Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

the chair and vice chair tonight. I will go ahead and call this meeting to order and we will have um our clerk Benson do the do a roll call. Commissioner Baron here. Commissioner Bingham here. Commissioner and Ciso Commissioner Keith here and Commissioner Nukem here. Please also let the record reflect that Selene Sevilla, senior planner, Wilco, city manager, Steven Flower, city attorney. Mike Thorton, city engineer, Asa Benson, commission secretary, is also present. Since our city manager is here, can he lead us in the pledge of allegiance? I will do that. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Since uh our agenda does look different tonight, we are going to start off with business item number one, the annual reorganization of our planning commission um as pursuant to our municipal code. So with that, I will go ahead and open the nominations up for chairperson. I'd like to make a nomination for Mr. Baron to continue as our commissioner or I'm sorry as our chair. Chair. Okay. And do I have a second? I second. Okay. And all in favor? I motion passes. So with that, now I open the nominations for vice chair. I'll make a motion for vice chair to be Mike Burningham.

Can I get a vote? All in favor? All in favor? Yeah. Sorry. I Okay, motion passes. So, we'll just take a moment to uh rearrange our seats. Okay. Oh, yeah. And if you don't mind taking your name plates with you. Yeah, Mike. Try not to take this personal. All right. Thank you everybody. Um, first we have uh public comments on non-aggenda items and I don't have any for non-aggenda. Do we have any emails or I did not receive any emails. Okay. Thank you. All right. Here we go. Uh, approval of our minutes from October 14th, 2024, the regular planning commission meeting. We have two that will abstain and three of us were here. Any changes, corrections? All in favor? I I Sorry, that was just weird for me. So I um did I have a motion and then a second? Yeah, I'm sorry. I did that one. We'll count that as a motion first. Second and then Okay. Is there a second? Yeah. And can we just do the vote of the people who are voting? There's only three of us. Mike Burningham, myself, and and John. Perfect. Thank you. just to confirm the extensions of of our

other two members and it seems to know that yes. Okay, here we go. You ready? All right, I'm going to open the public hearing. Um, Summerwind Trails phase 2B or five. Uh, a request by Paul Aener on behalf of Jen SoCal LLC applicant for recommended approval of environmental assessment 23 03. Um, general plan amendment 2302, Summerwind Ranch specific plan area number one, amendment number five. Um, tenative track map 33536, amendment number one, and tenative tenative parcel map 38212 and development agreement 25502. Staff, thank you, chair, and welcome to our two new commissioners. We're happy to have you here. Um, also want to thank our public for being here this evening. Um, tonight agenda item number two is a public hearing for the project known as Summerwind Trails phases 2 through five. I can get this to Oh, there we go. Okay. Um so again for the project known as Summerwing Trails phases 2 through five and before you this evening you do have a number of entitlement applications um including general plan amendment 2302 specific plan amendment 2201 environmental assessment 2303 new tenative parcel map 38212 an amendment to previously

approved tenative track map 33536 and development agreement 252. So for the project vicinity as you can see here the project is generally within the northwest area of the city um for the project location. So outlined here in blue um it is located within the intersection of interstate highway 10 and uh Santa Mateo Wash. The project encompasses approximately 853 gross acres. So many of the commissioners and public may be familiar with the history of this specific plan, but for the benefit of our two new commissioners and to give a brief overview of kind of where this project is headed and kind of where it started, I'm going to touch on a few points. So, the project in whole was um originally entitled by Riverside County in 1998 and it encompassed approximately 6,000 acres. Since then, the project has been uh chopped up into three separate specific plans with a portion going over to the city of Bulmont. In 1991, after the city incorporated, the city adopted specific plan amendment area 1, which compromised what we now know as Summerwind Ranch at Oak Valley specific plan. and it's about 2,600 acres in total. Between the years of 2020 and 2024, the city has approved three additional amendments. Um, amendment two and three were to accommodate some industrial land uses. Um, and amendment four was to change approximately 24 acres from business park to residential uses. Um the subject project before you this evening is a proposal for uh specific plan amendment number five for again

summer wind trails phases 2 through five. So I so if I can have you shift your focus here to the area kind of outlined with the blue star. It pops up. I think it there we go. Um so this is the area that is approximately 853 acres. Um with this general plan amendment 2302 um it is a proposed change to our land use map. The land use map provises um a water reclamation facility to be removed. With that removal 83 additional residential units will be allowed to be constructed. Um, a school site has also been shifted to relocate some residential uses we have there. We have the current on the left and the revised on the right. So, this general plan amendment also proposes a change to our circulation map. Um, so kind of where that arrow is and where I have that circle. Um, it proposes to revise a divided collector's street and also a minor alignment change to Singleton Road. This general plan amendment also proposes a change to our multi-use trail system. Um, so if you can see right there in the kind of highlighted in red says uh minor trail changes. So it will revise an equestrian tail trail due to alignment changes proposed within tenative trackm 33536 amendment one and these alignment changes are mainly due to grading refinements. So here we have the specific plan amendment area 5. Um which is specific plan specific plan amendment 2201. Um this is our land use map and the proposed changes. All the incorporated

affirmation general plan amendment changes that I previously discussed in the previous slide. Um are within the specific plan um and in the following slide I'll touch on a few more. So phases 2 through 5 has been reconfigured to utilize a lift station adjacent to the town center. Um and it will also change the refasing of phases 2 through 5. Um two, a sewer facility has been resized to accommodate the plant capacity. Um a slight boundary line change has been revised to be consistent with the proposed reacing within tenative trackm 33536 amendment one. Um, and the amendment modifies the reference location where affordable housing units can be located. And this is just in addition to so area B2 has been added to the previous two other areas which I think was T7. So here we have the amended uh tenative track map 33536. Again, this is a proposal to subdivide approximately 853 acres um for the Summerway Ranch area phases 2 through 5. It will be subdivided into four phases. Um and with that um 3,99 single family dwelling units will be able to be constructed. Approximately 82 acres of park and open space and 13 acres for school. So up on the screen, I kind of broke down phase two. uh will be 240 240 acres, approximately 1,800 dwelling units, one school site, uh 25 acres of open space and park um addition uh with addition of the rec center that is part of the 25 acres. Phase three will be 210 acres and that will be 58

584 single family dwelling units and approximately 28 acres of parks and open space. Um phase 4 that will be 217 acres with 374 dwelling units and approximately 108 of parks and open space. Lastly, phase five will be total of 185 acres with 431 dwelling units um and 82 acres of parks and open space. So in addition to the track map, we also have a new proposed parcel map. This parcel map is for finance and conveyance conveyance purposes only and this will be for phase two of the project only. So in addition to um all the referenced entitlement applications, the applicant has also submitted um development agreement 25502. Um generally um an applicant or developer will propose a development agreement um when there is construction of a project that will be phased over several years or it entails a large scale development. So within that development agreement, um I'll briefly touch on a few things um but I think we'll um during our Q&A can follow up with this. So the term is a 10-year term from the previous expiration of the development agreement with one optional extension. Um the developer will have right to develop in accordance u with the development approvals in the development agreement. The fees include um a believe a onetime fee of 250,000 um when with an additional payment of

125,000 for an extension option. The developer will be responsible for public improvements and those public improvements include construction of Robert's road bridge and completion of Cherry Valley Boulevard interchange. They also have an obligation um to construct the city a fire station and that fire station will be built in the town center area. There is also a community benefit contribution. Um the developer is obligated to make contributions for phases 2 through five at certificate of occupancy for uh each dwelling unit. There al there is also a park contribution um which includes improved park and community wreck facilities totaling approximately 90 acres. Um with the project in whole um the applicant has also submitted the fourth addendum to the summer ranch at Oak Valley specific plan and that is environmental assessment 2303. Um the environmental assessment evaluated the potential environmental impacts associated with the summer ranch specific plan. Um and staff determined that the Summerwind Trails phases two through five um disclosed in the previously certified Summerwood Ranch um EIR um sorry lost myself. Um all the potential impacts um related to the project. Um, this fourth addendum supports the conclusion that only minor technical changes or additions are necessary and that none of the conditions desri described in the state SQL guidelines require the preparation of a subse subsequent or supplemental EIR under state SQL guidelines section 15163.

um as detailed herein, the project will not result in any new or increased signific significant impacts that were not already disclosed and fully analyzed in the previous previously certified EIR. So, we do have a handful of recommended actions before you tonight. Um, we are requesting that the council recommend approval of planning commission resolutions 202501 for the environmental assessment, 25 202502 for the general plan amendment, 20250 for the requested specific plan amendment, um, 202504 for the tenative track map amendment 1, 20250 for the tenative parcel map, and 202 256 for the development agreement. Um before we get into the Q&A, um and following uh order of business, the applicant does also have a few comments he'd like to make. So Paul, if you could take the podium, green light on. All right. Good evening, chairman, fellow planning commissioners. My name is Paul Honifer with Jen SoCal 1, owners of Summerwind Trails. I thought it would be appropriate to kind of give the backdrop of why we're here to reface the essentially reface the project. So, can you bring up the uh the side by side? So the original phasing for Summerwind Trails phases two through five essentially started at we'll call it Roberts Road in Singleton and you you would go west on Singleton out to San Timato that's essentially phase two and

then you go clockwise around to the north along Sim that would be phase three and then phase four and then phase five was along uh Robert's Road. The original phasing for uh Summerwind Trails required an intensive amount of upfront infrastructure to just deliver the first unit. It had two lift stations. It had Singleton Road extension out to San Tim. It had the Singleton Bridge at San Timonteo to be constructed. It had the zone 10 potable and recycled water facilities along with the rest of the um sewer water, storm drain, uh streets, parks, etc. So when we looked at this and the town center was going through its uh approvals and amendment number two, it kind of made sense to look at this and say, okay, a lot of infrastructure is being brought in from the town center. How can we piggyback on that to help reduce the upfront costs? So essentially now phase two of amendment number five is the entire area that gravity sewers into the town center lift station. So instead of having to build two lift stations and two the the reservoirs and the bridge and etc. The town center lift station we are contributing to with the town center and most not all but a portion of the water for phase two is served by existing uh zone 12 water potable and recycled water reservoirs that are already built. Second half of phase two we have to construct the zone 11 uh reservoirs. So it's really just kind of to get everything aligned in terms of the infrastructure. Um, and that was the the genesis of the phasing. When we started looking at that, we also talked to uh Bulmont Unified School District and said, "Hey, we're looking at this. We want to make

sure that the school sites that we have identified in specific plan meet your needs." and they came back and said that the school site that was designated, I believe in planning area C2, uh, didn't meet their needs. It was too small. It I think it was only 11 acres. They needed a minimum of 12 and they needed to be on two frontage roads. It was only on one. We looked at a bunch of different alternatives. We couldn't make it work. So, what ended up happening was we moved the school from C2 to original phasing. It was D1. and we had to reconfigure some of the stuff at the intersection of Roberts Road and I think street B to accommodate the school. So that was the other part of it. And then there was a couple other things that happened. The tenative map that was approved didn't quite align with the approved specific plan. There were some roads that moved because of grades. So we cleaned that up. And then in addition to that, the the city, well, as Seline mentioned, uh the water district didn't need the reclamation plant because they expanded the sewer treatment plant. So, we we got rid of that and reconfigured that to for additional units. And so, that all of this came together. And the other part of it was the specific plan had to be reorganized. So it was consistent with the approved specific plan. So phase two is planning area B. Phase three is plan area C, D, and E. So it's all consistent because when we rephased it, essentially phase two, the new phase two became portions of phase original phase two and original phase five, which is why we reorganized the specific plan language. Um

and then the development agreement is being amended to kind of there's a lot of triggers in the development agreement about when certain improvements have to be done and that was revised to accommodate the phasing and it also clarified our obligation in terms of the fire station. Um and I'm trying to think of what else. There's a couple other things in the development agreement that I'm sure won't come to me after I stop talking. So, that was essentially the genesis of it. I'm sure you guys have a lot of questions. Um, and I'm here to answer any questions you may have on this and any questions that from the community. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anything else from staff? No, I think we can open it up for testimony. Then we'll go into the public testimony. This would be the time for the commission itself to ask questions of the staff or the applicant if you have factual questions about the proposal. On our line it says that's number eight. That's that's the end. Next in line on my sheet here says public testimony commissioner's comments is down here. Discussion is on eight. Yeah. um not comments on the project, but factual questions if you want points of clarification before we go into public testimony. See, we don't get the opportunity to have you here with us all the time, so usually we just do that at the end. All right, with that, this may help the may help the public as well with some of the questions they have. Gotcha. John, you have anything? Any questions?

Okay. No question. Only concern that I have was just the water district facility, but I did see that they did expand their facility to, you know, to help out with those requirements. And now um something about the two the two left stations at the at the one of the one of the proposed locations I guess right or you're avoiding to put like the two uh the two uh those two units on that summer trail location. Well, I'll to clarify the lift state. There's still two lift stations that are going to be required as opposed to building two to deliver phase two. We're just doing one. So, there's one lift station that's at the town center that serves all of the town center and some of the developments that are a little bit farther south um up towards Cherry Valley. The Reedman property um is served by the the new lift station, the town center. Let me back up. There's an existing lift station that's a temporary that's pretty much at capacity. That one's being going to be removed and all of that affluent will go to the new town center lift station. Okay. And then the second lift station is in part of phase three and that's on the far west pro end of the property. That will take all of the sewage from phases portions of phase three uh five and four and three and then it pumps it up to the town center lift station. Awesome. Is that it? Anything? I've got nothing. I've been with this project since day one. So, I I've reviewed it quite a bit with the my original maps and things. So, excellent job. Thank you. Thank you. Now, we can go to public testimony. All right. Thank you.

All right. We have uh our first up is going to be Christine Develin. Is it on? It's on. Okay. Um, so I I am actually a um resident of Summerwind Trails and the LAR track and so this property development is going to really directly impact I think all of the residents in those phases. One of the things that I want to make sure of is we're looking at with the schools, right? high school is a huge population and both Yukipa and Bowmont are packed. So, is that something that we're looking at as far as you know what we're housing in those schools? Number two is traffic. Traffic is a nightmare already and the new development that they're putting in right there on Roberts Road and Cherry Valley Boulevard. The extra stop lights, it's congestion nightmare when you're trying to get out to Cherry Valley Boulevard. So, I just want to make sure that we're looking at th those infrastructures as well when we're putting in those developments because this is a lot to add to what's already existing. So, that's all that I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Next up, we'll have Russell Pierce. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, planning commissioners. U my name is Russell Pierce. I'm with RDP Development. I'm the development manager for QR Ber Oak Valley Distribution Center. Um we are a neighbor to the Genese project. the summer one project and we're also being um we're on calls uh as stakeholders together uh every two weeks where we're

working through a lot of issues uh with regard to sharing of costs for the infrastructure namely uh New Roberts Road and Singleton Road. So I just wanted to say just a few brief words about uh being in favor of the GSE project. It's very well thought out. Um and and uh we're all trying to move things forward from a difficult situation with the original OBVC uh going bankrupt. So uh we're all uh cooperating with one another and uh and we're here to to hopefully move that forward. Great. Thank you. Uh Mr. All right. Okay. I haven't got a any answer to my question. I went to the city three days ago and as you know I'm a sensitive receptor advocate. I need to know if there's going to be any project traffic going up and down Calama Boulevard at any time connected to this project. Also, when you put the map up the first time, it looked like part of it bled over onto the other side of the free on our side of the freeway. And I was wondering uh I need clarification on that. I'm just going to read something real quick here. project generated off-site diesel truck movements on Calama Boulevard and Singleton Road. The quarter mile model of greatest exposure risk to our sensitive receptors from the primary

source of diesel toxic exhaust and road dust pollution of toxic air contaminants directly occurring in these areas affect the community. Health risk related to the project construction. Long-term adverse operational impacts will occur when the wind blows diesel particulate into sensitive land use populated areas filled with vulnerable sensitive receptors of our babies, children, elderly residents, exposing them to heavy concentrations of toxic air contaminants that remain in the air for 10 days. So, I just want to make sure that our sensitive receptors are not going to be exposed to any of the project traffic or any of the diesel exhaust contaminants or road road dust contaminants because we've got to protect our sensitive receptors. And I just want to make sure those two questions. Any Calama Boulevard project traffic and what was that overlap on on the other side of the highway that looked like it was into our land? You know, we we can't answer that because this is public comment. We can't make any Well, those are my concerns then. Thank you very much. John Gordon. Uh, so the lady prior to me actually sort of started my question. I'm curious. Um, and maybe since we have Mr. on for here. Um there is an issue with the roads um that currently exists as it pertains to housing that's already in

existence and the the businesses are already in existence. Is there a road plan that are because what I saw kind of surprised me where the Seline stated that the developer would be responsible for completing Cherry Valley and I was under the impression that there was already a plan for the completion of Cherry Valley. So Since the onus is now on Mr. Onafer, is there a plan or a date for completion of the Cherry Valley Road um and the overpass or not? Does that make sense? Cherry Valley, we're dealing with the CALR. So, I don't know if Mr. Thor would like to say anything on that one. Actually, why don't we I think what we're doing right now is we're kind of collecting the the the public testimony and once we have all the public feedback, we can answer those questions at the at the conclusion of that. So, we but we will address that. Great. Thank you. Thank you all. Uh, last one. Rich Rolland. Good evening everyone. Uh, you might remember us as uh the developers of Summerwind Commons uh just south of the continuation specific plan. We were spa number four. Uh I just wanted to come out in our support for uh Paul's uh SPA number five. Uh and uh we are currently constructing the new Roberts Road uh public improvements and getting our site ready for phase one our commercial at Cherry Valley Boulevard and the new Roberts Road. Um we will then be segueing segueing into our phase two

residential uh portion of the project and uh we are also a participant in the cooperative effort to finish the infrastructure along with Paul and the other members of property owners of the Oak Valley Town Center. It's been we've all suffered from a couple of years of delay and uh we're glad to see things moving again and we just wanted to support Paul and his efforts and let you know that uh we're there to finish our requirements and be there to support Paul he's doing phases two through five. That's it. Great. Thank you. Bye. Would the applicant like to come up and add anything to that? Thank you, chairman, fellow commissioners. I will do my best to answer the questions that were um brought up by the various residents. So Christine, first on the school types, at least in the discussions that we've had with um Bont Unified School District, there is not these are not high schools. It'd either be uh elementary school, middle school, or combination thereof. And as far as traffic, uh traffic's a big issue. Obviously, it just all you got to do is get in your car and you'll experience it. Um, we're doing our best, but a lot of it is, you know, as Mike had indicated and will interchange Cherry Valley Boulevard is a CALR project. We're contributing funds to that. Um, we're not constructing it. We're just contributing funds. When it starts,

I I don't even want to say because I thought it was going to start by now. Um, Um, but there are a number of traffic improvements that we are doing and that we're working on with our neighbors to try and get the Roberts Road opened up to Singleton and then the Singleton on and off ramps, working with the city trying to get that opened up. Yeah. So, it's though I mean I think I'm going to speak for myself and I and talking to the city on this. The goal is to open up Singleton, Roberts Road, and the onoff ramps at Singleton first, and then the Cherry Valley interchange work would probably start thereafter. Uh, and Mr. Wright, in terms of the Cal Mesa Boulevard traffic, I cannot guarantee that there will be no traffic on Kal Mesa Boulevard. Um, the traffic study, I'm sure, shows some traffic on Kal Mesa Boulevard. Uh the lion share is going to be internal to the streets and on off onto the freeway. Our project does not go east of the I 10 freeway. We are not doing any improvements on Cal Mesa Boulevard. I'm not saying that. I I I I I think there's probably some traffic on Cal Mesa Boulevard from our project. Yes, I'm sure our traffic study says that. If I if I may, I also like to add um as part of the as part of this fourth addendum, there was a focus traffic analysis that was done and it is appended to the um environmental report.

So you can um ask for a copy. We have the city hall. We should have a copy um and it is also included um in the website. I have a copy of the quarter mile for the sake of preserving the record of the hearing. Um, if you're going to reopen comment, allow people to speak again, we should make that formal and have them come forward. But it's also also within your discretion to just to move on to move on. Thank you, James. We'll get to that question later or uh right now we need to continue the meeting with the gentleman. Uh, and then for John, I think hopefully I addressed your your question on Cherry Valley Interchange and um I there's I know there's a question out there from the phase one uh property owners in terms of the timing of the rec center in phase it's in phase two but we're moving that to be constructed as part of phase three primarily because we're building a fire station in phase phase two. So hopefully that addresses some of the concerns of the That was an email I got from uh some of the residents of phase one. Happy to answer any other questions you may have. Anybody else have any questions? Anyone? Thank you. Thank you, sir. With that, I'll close the public hearing and now back to commissioner comments discussion. John

21 years. I can't hear you on the mic. Anyway, we've lived here 21 years. I've been to a lot of council meetings and I'm really proud of the city and the direction it's taken. Very efficient all department. So, that's it. Great. Thank you, Mike. No, chairman. Nothing, Mike. Um, no. Looking I'm glad to see the project come back. I was getting worried there after we had that speed bump and all and uh had the pleasure of touring Valley Water District in their lift stations what they have in there and all. Pretty impressive. And I think you guys are going to be well handled down there. So, best of luck. No, Louis. Nothing. Okay. I've got nothing. It's a It's a good project there. Um, so with that, uh, we want to make a motion. Quick question. Can we do all these all in one shot or do we have to do them each individually? Yes. One big beautiful motion to approve all the resolutions as presented would be appropriate. That's a lot of reading. Okay. Are you going to say and in that case and uh I'll make the recommendation to adopt all uh PC resolutions one through six. I got a second. Mike it. All in favor? I good. Okay. As number four. Thank you on that one. Okay. So, with that, we'll go to item number four. Before moving into that item, M uh Mr. Chairman, I believe uh one of our commissioners has just decided to recuse himself. Um I

have a conflict. So uh due to the location Oh, I guess it was I was thinking the wrong guy. I thought Mike was the one. I'm sorry. Well, I thought that's why maybe he just went to Don't be yelling Mike. be yelling. Too many of us will answer, right? Okay. C can I ask for some clarification? Has the other commissioner left just for uh point of privilege or or I'm assuming that Okay. Okay. Do you mind if I mark this as a brief recess? Okay. We'll take a brief recess now. Let him get Oh, never mind. He just got back. Okay. Item number four is the Bircher Logistics Center at Oak Valley Town Center. A request by Russell Pierce on behalf of QR Burchcher Oak Valley Owner LLC for approval of planning commission resolution 257 recommending that the city council approve development agreement 253 between Ber Oak Valley Owner LLC and the city of Calama on an approximately 115 acre site within the summer ranch Oak Valley specific plan area 1. Amendment number four as previously plan amendment 21101 and tenative parcel map 37862 and making environmental findings under the California environmental quality act. Thank you chair. So um our city manager will go will actually be presenting this project. Thank you. Um, item number four asks the commission to consider uh recommending approval to the city council of development agreement 25-03 between the city of Calama and QR Ber

Oak Valley owner LLC for the Bircher Logistics Center and Oak Valley Town Center. This project is located on approximately 115 acres within the Summerwind Ranch specific plan. To begin, it's important to emphasize that this project has already been fully approved. The city council approved land uses to accommodate logistics use in 2020 and gathered the projects and granted the project's entitlements in 2022, including the specific plan amendment, tenative tra parcel map, and development entitlements. This rep these approvals remain valid, but they are currently set to expire on September 6th, 2025. As a reminder, the planning commission approved a one-year extension of the entitlements on August 12th, 2024 in accordance with the Calam Municipal Code. The action before you tonight is not a is not a new project approval. Rather, it is a proposed development agreement that would further extend the life of the existing project as the project has exhausted available extensions in the municipal code and secure additional public benefits in the process. We also understand that some members of the public would prefer to see this project expire. However, it's critical to understand that the underlying zoning of this site still allows similar industrial uses in the future, even if this particular project is not extended. What the development agreement does is provide the city with certainty, timing, and tangible community benefits that we may not otherwise receive if the project simply expired and a similar use was proposed later. Specifically, the development agreement includes an immediate $200,000 payment to the city within 30 days of the agreement's effective date. Optional extension fees of $100,000 each if the development developer chooses to exercise two possible two-year extensions. A community benefit contribution of of 50 cents per square foot of industrial building space payable at the time of each certificate of occupancy. This ensures that the city will receive direct community benefit payments as the project is built out.

This would generate up to $1.1 million when all buildings are completed. There is a related reimbursement provision. If any building within the project generates point of sales uh point of sale sales tax within the first 5 years, that sales tax would offset a portion of the developers community benefit payments, creating a shared shared incentive to attract sales tax generating businesses. contribution towards uh public improvement or public infrastructure improvements in the Oak Valley Town Center area with the structure of those contributions tied to the resolution of the city's ongoing litigation with Everest reinsurance over performance bonds. So, I'm going to go into that a little bit. It's important to remember that the public improvements uh for the Oak Valley Town Center were an obligation of Oak Valley Development Company, which has gone into liquidation, bankruptcy, and and the commercial portion of the town center foreclosed on by a lender. Those public improvements were secured by performance bonds obtained from Everest Reinsurance, which the city alleges has not performed under the terms of those performance bonds. I also want to clarify an important point. This development agreement does not trigger new environmental review. The project's environmental impacts were fully analyzed and mitigated through the certified environmental impact report and subsequent agenda. Because the agreement does not change approved land use to building sizes, traffic impacts, or development provisions other than extending the timeline, no additional environmental review is required. Summary, the project is already is already fully approved and entitled but set to expire expire on September 6th, 2025 unless extended through a development agreement. The development agreement secures additional public benefits and infrastructure contributions. The unit does not modify the approved project scope, land uses, or environmental impacts, and the project's underlying zoning would continue to allow similar industrial uses, even if the project expired. From a policy standpoint, the development agreement provides the city with a structured, predictable pathway to receive community benefits and infrastructure investments that would otherwise not be guaranteed. For these

reasons, staff recommends that the planning commission adopt resolution 2025-07 recommending approval of the development agreement to the city council. That concludes my report and I'm available to answer any questions. And at this time, I would like to hand it over to Russell Pierce who is here on behalf of the applicant. Hello again, Mr. Chairman, uh, commissioners. Uh, my name is Russell Pierce, RDP development. Um, now I'm speaking on behalf of the item number four project, QR Bureau Oak Valley LLC. Um, first of all, I I have to say I I've done this for 35 years uh, as a developer and that is one of the best presentations I think I've ever heard um, in terms of summarizing what we're here to do. Um, as Mr. Colbo said, um, this is this is an approved project. Um, all we're doing is extending the time and giving some finite community benefit contributions in the process. Um, and it's unfortunate that we did have the the original master developer, and that's really why we're here. Otherwise, the project would have probably moved forward had things gone according to plan uh, with Oak Valley Development Center. but because it did not um that kind of put us in a position to where everything froze um and now our our entitlements are due to expire shortly. So u this this gives us a little breathing room to be able to restart that project. It also gives the city certainty as to some of the infrastructure development improvements, the roadways. Uh one of the critical paths that we realized uh early on was that the city wanted to ultimately back into it u build the Cherry Valley uh which was addressed earlier on that

interchange uh improvement. Um and in order to do that they have to have new Roberts Road built along with the single Tedoff ramps to be able to have a relief valve while that is being worked on. So this provides for all of that infrastructure to go in in two phases in an initial phase and then a final phase um so that that part of the project can move forward and those critical infrastructures for traffic can be uh can be improved. So uh that's about all I have. Uh but I do want to make myself available to the commission or to the public um if you have any questions at all. Okay. Thank you. With that, I need to open the public hearing. Almost forgot. Okay. So, what you changed it last time. You said we Oh, yeah. It's different. We do it different. The council does. Yeah. Okay. All right. Fine. Yeah, no alignment is changing with this. Again, this is not uh making any changes to uh what was proposed and approved previously. It's uh simply an extension of time. Basically, it if it's relevant, what what were the reasons for the delay? Is it can it be summarized? Uh yeah, I can I can do my best to summarize that because there are a lot. Um that's okay. No, that's okay. That's a it's a great question. Um so there this the when this started being developed um you know shortly so this was approved initially in 2022 September of 2022 and um construction began in earnest and um

really about you know in September of 2023 um financial challenges uh there was issues with um cultural resources um uh delays with the flood control district that that escalated costs. A lot of it had to do with just escalating costs of construction and um unfortunately there was a very complex um land land sale that happened um between the commercial industrial owners. Um that you know part of that was was contingent upon those public improvements being constructed. And so uh because of the those financial challenges they couldn't work out a deal to basically kind of split the costs and so construction basically came to a halt. Um and then it led to ultimately led to the bankruptcy of the commercial developer who is also responsible for all the public improvements. So, you know, we usually when in a in a in a project like this, especially one that benefits multiple developments um and you have one developer that's responsible for all of that, that's guaranteed by performance bonds. And so that's what the city has been processing, right? So, um and obviously that takes time as well. So just all these combination of costs and delays uh have kind of led to where we are today and the city trying to work out alternatives to again get that um that much needed infrastructure constructed um as soon as possible um for multiple reasons not just to serve the future developments but also um the people that are already here. So that's uh that's the big that was the big motivation for us to um negotiate the this development agreement. Thanks. Neither do I. So, um, we do have one public testimony here and I'll go to that one is Paul. Good evening, chairman and fellow

commissioners. Paul on J and SoCal one. Uh, we're in support of the amendment. I think one of the things that everyone kind of forgets is Town Center was responsible to do all this backbone infrastructure. When they stopped, put a big burden on everybody else. And we've been working very closely with Quadrill and the city to kind of come up with a plan um to finish the infrastructure in the town center. Um all of this is kind of tied to the the the bond uh agreement or bond uh litigation that the city's involved with. But in a nutshell, we're working together. Um as Russ had indicated earlier, we have a standing call every two weeks where we discuss the issues and kind of coordinate things. And uh hopefully with this extension, it gives a little bit more runway to get things done in a in a timely manner. Thank you. Thank you. Make it quick. Okay, what I mentioned before was the quarter mile model of the greatest exposure risks to our sensitive receptors. This is in the um environmental impact report. They're the quarter mile exposure risk cover Sandalwood, the Academy School, Sharendelle, Singleton Heights, Rancher Calamsa, and the Stater area there. Traffic overflows on Calama Boulevard anyway when there's a accident or anything. So, he just admitted that there's going to be project traffic coming up and down Kelamisa Boulevard.

And I'm telling you, you cannot escape that quarter mile of greatest exposure risk to our sensitive receptors. You can't because it bleeds over on the other side of the highway into this project. Thank you. Okay, with that, I will close the public hearing. Back to commissioners. You got anything pleasure? Nothing. Mike? No, I don't have anything. Looking forward to get this thing going again. Okay. Well, in that case, I will uh the recommended action is to adopt resolution adopt PC resolution 257 recommending that the city council approved development agreement 253 uh between the city of Calama and QR Burchcher Oak Valley owner LLC and the Bircher Logistics Center at Oak Valley Town Center project. and that the planning commission also find that the project requires no further environmental analysis pursuant to public uh public resources code section 21166 and SQL guidelines section 15162 and 15164. Can I get a second? Second. Second. All in favor? I passes 4. Now we can bring him back.

All right. And we have Luis back. Um, this is the part where we do commissioner comments and reports. Um, this is where we get to talk about whatever you want or ask any questions. John, I appreciate our new members. Welcome to the board. Just happy to be here and learning and appreciate the welcome city to be on the planning. Sorry for a hard question, Louis. There we go. Green light. Okay. I just feel lucky to be here, fortunate, you know, um excited for the the experience and the opportunity to learn, develop from it, and you know, be a part of my city. It's the biggest thing for it. Great. Thank you. All right. Just wanted to thank thank staff for doing all the hard work and all make sure we get this done. It's been a long six months of sitting waiting for a meeting. So I know glad to see audience members. We are so happy to see you honestly. We enjoy you. Please come back and visit us. Thank you staff. That's all I got. Very good. Yeah. Thank you again. Thanks Jesa for helping me out getting my paperwork because I was out of town working and I got all my stuff that I needed. And Will, you did a podcast on this exact this exact story with the that and more. Yes. Um yeah, so uh I did do a development update um probably about a month and maybe two months ago. Um and it did cover this this all of the history of this project quite a bit. Um you know, both the re both of basically both of the items on tonight's agenda and kind of where they were. Um, and so yeah, the the podcast I try to cover those kind of things um because I know that's th those are the things that are most important to our community as far as what's

happening and the impacts that those things will have in the future. So yeah, thank you. Yeah, that that's a good system right there. Will does a podcast every two weeks now, right? Used to do it every week, but now he does them every two weeks. So, but if you want to learn what's going on in the city and things like that, his podcast is the way to go and it's online. So that's that's the way to go there. Okay, with that we will go to our planning director reports and comments, Miss Selene. I have no report. Thank you. Well, how's Kelly doing? Good. She'll be back soon. She should be at the next meeting. Okay, great. Thank you very much. And with that, if there's nothing else from the staff and nobody else, then we'll call adjourn the meeting to our July 14th, 2025 at 6 p.m.