7:54] all end up being M2 just for consistent zoning throughout
[7:58] the project site. The general plan LEN uses as a
[8:01] nation remains the scene. It would still be limited industrial.
[8:05] And the project does not involve any other land use
[8:07] changes to the surrounding, um, properties, including any of the
[8:10] residential zone properties. So the next few slides are renderings
[8:18] of the, um, proposed design. So the, this one shows
[8:21] the, um. Kind of an overview of both buildings or
[8:24] the project site as you're driving along baker. Baker street,
[8:29] excuse me. And then this is building one, um, also
[8:33] showing the view from Baker Street. And then of course
[8:36] we have building two. In conjunction with the design review.
[8:44] The project is requesting a parking reduction, um, which staff
[8:47] is supportive of. Because it, uh, it's supported by a
[8:52] parking study. And the parking study, um, reveals several things
[8:56] in order to come to the conclusion that the proposed
[8:58] parking rate would be appropriate. So there was comparison of
[9:02] the cities, um, warehousing parking requirement against a nationwide average.
[9:07] Also comparison with our surrounding, um, neighboring cities that immediately
[9:10] adjacent one as well as more regional. The cities that
[9:13] have, um, more warehousing developments. And then lastly, there was
[9:18] also surveys at three similar scale warehouse buildings. And I
[9:22] find an interest to staff founding interesting enough that the
[9:24] survey counts showed that there is actually a pretty big
[9:28] surplus of parking available. So for that reason, um, we
[9:31] don't anticipate a parking impact. To occur here. But the
[9:36] project does include a condition of approval to address any
[9:41] potential, if there are any potential parking impacts in the
[9:43] future. Okay. So as for the two CUPs, as I
[9:48] mentioned, the first one is to allow M2 uses within
[9:50] a 300 feet of a residential zone, um, which is
[9:53] measured from property lying to property line. So even though
[9:57] the project is adjacent to a resident ja zone, the
[10:00] properties are currently undeveloped, but nonetheless, the project's building especially
[10:04] the loading docks as well as the parking areas have
[10:06] been designed to create a buffer between the project and
[10:10] the existing and future residential uses. And then the second
[10:14] CUP is to exceed the 45 foot building height. So
[10:17] both buildings are requesting to increase the height due to
[10:21] the design. And the increased height you'll see is primarily
[10:25] at the front of the buildings, um, which features an
[10:28] enhanced corner design that helps, um, helps and better guide
[10:32] visitors to the main entrances. So the project, so the
[10:40] city council adopted a good naper policy. And that was
[10:43] specifically in response to some of the large - scale
[10:45] warehousing projects that the inland empire region has been experiencing.
[10:50] And so those project was reviewed for compliance with the
[10:53] good neighbor policy, just to back up really quickly. This
[10:57] policy only applies to buildings that are over 250, 000
[11:02] square feet. So in this case, it only applies to
[11:04] building two, because building two is 788, 000 versus the
[11:08] other one is only 212. So some of the compliance
[11:14] features of building to, the loading docs, the parking areas,
[11:18] the truck bays are located over a thousand feet from
[11:21] the nearest residences. The loading docs truck bays are also
[11:27] oriented away from the residences. So they don't face the
[11:29] residency on the opposite other side of the building. There's
[11:32] multiple access points, um, with three lanes each. So they're
[11:36] just going to provide adequate onset queuing to prevent any,
[11:39] um, spillover traffic unto the public streets. Um, as I
[11:44] mentioned earlier, perimeter landscaping with large 24 and 36 inch
[11:47] box trees as well as a screening wall. And then
[11:50] of course the condition of approval included to make sure
[11:53] that, um, going into plant trick pride to issuance of
[11:57] building permits that the project continues to comply with the
[12:00] good neighborhood policy. So I just want to quickly touch
[12:07] on the tentative parcel map associated with the project. So
[12:10] as I said earlier, the 10 existing parcels that the
[12:15] warehouse buildings are going to be developed on. They're all
[12:17] going to be merge or consolidated into two parcels. Parcel
[12:20] one and parcel two with one building on each parcel.
[12:24] And of course the, um, driveways as well as the
[12:27] parking lot. There'll reciprocal axis or share to access agreement
[12:30] would be required. And lastly, the project concludes, like I
[12:38] said, a DA, her development agreement, um, the developer has
[12:40] agreed to contribute nine million dollars to the city, which
[12:44] would go towards future roadway improvements, um, and by the
[12:46] way, the project would be required to do street improvements
[12:50] along their project frontage. So the nine million dollars is
[12:53] in addition to that. Exchange for the contribution, the project
[12:58] receives, um, longer entitlement period. So instead of the typical
[13:01] two year that's in the menu super code, the project
[13:04] would have seven years. And then, um, the cities development
[13:09] impact fees are not applicable to the project. So I
[13:15] know the wording here is kind of squeeze and small,
[13:18] um, but staff is recommending that the planning commission adopt
[13:21] the following resolutions and recommend that the city council certify
[13:24] the project's environmental impact report as well as approve the
[13:28] project's applications requests. So that concludes my staff presentation, but
[13:32] the applicant has also prepared a presentation for you tonight.
[13:38] All right. Thank you very much.
[14:05] There we go. Better now. Honorable chair, vice chair and
[14:09] commissioners. My name is Daned Planjin. I'm with EPD solutions
[14:13] and our team's been representing ecosystem investment partners. Since the
[14:17] beginning of the Baker Street project. This entitlement has taken
[14:21] six and a half years. And it wouldn't be possible
[14:23] without all the support from staff. Um, everyone in every
[14:27] department here has been along our side helping us make
[14:30] sure that we're bringing forth the best possible project possible.
[14:34] We'd also like to extend our appreciation for the support
[14:37] from the Riverside County Conservation Authority in the California Fish
[14:41] and Wildlife for their support throughout this process. Ecosystem investment
[14:50] partners is a private equity real estate firm that supports
[14:54] ecological restoration projects. Their vision is clear. Balanced biological restoration
[14:59] and conservation with e - commerce. They're currently have 55
[15:04] active mitigation banks and restoration projects across 13 states. And
[15:09] since 2019, EIP is partnered with the RCA to assemble
[15:13] land with critical conservation value alongside surplus land for development.
[15:18] The baker project is the poster child for this initiative.
[15:29] As many may not know, EIP has been in this
[15:31] community for a lot longer than the baker project, Riverside
[15:34] legacy, also known as Walker Canyon, was an initiative brought
[15:38] forward by EIP. Ultimately 240 acres were put into conservation.
[15:44] Um, with the RCA.
[15:54] This project also has been no small feat in terms
[15:57] of the acquisition and the assemblage that was required as
[16:00] part of the project. In total 15 different parcels were
[16:03] acquired. The 10 outlined in red is the development footprint.
[16:08] And the five outlined in yellow are those that have
[16:10] already been conveyed to the RCA for conservation and perpetuity.
[16:21] The land use is limited industrial. The project is consistent
[16:25] with the general plan. The zoning is M1 and M2
[16:28] split. The project is proposing a change of zone to
[16:32] M2. And this is really to bring in the best
[16:34] possible use we can. Um, the full range of industrial
[16:37] and manufacturing use is that are accessible under the M2.
[16:42] Possible growth and employment. Triple A credit tenant. Also building
[16:46] specifications. Today's day and age is requiring the best out
[16:50] there in the industry. And we want to make sure
[16:52] that this project is able to provide for that. Also
[16:55] the M2 opens up for more skilled uses that will
[16:57] allow for the highs paying jobs. A
[17:07] little bit of history on this property. It's been industrial.
[17:11] It has had an industrial land use for more than
[17:13] 30 years. And that there are known industrial plan uses
[17:17] that date back to pre - city and corporation on
[17:20] the site. It's also included within the business district of
[17:23] the city's general plan. The purpose of that general plan
[17:27] is to encourage industrial and commercial uses with sensitivity to
[17:30] surrounding areas such as floodways, wetlands and floodplains.
[17:43] The site has a lot of existing challenges that we've
[17:46] had to work through over the past six and a
[17:48] half years. Two of those are the Southern California Edison
[17:51] easements as well as the topography of the site. Outlined
[17:54] on your screen is an exhibit of our site plan,
[17:57] which shows two of the SE easements in high voltage
[18:00] utility lines that run through the site. The first is
[18:04] a 330 foot SE easement and utilitylines that run perpendicular
[18:08] between building one and building two. Also the IV Glen
[18:13] high voltage steel poles run along the property's frontage of
[18:16] Baker. Southern California Edison has strict requirements for development within
[18:21] these areas that have posed challenges for us that we've
[18:24] had to work through to make sure that the plan
[18:26] works. Additionally, the topography. And actually through the design process,
[18:31] this constraint is actually proven to be a benefit. And
[18:34] that the site slopes, uh, very extreme to the top
[18:38] of a hill. And through our design, uh, the area
[18:40] outlined in red is actually going to be a retaining
[18:43] wall condition at the rear of the property. That's the
[18:46] approximate location that the property will not be visible from
[18:50] any of the residential communities to the rear of the
[18:53] property. So as you head west towards Pear Street, it
[18:57] comes back to grade. As you go away from Peer
[19:00] Street down Baker, the slope comes up and ultimately within
[19:04] that area, it's not visible.
[19:14] As mentioned, there is a large biological component part of
[19:18] this project. EIP is spent. Approximately 3. 75 million dollars.
[19:24] In terms of tying up this area of land. And
[19:27] this area's already been conveyed to the RCA for conservation
[19:30] and perpetuity. The project helps the city of Lake Elsinore
[19:37] achieve the MSHCP reserve assembly requirements. And contributes to the
[19:41] wide area plan for the ultimate conservation goal of 500,
[19:44] 000 acres. There's different repairing and riverine habitat that will
[19:50] be addressed through the project. That includes three vernal pools.
[19:54] Two, which will be expanded as well as several sensitive
[19:56] plants that will either be protected in place or restored
[20:00] through the conservation area. The property will
[20:10] use baker and nickels to the I - 215 freeway.
[20:13] The city - led current general planned update includes Baker
[20:18] and Nichols within the circulation element for truck access.
[20:29] So related to traffic generation throughout a lot of our
[20:33] community outreach meetings that we've had, a lot of conversations
[20:36] that I've been personally involved in, inquiring about the use
[20:39] that we're proposing concerns related to the traffic generation. And
[20:43] I guess questions as to why we aren't proposing a
[20:46] mixed use or a residential compatibility there. Um, other than
[20:50] it not being allowed within the zoning designation and the
[20:53] general plan, um, I think it was interesting that we
[20:57] went ahead and shared this. So this is a daily
[20:59] trips comparison by use. The baker project is on the
[21:03] far left. And as you can see, we did a
[21:06] comparison against other uses that could potentially go on the
[21:10] site such as business park, medium residential, commercial and mixed
[21:14] use. As you can see, the industrial project generates far
[21:18] fewer or the least amount of trips out of any
[21:20] of the other alternative uses that could be considered.
[21:32] As Nancy mentioned, there's certain offsite improvements that the project's
[21:35] committed to making the build out of Baker Street along
[21:37] the frontage, which is the general plan road. The realignment
[21:41] of Baker into nickels for its ultimate configuration as coordinated
[21:45] with the engineering department. The signalization of Baker and Nichols
[21:50] and the build - out appear street along the project
[21:52] frontage. These two renderings were shared, but ultimately I just
[21:59] want to acknowledge that we spent our great deal of
[22:01] time and effort working with staff to make sure that
[22:05] the architectural enhancements in the futures of the building are
[22:07] compatible with the surrounding area. Ensuring that the truck court
[22:11] and screening from the public right - of - way
[22:13] was addressed. And also that there's an abundance of landscaping
[22:16] and screening. I believe Nancy also mentioned this, but the
[22:24] project is in compliant with all sitting and design guidelines
[22:28] of the good neighbor policy. Um, well, the good neighbor
[22:32] policy doesn't apply to buildings under 250, 000 square feet.
[22:36] We did every attempt necessary to make sure that we
[22:38] could also ensure that that building was also designed to
[22:41] meet everything that we could. It's also in compliance with
[22:45] all the construction and operational measures of the Ganebra policy.
[22:51] In terms of economic benefits, about 350, 000 dollars is
[22:56] anticipated to go to the city's general fund annually. Job
[23:00] creation and labor income, both on a construction basis as
[23:03] well as an ongoing operational basis. One - time fees,
[23:11] so approximately 870, 000 dollars to the Lake Elsanor Unified
[23:14] School District 10. 5 million in terms of local and
[23:18] regional transportation and fire contributions, as well as 3. 9
[23:24] million to other agencies. Some of those agencies include the
[23:28] water district, um, MSHCP mitigation fees, and final engineering plan
[23:33] check fees at the applicant will pay toward to the
[23:35] city. Related to the development agreement. We spent a great
[23:42] deal of time with city managers'office, really working through this.
[23:46] And I think the major calling and requests from the
[23:48] city was we need money, and we need money sooner.
[23:50] And so that's how we've structured the development agreement. Um,
[23:54] certain milestones that I would say are a little bit
[23:58] abnormal for the types of projects that we work on
[24:00] to try and get fund sooner so that those funds
[24:02] can be put to work. Um, I think overall we
[24:05] acknowledge that this area needs improvements. These are regional issues.
[24:10] They need regional solutioning. We feel really good behind the
[24:13] contribution that we're making so that this money can be
[24:16] put to work and that there can be an improvement
[24:18] made out here. Community outreach, community outreach has been a
[24:24] big part of our initiative, um, we've really have tried
[24:27] and I've let all those efforts to be transparent and
[24:30] truthful, making sure that we, you know, understand what the
[24:33] community's concerns are, you know, revise our plans and do
[24:37] what we can to work with them. We've had four
[24:39] community outreach meetings, two in 2024 and two more recently
[24:43] in 2026. Um, and it's been a big part of,
[24:45] you know, what we've done and how we've showed up
[24:47] for the community. And then just lastly, in terms of
[24:52] timing, these things take time. So six and a half
[24:54] years to get where we're standing right now. If this
[24:58] project is approved, we would go into final engineering drawings.
[25:01] Followed by construction and opening year. So assuming no roadblocks
[25:06] in our way, um, the earliest that we would foresee
[25:09] this building being built, uh, or buildings being built would
[25:12] be Q1 of 2030. So we have some time ahead
[25:14] of us. And that concludes my presentation. Happy to address
[25:20] any questions you may have. One question. Of course. You
[25:29] mentioned the screening of the site from the nearby residential,
[25:34] both with walls and with landscaping and so forth. Could
[25:37] you remind us that there's a differential. Vertically between the
[25:43] nearest residents. And this property site? Could you mention that?
[25:48] Yeah. So, um, I would say that the nearest community
[25:52] that, um, is partially built would be the KB home
[25:56] development. It's about a fifth of a mile away. Um,
[25:59] there is an elevation grade, but there's also an L.
[26:02] So the elevation grade behind of where those residences are.
[26:06] But there's also an elevation grade difference on the project
[26:09] site from west to east. So, you know, those residences,
[26:13] and we've done visual simulations are included with our project
[26:16] documents, um, indicate the placement of the building, the ultimate
[26:20] grade. And, you know, that is the approximate location that
[26:24] I outlined. Which wouldn't be visible from those, from that
[26:30] community or any other community. To that matter. Right. Thank
[26:33] you. All right. Thank you very much. I was a
[26:38] great, um, presentation. Thank you. Well now. We'll open it
[26:46] up here for public, uh, just right now. So we'll
[26:49] receive comments from members of the public who wish to
[26:52] speak on this manner. We do have a packed house
[26:55] tonight. So, um, please keep in mind that each person
[26:58] may dress the planning commission for maximum of three minutes.
[27:01] Madam Secretary. I'm assuming we've received requests to speak tonight.
[27:06] Corre. Yes. We've received 14 requests to speak tonight. 14.
[27:10] The first will be Juan Cerrado.
[27:19] All right. If you could give us your name, um,
[27:23] where you live. So my name is throttle. You know,
[27:28] we cover a lot of this area, Riversed County. So
[27:31] this is where our members live here in this area.
[27:34] And you're with, if you could tell you no. Okay.
[27:36] Yeah. Like you're in a union. Uh, so good evening
[27:39] commissioners. My name is Juan Sorrow with the labor union
[27:42] of North America. Um, here tonight to speak and support
[27:46] of the Baker Street warehouse project. Uh, this is a
[27:49] significant investment in the city of Lake Elsinor. And I
[27:52] believe projects like this can bring real opportunities to the
[27:55] community. A project of this size means construction jobs for
[27:59] local workers, opportunities for apprentices. To get valuable experience and
[28:03] build a career. Uh, it also means, uh, the potential
[28:06] for long - term jobs once these buildings are up
[28:09] in opening. Um, I also think that it's important that,
[28:12] uh, Lake Illsonor continues to grow, uh, the people who
[28:16] live here have the opportunity to benefit from the growth.
[28:19] Uh, we want to see these projects built with a
[28:22] strong local workforce. And good paying jobs that help families
[28:26] support themselves and keep money right here in the community.
[28:29] I appreciate the commission taking the time to review this
[28:32] project for those reasons. I sprewfully ask that you support
[28:35] the Baker Street Warehouse budget. Thank you so much. Thank
[28:38] you, Juan. Thank you. Next. Speaker is polyterani.
[29:03] All right. We could get your name and where you
[29:04] live. Okay. My name is Polly and I live on
[29:09] Ash Street in Alper Hill Ranch. And good evening commissioners.
[29:15] Um, I'd like, I haven't done this in a long
[29:19] time. Seems like I have to because when I turn
[29:22] my back, then all this bullshit starts happening in our
[29:26] area. So anyhow, I'll be direct. Any zoning change connected
[29:30] to the Baker Street warehouse project is completely unacceptable. The
[29:34] project has already been built as of right under existing
[29:38] M1, M2, and OS zoning. The developers consultant told us
[29:43] city staff. Requested the zone changes to M2 heavy industrial.
[29:50] That was city staff that suggested that. None is required.
[29:55] So if a zoning change appears now, it's not planning.
[29:57] It's manufacturing a justification by city, staff after the fact.
[30:02] And that exposes a city to spot zoning claims and
[30:05] SQA violations because the EIR only analyzed impacts under curtains
[30:10] zoning. But it's really bad. It looks bad. That the
[30:15] city staff are the ones that said, Oh, to the
[30:18] developer, Dan and the guys. Change zoning to M2. We
[30:23] want it to be consistent. And they didn't take us
[30:25] into consideration. We are immune people. Let's be clear. Changing
[30:29] zones after approval breaks the city's own gurus. If violates
[30:34] the good neighbor policy, it contradicts the city's commitment to
[30:37] predictable land use planning and is directly harms, RMU neighborhoods
[30:43] that relied on longstanding zoning when they bought our homes.
[30:48] And any intensification, especially toward heavier industrial means, more trucks,
[30:54] more noise, more emissions, more height, and more impact. None
[30:57] of that was disclosed. None of that was analyzed. None
[31:00] of that. Is justified. And plus. The
[31:10] CUP. Probably said it wrong. Anyhow, it's 12, 000 or
[31:15] 1, 200 houses. And that's not going to happen. Um,
[31:21] poulte and syntax have built fewer houses. So we'll have
[31:25] to wait until Lansing company decides to build the apartment
[31:29] complexes. And who knows when that would be. That's when
[31:33] they'll have to pay to take care of the roads.
[31:36] And Sharon and I came here in two thumbs. And
[31:38] nine, I believe it was, or 10 telling you guys,
[31:41] please do not change the certificate of Apoc up. Occupancy.
[31:51] To 1200 because we'll never get the roads that we
[31:54] were promised. And that's, I can't believe the roads. Anyhow.
[32:05] There's zero legitimate planning basis for altering stable zoning for,
[32:11] okay, I'm going to just close this with one last
[32:14] six. Can I say it? You can finish. Okay. I
[32:18] haven't done this in years. Excuse me. My legs are
[32:23] shaking. I'm sorry. I'm having such a hard time. It's
[32:33] so bad. Can you. Help me. Jane? Oh, I got
[32:37] it. Here we go. Thank you. I will end by
[32:42] saying converting M1 to M2 at the Baker Street site
[32:46] is legally indefensible. Because it increases industrial intensity without general
[32:51] plan justifications triggering new SECOA obligations create spot zoning exposure
[32:57] violates reliance interest and contradicts the city's own compatibility process
[33:02] policies. The city must reject the proposed M1 to M2
[33:06] conversion to avoid significant legal and procedural risk. And the
[33:12] legal risk in this one, buddies. Thank you. Thank you,
[33:15] Polly. The next speaker is Sharon Galena.
[33:33] Good evening. Sharon Galena. Ash Street, Albert Hill Ranch. Is
[33:40] that a good enough? Yes. Okay. The M1 light manufacturing
[33:46] is over often nickels right now. Which I don't, I
[33:52] think that's good. Because light manufacturing has restrictions. Go to
[33:59] an M2 allows intensified use. Allows noise and truck traffic.
[34:07] I don't think Nichols can handle it. Right now, you
[34:10] get on nickels coming home off the freeway. It's backed
[34:14] up. All the way. How's the truck going to come
[34:20] down there? And who wants to hear trucks at night.
[34:24] None of us in Aberhil want to hear trucks at
[34:26] night. M2, you don't know what you're going to get.
[34:29] I hope we don't get boil heights over here. You
[34:33] don't know. You could give, oh, what is it? Oh,
[34:39] let's see. Better put my glasses on for this one.
[34:44] Um, hazmat material. You don't know what's coming. Because M2
[34:49] brings it all in. And people that bought houses, the
[34:56] brand new houses. They paid up to 800, 000 dollars.
[35:01] Who want an M2 behind them. Do you? You don't
[35:03] live there. We all live over there. They don't want
[35:07] to hear trucks at night. It was bad enough we
[35:10] had to hear the mining at night when we first
[35:12] moved in. So I guess that's it. That's it. I
[35:20] guess I'll be back. Thank you, Sharon. The next speaker
[35:28] is Karen Holder.
[35:39] I'm Karen Holder. I live on elderwood street in Alperhill
[35:42] Ranch. Anyway, I totally agree with my other two friends
[35:47] over here. Um, I am against changing it from M1
[35:51] to M2. I also, it was one of my first
[35:54] concerns is to have another oil heights. The traffic. You
[35:58] guys have not addressed the traffic. Um, that is one
[36:00] of the biggest components. The noise pollution. We already have
[36:04] air pollution. Um, from the freeways, the mines, the quarry
[36:09] over here. And now we're going to add more intense.
[36:13] And secondly, the noise. The noise, we have a quiet
[36:15] community. I listened to birds in the morning. I listened
[36:18] to birds at night. Um, I don't want to hear
[36:20] beep. Beep throughout the, throughout the evening. So anyway, I
[36:24] just want to put in. Please do not change the
[36:26] zoning. That is my biggest concern. And then to address
[36:32] the traffic. Thank you. Thank you, Karen. The next speaker
[36:41] is Linda Sloan.
[36:53] Hi, my name is Linda Slocum and I live on
[36:55] Alderwood place. Can you just step forward a little bit
[36:57] so we can hear you, let there. Okay. I'm sorry.
[36:59] Okay. My name is my name is Linda Slocum and
[37:02] I live on Alderwood plays. And when we originally bought
[37:05] here in 2012, we were made a lot of promises
[37:08] and none of them have come true. And now the
[37:11] plan that you guys, that's being proposed is to me
[37:14] absolutely outrageous and ridiculous. I do not want this zoning
[37:19] to change for one. This is supposed to be a
[37:22] residential community. So please, please do not approve this. And
[37:28] the traffic situation is horrible. And we were promised back
[37:31] in 12 that that was also going to be fixed
[37:34] at that nickels was supposed to be expanded. Lake was
[37:36] supposed to be expanded. And none of those plans have
[37:38] come through. So why would we expect anything different on
[37:41] this. Thank you. Thank you, Linda. The next speaker is
[37:51] Jennifer Douglas.
[38:03] My name's Jenifer Douglas. I live on Alderwood in Albert
[38:06] Hill community. Again, as the few people that have come
[38:10] before me, we were promised many different things when we
[38:14] bought the homes and even the new homeowners going in
[38:17] now had no idea that these warehouses were even going
[38:20] to be developed. So the fact that again, you guys
[38:23] are changing the zoning should not be happening. The traffic
[38:26] has yet to be addressed on both of them. We
[38:29] saw the traffic issues at the fullest extent when we
[38:32] had the poppy bloom. People couldn't get in and out
[38:34] of the city. We were actually not even able to
[38:36] alleave our homes during that time because you could not
[38:39] go down lake or nickels, which was our really the
[38:42] only entrances. So again, you need, please do not approve
[38:46] this. Thank you. Thank you, Jenipyr. The next speaker is
[38:54] Patricia Ponzo. Can you hear me? Yeah.
[39:05] My name is Patricia Ponzo. I live on ash in
[39:08] Alberhill Ranch. I'm here tonight because I'm concerned about the
[39:12] proposed make a warehouses on Nichols Road. And I'm asking
[39:16] you to please think about what this project will mean
[39:19] for the people who live here. Why? Because I live
[39:25] here. I drive Nichols Road. And if you've ever tried
[39:27] to get through Nichols around four o'clock in the afternoon,
[39:30] you know exactly what I'm talking about. You don't. You're
[39:34] the one that talked about our traffic. No, you don't
[39:37] have any idea what it's like. The traffic can already
[39:44] be backed up across the freeway and into the new
[39:47] neighborhood. And that's going in one direction. The other direction
[39:50] is backed up way past the electrical power there by
[39:54] Baker Street. In fact, I've learned to change the time.
[39:57] I leave my house just to avoid that. And remember
[40:01] that's just the traffic that we have now. Add on
[40:06] about 1, 900 additional vehicle trips every day. With all
[40:11] those trucks, it's going to be a mess. So I
[40:14] have a simple question. Where are the tricks going to
[40:17] go. And from what I understand, there's no plan to
[40:21] widen the road. Is that still true? You're not saying
[40:26] anything. To wind the road to accommodate all this additional
[40:30] traffic. So what are you going to do? What are
[40:33] you going to do about the congestion? What are you
[40:36] going to do about the diesel exhaust? What are you
[40:38] going to do about the noise. What are we going
[40:40] to do about the safety of the people that live
[40:43] in our neighborhoods. Because once these warehouses are built. We
[40:49] can't just unbuild them when we discovered that the traffic
[40:52] was unbearable. Finally. I want to remind you that we
[40:59] aren't just numbers on a traffic study. Where your residents.
[41:05] We live here. We're your neighbors. And yes, we're also
[41:09] your voters. So please don't just listen to our concerns,
[41:14] nod your heads and send us home. Please do something
[41:17] about it. Thank you. Thank you, Patricia. The next speaker
[41:25] is Orcadia Wilcox. Good afternoon. Orchidea Wilcox. I'm a local
[41:34] resident. Um, this seems to be like a contradiction of
[41:40] what the city of Lake Aussinor is supposed to be.
[41:43] It's supposed to be an extreme sports city, non -
[41:46] industrial city. So this is going to, again, the goals
[41:50] of the city. Like they were mentioning, you know, the
[41:54] pictures are very nice with three or four cars. I
[41:56] don't see all the tracks that are going to be
[41:57] coming and going. I don't see the pollution. That's going
[42:01] to be creating. I don't see all the noise that's
[42:04] going to be creating. That in a picture looks very
[42:07] pretty, but that's not a reality. Let's be clear. The
[42:10] grid. The water usage, the congestion on everything that is
[42:16] going to be happening is not showing on those pictures.
[42:19] The fire haser. You know, a big workhouse like that
[42:24] can catch on fire 300 feet from a neighborhood. That's
[42:28] not safe. Um, right now we don't know for sure
[42:32] what it's going to be there. And you cannot promise
[42:34] what is going to be there. It could be a
[42:36] data center pretty soon using all the water from lake
[42:39] else, you know. 9 million, the little bit of money
[42:44] that this project can bring. It would not pay for
[42:48] the usage of the water, the electricity, the air pollution,
[42:53] the noise pollution, the light pollution of the residence of
[42:56] lake calciner. We need to support the residents. You know,
[43:01] it's very nice for some people that live somewhere else.
[43:04] They want to have a job. But, you know, the
[43:07] people that count and the people that you represent are
[43:09] the people that live here. Not that people are coming
[43:11] to work. Um, I am against the change from M1
[43:19] to M2 because the expansion that you're going to create
[43:24] cannot be controlled after you do that. It will be
[43:28] irreversible. And the damage will be reversible. The little effort
[43:33] that they will put for a little bit of contribution
[43:36] for the ecosystem does not pay for all the acres
[43:39] that they're going to be creating against it. A little
[43:45] bit of money for the school. Please do not sell
[43:47] the city of Lake Helciner for just a little bit
[43:51] of change. This will bring 1900 new daily vehicle trips,
[43:59] 1500 to 1700 daily trips on the I - 15.
[44:02] And even though I don't live off nickel, I have
[44:04] to travel on the 15. I don't hear anything about
[44:07] enlarging. Uh, every day you have to pay coming from
[44:11] Riverside 14 dollars and you still for 15 miles you
[44:14] take an hour. Uh, there's no change for that. We
[44:18] live here, uh, we don't want to have all this
[44:21] congestion. It's not safe. It's not good. You cannot promise
[44:25] that this is going to be good for the city
[44:27] of Lake Kelsinger. Please protect the neighbors, protect the people
[44:32] that put you on your opposition. Thank you. The next
[44:39] speaker is Brianna Wilcox. Evening commission, my name is Brianna
[44:44] Wilcox. I'm a local resident. I'm also a proud union
[44:47] baby. I'm proud union member myself when I worked as
[44:50] a teacher. The thing is when you work as a
[44:52] teacher, you see how the living conditions of your students
[44:55] affects them. My kids are sick. Over a riverside because
[45:00] of all the warehouses that they've just been throwing in.
[45:03] My family's are sick. The congestion is unbelievable. They can't
[45:07] sleep because of the sound and smog and noise pollution,
[45:11] noxious chemicals. We're already getting chronic health conditions for kids
[45:15] who aren't even ten yet. Let alone the rest of
[45:18] their family. Like the people who live here. I don't
[45:23] know if you know what it feels like to be
[45:25] trapped in your neighborhood because of the freeway is clogged.
[45:28] When the wildfire coming. I don't know how close you
[45:31] live here. I'm sure that can be looked up, though.
[45:34] If you bring in what is already congested and what
[45:37] is already a safety hazard. You're just saying you want
[45:40] us to die in a fire. You're just saying you
[45:43] want, are you tell you to go up because water's
[45:46] being used? Electricity is being used. With rigorous safety standards,
[45:49] from so - called Edison, the same sulka, Aldison, that
[45:52] caused the eaten fire, right? And never got accountability for
[45:54] it. Those standards. That's what you're planning for this community.
[45:59] That's what you're planning for these families. They don't get
[46:01] to sleep. They don't get to breathe. They don't have
[46:04] a safe way out. For what. Some temporary construction jobs.
[46:09] And then terrible warehouse jobs. We don't even know who
[46:12] the buyer is for this warehouse. Who is it? Who
[46:15] is paying so much money that they want to profit
[46:17] off of this community. They're not telling us probably a
[46:21] good reason why. I was here for the city council
[46:24] meeting. Well, past series of city council meetings because we
[46:28] were trying to fight an AI data center that didn't
[46:30] say was a data center. It just wanted to be
[46:32] rezoned for industrial use. So who's buying here? Is it
[46:36] a data center? Is it Amazon. Is it the same
[46:39] warehouse conglomerates that force their workers to pee in a
[46:42] bottles because they don't want them to take 15 minute
[46:43] bathroom breaks. The ones that pay barely minimum wage. No
[46:49] vacation time. No real health care for when they get
[46:52] injured at way above industry standards and averages. You want
[46:57] to sell us out for crappy jobs that hurt us
[47:00] for air that poisons us. You want to ruin these
[47:01] families'lives. I appreciate this has been many years in the
[47:05] making. But then I wonder, why has this been so
[47:07] many years in the making without our input. We are
[47:11] the ones who are going to bear the true cost
[47:12] of this. And I'm wondering, why would city stuff wish
[47:15] this through open you to litigation. Trying to justify things
[47:19] after the fact? Where's that money going? Because we're not
[47:22] seeing it. A couple of acres for conservation is not
[47:25] going to mitigate every risk that this represents. And I'm
[47:32] sorry that I'm upset. But it's because I care. I
[47:36] don't want any more kids sick. I don't want any
[47:38] families trapped in a wildfire. You live here, you belong
[47:42] here too. Please vote like it. Thank you.
[47:52] The next speaker is Andrew Molina.
[48:05] The next speaker after Andrew Molina will be.
[48:21] You guys hear me? Alright, good evening everybody. My name
[48:24] is Andrew Melling and I'm a representative with the Western
[48:27] States Regional Council of Carpenters here in Riverside County, representing
[48:30] over 6, 100 members, countywide. And several of them live
[48:35] in and around this area. We're here to speak in
[48:39] favor of the project, not only because of the job
[48:41] opportunities it's going to bring, but also because the developer
[48:44] has committed to using responsible local contractors that will pay
[48:48] an area standard wage, a livable wage, and higher apprentices
[48:52] from a state accredited apprenticeship program. Thank you. All right,
[48:57] thank you Andrew. The next speaker is Louis Briges.
[49:07] The next speaker is Saugaytan. The next speaker is Ruth
[49:17] Bryson.
[49:28] Good evening. My name is Ruth Brissonden from Stand Up
[49:33] for Mother Earth. I also live in Tumisco Valley just
[49:36] up the road from this proposed project. As I'm sure
[49:41] you're aware, this project cite is home to several populations
[49:44] of the rare and endangered San Diego Ambrosia, which will
[49:49] be negatively impacted by this project. In 2002, San Diego
[49:55] Ambrosia was listed as an endangered species under the U.
[49:58] S. Endangered Species Act. In 2010, the U. S. Fish
[50:03] and Wildlife Service at a critical habitat for the San
[50:06] Diego Ambrosia to the listing. This designation of critical habitat
[50:11] created subunit 1B consisting of about 70 acres in the
[50:15] area around Nichols Road where this project has located. The
[50:20] designation of critical habitat stated that this subunit is essential
[50:24] to the conservation and genetic diversity of this species. San
[50:30] Diego and Brosia is found only in a few places
[50:33] in the world. It's found in limited numbers only here
[50:36] in Riverside County, San Diego County and Baja, California. The
[50:40] parcel upon which the proposed project sits contains at least
[50:44] eight different populations of this endangered plant. All of which
[50:50] are slated to be removed and then transplanted in the
[50:53] conserved area. The area is already under conservation. So how
[50:59] is this new mitigation? Anyway, none of the endangered ambrosia
[51:04] at this site will remain in its natural location. All
[51:08] will be dug up and all will be removed. Hopefully
[51:11] some will still survive. The FEIR seems to twist the
[51:16] language at the MSHCP to justify their removal of all
[51:20] of the ambrosia under rationale that since 90 percent of
[51:24] the population cannot be avoided, then none should be avoided.
[51:28] Does that make sense to you. At least some of
[51:31] the ambrosia should remain in situ to maximize the chances
[51:36] of its survival. Translocation should complement, not replace full protection
[51:43] measures for the ambrosia. It's possible that a downscaled project,
[51:49] such as that proposed under alternative number three, the reduced
[51:52] project alternative described in the draft EIR could avoid at
[51:58] least some of the ambrosia. Some would be avoided, some
[52:01] would be translocated, offering the best chance for survival for
[52:05] this rare and dangered native plant. This would also satisfy
[52:11] the primary project objectives due to the similarity in the
[52:16] development type design use and location. I urge you to
[52:23] either reject this project in whole or adopt alternative three
[52:29] instead of the project as proposed. Thank you. Thank you.
[52:32] Red. The next speaker is Ace Vallejos.
[52:47] Good evening. I'm Ashed Vallejo, and I wanted to go
[52:50] ahead and speak in opposition to what is currently planned.
[52:54] M1. M2 is okay. I don't think any of us
[52:57] are against any development in the area. I think, also
[53:01] if you take a look at the RMU zoning, all
[53:04] that zoning allows jobs. Those jobs are very well paying
[53:08] jobs. I know people that work in those light manufacturing
[53:10] in our area and they make a substantial salary. So
[53:14] I don't see where that's an issue. Uh, getting out
[53:18] on Nichols Road. And over the Lake Street or over
[53:22] to the Nicholson ramp. It's terrible. There's just no, it
[53:26] just doesn't even make any sense. In fact, cloud chair
[53:30] and RCTC have no plans right now to do anything
[53:33] with that on - ramp or widening or anything like
[53:36] that. I believe they're working on central now. And there's
[53:39] no scope or work being moved forward on nickels. Nichols
[53:44] eventually, I understand El Toro will come in and merge
[53:48] in with the rest of it there. So that's a
[53:51] long ways off before that ever gets done. The bottom
[53:54] line is as compatible development. Something that's compatible with the
[53:58] houses compatible with the neighborhood. And I think that that
[54:01] would be light manufacturing would be fine. It'd be nice
[54:04] to have a hospital. It'll be nice to have a
[54:07] life city college or something like that. But what you're
[54:10] proposing now is incompatible. It doesn't make any sense. Thank
[54:13] you. Thank you Ace. The next speaker is Michael Moran.
[54:26] I'm fairly new to the area. I'm one of the
[54:28] people that moved in recently that had no idea about
[54:30] the warehouses, you know, real estate agents. They don't tell
[54:33] you those things. So anyway, the reason I came up
[54:38] is I had a question. You had a slide of
[54:41] slide up there about transportation. You go to slide during
[54:44] your presentation about transportation. Could you answer? I had a
[54:48] question about that.
[55:01] So this makes your project look really good. And if
[55:03] I wanted to make my project look good, I'd do
[55:05] a slide just like that. I'm going to have to
[55:11] sit down. Um, yeah, this is a great slide. If
[55:17] I wanted to make my project look good, I do
[55:19] one just like this. My question, I couldn't read the
[55:22] axes. So what's the baseline? I see that that increase
[55:26] is very light. But what is baseline and in a
[55:32] percentage basis? How much does that increase the percentage of
[55:36] traffic? Do we have an idea about that. I can't
[55:39] answer. That. Anybody. And whatever that percentage increase is have
[55:49] plans been made, as many people have brought up, to
[55:53] address the logistics around the area in order to make.
[55:58] The traffic be reasonable. And I didn't hear anything in
[56:03] the presentation along those lines in terms of anything that
[56:06] was going to be done to address that. Um, I
[56:09] do think, I'm all for more jobs. I think the
[56:13] jobs are great. Um, but the good jobs are temporary.
[56:17] This is a warehouse. And those warehouse jobs I know
[56:20] from experience, um, are not the greatest jobs. And the
[56:26] safety issues that have been brought up are very real.
[56:29] Um, so I just wanted to make those points. Um,
[56:32] and, uh, I'm in agreement with the project not going
[56:37] forward as it is until some of these issues are
[56:39] addressed. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker is Andre
[56:48] Masuzov. Hi everyone. Oh, that's nice. Um, so
[56:59] I stand against the licensing change from M1 and M2.
[57:04] To M2. And also I wanted to speak as a
[57:06] person who lives in the new KB home community that
[57:10] was recently built and still in the process of building.
[57:14] Our home, myself and my families and also a home
[57:17] of my neighbors who also have families and the young
[57:20] children will directly oversee the proposed construction proposed baker street
[57:27] project. I think it's going to one negatively impact the
[57:31] air quality, the water quality, the overall look of the
[57:34] area. There is a, I would say big outbreak hill
[57:39] range community and also including this AB home project or
[57:43] large community that has kids. A lot of children actually.
[57:49] It has a school up the hill that will also.
[57:54] Certain issues in terms of air quality that this project
[57:56] will bring. Um, this is a nice presentation, but I
[58:01] do think that for debt area specifically, there are many
[58:04] things that can be done from the city side that
[58:07] can actually improve people's lives there. And instead of building
[58:11] this project, um, I stand not only against the license
[58:14] change, but also against the project in general. I think
[58:17] again, there is much better use of that length in
[58:20] that area. Um, yeah, that's all. Thank you very much.
[58:31] Next speaker is Cassandra Madison.
[58:46] Good evening, commissioners. My name is Cassandra Madison. And I
[58:49] am here to Lake Elsinor resident. Concerned about the Baker
[58:53] Street warehouse project. I am not opposed to economic development.
[59:00] But development of this size must provide benefits that are
[59:03] clear, measurable and enforceable. We renaced to approve more than
[59:08] one million square feet of industrial development potentially operating 24
[59:13] hours a day, seven days a week with substantial daily
[59:17] truck traffic. At the same time, the environmental review acknowledges
[59:23] significant and unavoidable air quality and greenhouse gas impacts. So
[59:28] my first question is simple. What guaranteed benefit to the
[59:32] people of Lake Elsinor is substantially enough to justify accepting
[59:36] environmental impacts that cannot fully be mitigated. I also want
[59:41] clarity on the economic benefit. How many permanent jobs will
[59:45] actually be created at this facility? How many are expected
[59:49] to go to Lake Elsinor residents? What wages are anticipated?
[59:54] And most importantly, what direct tax revenue will this project
[59:57] generate for our city. Regional economic projects are not the
[1:00:01] same has guaranteed local benefits. I also want to know
[1:00:04] who pays for the infrastructure this project requires. Road improvements
[1:00:09] sewer facilities, utilities, traffic, mitigation and other infrastructure connected to
[1:00:15] this development should be paid for by the developer. Lake
[1:00:19] Elsinor taxpayers and rapes should not be asked to subsidize
[1:00:23] the long - term costs of private development. And finally,
[1:00:28] we do not yet know who the tenant will be.
[1:00:31] If this project can operate 24 hours a day and
[1:00:33] accommodate a range of industrial uses, then the strongest protections
[1:00:37] need to be established now before approval, not negotiated later
[1:00:42] after a tenant arise. That includes enforceable truck routes, idling
[1:00:48] restrictions, nor is protections, environmental monitoring, infrastructure responsibilities, and consequences
[1:00:54] for noncompliance. I ask you to evaluate this project not
[1:00:58] only on what is being promised tonight, but on what
[1:01:00] the city will actually be able to enforce 5, 10
[1:01:03] or 20 years from now. Responsible development should pay its
[1:01:07] own way, protecting the surrounding community and provide benefit, proportionate
[1:01:13] to the burden it creates. Please make sure these commitments
[1:01:16] are enforceable and not simply projected. Thank you. Thank you,
[1:01:21] Cassandra. Next speaker is Elliot Ruland.
[1:01:38] Hi everyone, my name's Elliot. I'm a new resident here.
[1:01:41] I live in the KB community. Um, like the gentleman
[1:01:45] that was up here for moments ago. Uh, I moved
[1:01:48] in last year and had no idea that we'd be
[1:01:50] getting a warehouse built right next to us. Um, you
[1:01:54] know, one of the things that I really liked about
[1:01:56] Lake Elsinor is it's a beautiful area. I can walk
[1:02:00] outside my front door and see the mountains and the
[1:02:02] greenery. And it's really beautiful. I see it as a
[1:02:04] place that can grow and develop to a place where
[1:02:07] people want to come and live here and to come
[1:02:08] visit. Um, I don't think warehouse, uh, makes it look
[1:02:12] any more beautiful. Um, I think it makes it look
[1:02:15] quite bad actually. Right. Um, climate is important to me
[1:02:19] as well. And when we are going to be inviting,
[1:02:22] um, you know, semi trucks to be driving on our
[1:02:25] already two small streets, right? Polluting the air. There's kids
[1:02:29] in my neighborhood. There's a, I think an elementary school
[1:02:32] pretty nearby as well. Um, I just don't think that
[1:02:35] that's the right choice. We can, we can develop the
[1:02:37] land and bring things in that will be beneficial for
[1:02:39] the community. Uh, I don't think this is broadly beneficial
[1:02:42] for the community. Um, and then as far as the
[1:02:45] roads, I was commuting up the 15 for quite a
[1:02:49] while. Um, after I moved here. And sometimes just to
[1:02:53] get on the freeway at Lake Street would take me
[1:02:55] like 25 minutes coming from, uh, that KB community nickel
[1:02:59] streets is a disaster. It doesn't even have street lights.
[1:03:02] It curves. You can't even, you can barely see it
[1:03:04] night. You know, I'd like to see, um, our tax
[1:03:07] dollars going towards improving the city for the residents that
[1:03:10] are here. Um, not to, uh, you know, help out
[1:03:14] a big business or a corporation come in and take
[1:03:16] our land and put something there that no one really
[1:03:19] wants. So I hope that you, um, you listened to
[1:03:22] everyone and make a choice that benefits the community and
[1:03:25] not, uh, whatever company happens to come in. Who knows.
[1:03:29] Maybe we'll find out. Uh, when it actually opens. Thank
[1:03:31] you. Thank you, Aliyek. The next speaker is Harley Quinn
[1:03:37] Flint. Hello.
[1:03:48] Everyone. My name is Harley and I'm a resident of
[1:03:52] Lake Elsinor as well as a small business owner here.
[1:03:55] This is my first time speaking publicly. So please bear
[1:03:59] with me. I also did not necessarily plan to speak
[1:04:04] tonight. I just got off of a very long day
[1:04:06] of work. So, um. Please enjoy my bullet points. Um,
[1:04:11] so I am, again, I'm here today as a resident
[1:04:14] and a small business owner. I run a mobile service
[1:04:17] operating from Temecula through Corona, but most of my clients
[1:04:21] are right here in Lake Alsinore. I drive through Lake
[1:04:24] Street in Nickel Street almost on a daily basis. As
[1:04:27] a mobile dog groomer, I aim to provide services of
[1:04:29] care to my community. And I'm working every day to
[1:04:32] find more ways I can be involved and act to
[1:04:34] improve my city. That being said, I speak with my
[1:04:40] clients about their thoughts on the city and their needs.
[1:04:43] Many of them has expressed opinions over the years of
[1:04:46] the condition of, um, one, the traffic. But also generally
[1:04:52] how they've been made promises as they were moving in
[1:04:55] to have a beautiful city, some of the most gorgeous
[1:05:00] scenery going through Lake Street, for example. And, um, they
[1:05:04] feel like that's not being met. Um, and having a
[1:05:10] zone change from an M1 warehouse to an M2 would
[1:05:14] be even worse of a change. Also, as a resident,
[1:05:23] I was here for the Macy fire. My mom has
[1:05:27] a very severe breathing condition. And as an animal lover,
[1:05:32] I also have 10 pets. Definitely not all furry. You
[1:05:35] know, we've got some toads in there. But, um, it
[1:05:39] took us 10 hours to evacuate our animals. And that's
[1:05:43] not including the traffic. That's not, um, that's not even
[1:05:48] including the trips back and forth from different boarding facilities,
[1:05:52] finding a place for us to stay while the air
[1:05:57] quality was so horrible. Now I am fearful of the
[1:06:02] next time that we have to evacuate. Because while we've
[1:06:05] made plans just in case, I want to make sure
[1:06:09] that my family can get out safely. And there's only
[1:06:14] so many people and animals you can fit into one
[1:06:18] or two small vehicles. Um, and so having to take
[1:06:22] multiple trips, knowing how atrocious the traffic already is. Again,
[1:06:27] as a mobile business, I have to sit through it
[1:06:30] every day. Um, I am deeply, deeply concerned. Uh, so
[1:06:36] please don't change the zoning. Thank you. Thank you, Harley.
[1:06:44] The next speaker is David Noblet. Good evening, commissioners and
[1:06:51] city staff. Thank you for this venue to point out
[1:06:54] and make comments to, uh, to this project. So a
[1:06:57] few, first of all, I do live in South Corona,
[1:07:00] so I don't live in the city, but I do
[1:07:01] have a lot of the same. Traffic challenges that, you
[1:07:05] know, residents in the city like elsewhere do. So we're
[1:07:07] not toned up to that. So a few things to
[1:07:10] point out. The site already does have M1 and M
[1:07:13] zone. M2 zoning on the site. And so that's existing
[1:07:19] already there. It is just to create a consistency of
[1:07:22] zoning. Um, and what that does is it allows for
[1:07:26] an M2 zoning. It allows a more larger breath of
[1:07:30] users that have manufacturing uses higher paying jobs. Tech industry
[1:07:34] jobs to come in and actually operate and facilitate those
[1:07:37] buildings. Um, couple things also. Projects like this. Are the
[1:07:43] backbone of infrastructure for cities in the inland empire. They
[1:07:46] pay for the fire department such as this project is
[1:07:50] road streets bridges cities general fund. And so when you
[1:07:53] have a city, you know, that has a lot of
[1:07:55] residents and commercial, but not a lot of industrial. It's
[1:07:59] hard to get, you know, to offset those costs. Um,
[1:08:01] this project is really showing one of the very, very
[1:08:06] few industrial zone areas inside the city of Lake Elsinor.
[1:08:10] Um, and so, you know, the city or Temescal canyon,
[1:08:13] county land has industrial projects that they're going to benefit
[1:08:16] from those dollars. But inside the city of Lake Elsednor,
[1:08:19] the handful of projects that actually can, you know, reap
[1:08:22] the benefit of that. And so, you know, one of
[1:08:24] the gentlemen had mentioned that he was driving to Riverside
[1:08:27] up north to the 15, um, every day for work.
[1:08:31] Well, the idea is when you have it a warehouse,
[1:08:33] when you have a manufacturing facility in your own city,
[1:08:37] there's presence that will no longer have to commute up
[1:08:40] the freeway or down the freeway. Temecula, I grew up
[1:08:43] in specula. Temacula, Lake Elsinor, Minifee, that whole canyon, everybody
[1:08:48] drives out. And so, you know, you either drive to
[1:08:51] San Diego, Orange County, Riverside County, or Los Angeles County.
[1:08:55] With projects now in the inland empire, um, as a
[1:08:58] whole, and good skilled labor jobs, um, medium labor and,
[1:09:02] you know, high intensity labor jobs. We are now bringing
[1:09:05] our residents back home more time with their families, less
[1:09:08] time on the roads. So thank you for your time.
[1:09:10] Appreciate it. Thank you very much. The next speaker is
[1:09:15] David O'Malley. Good evening.
[1:09:25] Hopefully I can bring a positive end tonight's presentation. I
[1:09:29] have kind of a weird hobby or liking. I am
[1:09:33] very interested in land planning. And I really like to
[1:09:36] see projects like this one tonight in front of you
[1:09:38] that are well planned and are designed for a site
[1:09:42] and situation. I've looked at the exhibits. I've looked at,
[1:09:45] I've spoken to the applicant. And this is one of
[1:09:47] a kind. Um, it isn't going up the five freeway
[1:09:50] in grapevine and seeing a big box with a sign
[1:09:52] on it. Very sensitive, well - negotiated. You hear the
[1:09:57] word impact. There's a lot of good impact that this
[1:10:01] property brings. This application brings. It's a great investment. Um,
[1:10:05] I thought I heard nine million dollars with a roadway
[1:10:07] improvements. That's well done. School fees for an industrial site.
[1:10:13] Well done. Conservation mitigation and banking. Well done. I don't
[1:10:17] think I've ever heard that before in all my years
[1:10:20] in this business where a industrial design and application actually
[1:10:26] is sensitive toward the environment. So, um, impact can be
[1:10:31] good. And I think impacts will be very good on
[1:10:34] this particular application and a great addition to your city.
[1:10:37] Thank you. Thank you very much. We did have one
[1:10:42] last speaker request come in. It is Brianna Sora.
[1:10:54] Hi. Everyone. You can pull it down so we can
[1:10:57] hear you a little bit. Thank you. Um, hi everyone.
[1:11:00] My name is Brianna Sarah. I'm here to oppose the
[1:11:03] Baker Street Mega Warehouse. Actually a, I've been living here
[1:11:06] my whole life. I grew up in Lakeyesnor. I moved
[1:11:09] to Orange County. I went to undergrad over there. I
[1:11:13] went to grad school and I recently came back and
[1:11:15] I purchased a home in the terracena community. And I
[1:11:19] love Lake Elsinor. I never thought I would say that.
[1:11:24] Growing up, I remember always wanting to leave just because
[1:11:28] I felt like we were such a small town, but
[1:11:30] coming back in saying how big and how much it
[1:11:33] has expanded and the growth, I wanted to move back
[1:11:36] and just stay here. So when I learned about the
[1:11:41] mega Baker Street Make a Warehouse, I was pretty upset
[1:11:44] just because I felt like we can't be just wasn't
[1:11:48] transparent. I also remember coming to the planning commission meetings.
[1:11:53] And I just felt like there was also a lack
[1:11:54] of transparency there as well. I also feel like the
[1:11:57] city council hasn't really represented us as residents. Um, and
[1:12:01] I feel like we're just being sold to the mega
[1:12:05] companies and to kind of address someone else's comment about
[1:12:09] how these make a warehouses are going to create jobs.
[1:12:14] A lot of people who have, for example, for me,
[1:12:17] this will not be a good job for me. This
[1:12:18] is not sustainable. I cannot live on this type of
[1:12:22] outwardly wage job. And I also don't want my health
[1:12:26] impact to be impacted while it's a concern for if
[1:12:29] I ever want to have children. If they're going to
[1:12:31] have any health issues just due to the proximity of
[1:12:33] the mega warehouse. So I want to concern by the
[1:12:36] fire hazards. Um, like I said, I, my family husband
[1:12:40] here for a very long time. And I have seen
[1:12:42] those wild fires and they're very, very scary. And the
[1:12:46] traffic is already so terrible on the Nichols road. And
[1:12:50] if it's not going to be widened, that's a very
[1:12:51] concerning because there's a lot of residents that not just
[1:12:55] live in the Albrecht, but they also live, um, Mac
[1:13:00] Baker area. We also have the residents that label on
[1:13:03] the other side of the lake. Those are a lot
[1:13:05] of residents. And I feel like you guys need to
[1:13:08] address our concerns first prior. To moving forward with this
[1:13:14] project. Because right now I feel like this is not
[1:13:18] acceptable and it's not really compatible with the surrounding area.
[1:13:22] Thank you. Thank you. Could includes the speakers for tonight.
[1:13:31] Sorry. Was that concludes the speakers for chat? Yes. I
[1:13:34] know we have the pleasure of having, um, a representative
[1:13:37] of traffic with us tonight. I don't know if you're
[1:13:39] prepared or interested in addressing any of the items of
[1:13:43] concerns of the community.
[1:13:57] All right. Sorry for John's spot there. Oh, no worries.
[1:14:01] Uh, yeah, good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Happy to be
[1:14:05] here with you tonight. Um, so obviously I'm Paul. I'm
[1:14:09] the senior engineer here with the city of Lake Elsinor.
[1:14:12] So obviously we recognize the congestion down the nickels road
[1:14:17] area. And so there is an overall city plan to
[1:14:21] help out with the congestion in the area. Um, baker
[1:14:24] is one piece of that. So bakers are obviously going
[1:14:27] to install the intersection improvements at nickelsroad and baker. And
[1:14:31] then they're going to do the realignment as Dane was
[1:14:33] discussing earlier. And then they also, um, that includes a
[1:14:37] signal. And they'll also be building out peer street. So
[1:14:40] that'll provide a nice connection for the community over there
[1:14:42] as well, uh, to have a quicker route to the
[1:14:45] interchange. On top of that, they're obviously contributing the 9
[1:14:49] million dollars. Sorry, let me fix this. On top of
[1:14:53] that, they're contributing 9 million dollars. So that really provides
[1:14:55] the city with flexibility, um, to construct additional improvements in
[1:15:00] the area. Uh, as we see, you know, congestion, uh,
[1:15:06] as we see it develop. On top of that, you
[1:15:08] may remember, call your retail shops. They actually got conditioned
[1:15:12] to construct the signal at Collier Avenue at Nichols Road.
[1:15:16] So that is in final design right now. And that
[1:15:19] will be constructed. Within the next, you know, year or
[1:15:22] so here. And addition to that, we are working with
[1:15:26] a master developer of the Albert Hill Ranch area. And
[1:15:29] so, um, he has a lot of projects down the
[1:15:32] pipeline in this area. Right now they're actually progressing. The
[1:15:35] conceptual design of changing nickel's road to a foreign lane
[1:15:39] road. So that is in the works as well. Um,
[1:15:43] and on top of that, the city has the nickel's
[1:15:46] bridge and interchange project that's currently going through the environmental
[1:15:49] document. So there's a lot of things playing on in
[1:15:54] the background aside from just what you see in the
[1:15:56] conditions here. So I think that that will really help.
[1:15:59] But obviously, you know, improvements take time. And so a
[1:16:03] lot of these do have some environmental components such as
[1:16:06] the interchange. So. In my mind, that's the big picture
[1:16:10] of how everything will develop here over time. Thank you
[1:16:16] very much. All right. Um, do any commissioners have questions
[1:16:22] for staff or wish to make any comments. To be.
[1:16:30] Able to lane. Girls. Now we're talking. Five years. 10
[1:16:33] years. 30. So realistically, it's all tied to, if there
[1:16:41] is any environmental, um, if there's none, it could be
[1:16:46] three years, like anticipated window when that could come in.
[1:16:50] So right. Now. KD home.
[1:17:02] Madam chair, I think the way this is supposed to
[1:17:05] work. Is that we have a public comment substitute, but
[1:17:08] we usually don't engage in a debate in this way.
[1:17:10] So if anyone would want to talk to our traffic
[1:17:14] engineer afterwards, it certainly would be available to do that.
[1:17:17] All right. Thank you. Commissioners, any questions. Of staff. No.
[1:17:27] Um, I would like to say that, um, I want
[1:17:30] to acknowledge, um, everybody for coming out and addressing your
[1:17:33] concerns, um, your support for the project. It's good for
[1:17:38] us to hear from the community. Um, I understand why
[1:17:41] project of this size, um, particularly one involving warehouse operations
[1:17:46] and traffic generates concerns within the community. Our responsibility here
[1:17:52] is a planning commission is to evaluate the project based
[1:17:55] on the city's general plan, the municipal code, environmental review.
[1:18:01] Project design and the conditions that we have the authority
[1:18:06] to impose, which there are several conditions in their conditions
[1:18:09] of approval for this project. So. Um, you know, I
[1:18:14] want to say we hear you, but that's what our
[1:18:18] role is here as the planning commission. So if we
[1:18:20] don't have any other, uh, commissioner's comments, uh, declare, sorry,
[1:18:29] first of all, I appreciate the passion that was brought
[1:18:31] out here tonight. This is part of what I love
[1:18:32] about the lake housenor community. And there was a lot
[1:18:35] of great points that were made all well taken and
[1:18:40] noted, um. A couple of the comments were, well, you
[1:18:45] need to address our concerns. Um, I'm not going to
[1:18:49] sit here and address them point by point. But I
[1:18:51] can say that I've been to, uh, the community outreach
[1:18:56] that the developer has put on multiple times, not to
[1:18:59] hear the same boring presentation, but to talk to the
[1:19:03] community members who did come to the outreach. And so
[1:19:06] I know the passion in this room right now. And
[1:19:09] a lot of voices, but there's this discussion has been
[1:19:12] going on for a while. And there are a lot
[1:19:14] of other voices who have opinions as well. Um, that
[1:19:17] being said, you know, some of the concerns that I
[1:19:19] heard we didn't know that, uh, it was industrial. But
[1:19:24] it's, it's been industrial. Um, and in fact, part of
[1:19:28] it is already M2. I'm personally in favor of larger
[1:19:34] industrial buildings as opposed to smaller. You have the ability
[1:19:38] to have more structured and strategic. You're going to have
[1:19:42] those trucks if it's industrial. And we have a bigger
[1:19:45] warehouse. You have one user who they don't want to
[1:19:47] sit with the cars either. They're going to be more
[1:19:50] strategic on how they're scheduling their routes and how they're,
[1:19:55] um, how they're making their ways in and out. Um,
[1:19:58] and lastly, one of the speakers said that, uh, they
[1:20:01] were proud to call, you know, this home Lake Elsinor
[1:20:04] and they didn't think they were ever going to say
[1:20:05] that. And they talked about the beauty and the expansion
[1:20:07] that has gone on in the city. And this, this
[1:20:10] is part of that. And unfortunately the roads don't get
[1:20:15] bigger. The roads don't get bigger on their own. They
[1:20:18] get bigger out of necessity. And things like our city
[1:20:23] staff did an incredible job negotiating nine million dollars. To
[1:20:28] go towards doing this stuff that we want. So all,
[1:20:31] all the concerns that I've heard are valid. And they've
[1:20:38] been. Comple. They've been, um, addressing those concerns. Yeah. I
[1:20:46] mean, that you would act like. 9 million dollars in
[1:20:47] a lot of money. So. I wouldn't say. Good job.
[1:20:55] I'd say unitable. Job. Are. Somebody who's not a place.
[1:21:01] I'm sorry, but the time for public comments is closed.
[1:21:04] You were all given an opportunity to speak. I'm sorry.
[1:21:08] I got. Your meeting in your room. I'm sorry.
[1:21:18] Yeah. All right.
[1:21:40] We keep moving forward. So. Were you doing? Yes. No.
[1:21:47] Thank you. All right. Public here. I'm going to declare
[1:21:50] the public hearing closed. The time is now 720. Uh,
[1:21:55] may I have a motion. All right. We have a
[1:22:05] motion for approval. Vice chair dvor. Any second.
[1:22:17] By Commissioner Gray. So we'll move to vote. Is it.
[1:22:26] Posting. Oh, I. Can't see.
[1:22:43] The motion passes unanimously. All right. Motion passes unanimously. Congratulations
[1:22:52] to Byrne African. Do we have staff comments tonight. No
[1:22:56] comments tonight. City Attorney comments. No comments, manager. Any other
[1:23:01] commissioner comments. Thank you for staff for all the information
[1:23:07] you guys provided. It was great. Thank you. Yeah, it
[1:23:10] was a great comprehensive report and package. So yeah, thank
[1:23:13] you to staff for all of your work and to
[1:23:16] the applicant for all of their outreach for this. All
[1:23:19] right. Uh, the Lake Elsanor planning commission will join at
[1:23:22] 721 to the next regular meeting on Tuesday, September 15th.