Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Meeting of the Carson Planning Commission is now officially beginning. Welcome all of those of you who are here and those of you who are in our viewing audience. We will begin with our pledge of allegiance, and I will ask commissioner Wilson if she will lead us in our pledge.

Sure. Please rise. It is my honor and privilege to lead us in the pledge of allegiance. Place your right hand over your heart. Ready. Begin.

Thank you so much. Madam secretary, roll call, please.

Madam chair Thomas?

Here.

Vice chair Diaz? Here. Commissioner Dacdaso? Present. Commissioner Guerra? Present. Commissioner

Half? Present.

Commissioner Infume? Here. Commissioner Johnson? Here. Commissioner Wilson? Present. Commissioner Monteclero?

Here.

We have a quorum.

Thank you. Next item on the agenda oral communications for matters not on the agenda the public may at this time address the members of the Planning Commission on any matters within the jurisdiction of the planning commission. No action may be taken on nonagendized items except as authorized by law. Speakers are requested to limit their comments to no more than three minutes each speaking once. Madam secretary do we have any speakers for matters that are not on the agenda?

There are none madam chair.

Thank you. Next item would be your communications for nonpublic hearing items listed on the agenda. Members of the public. The public may at time this address the members of the planning commission on any matters within the jurisdiction of the planning commission. No action may be taken on nonagendized items except as authorized by law. Speakers are requested to limit their comments to no more than three minutes each speaking once. Do we have any comments for non public hearing items?

There are none madam chair. Thank you very much.

Next item on the agenda on the consent calendar we have approval of the minutes from our meeting on 05/27/2025.

Madam chair move to approve the minutes of 05/27/2025.

Second.

Okay, thank you very much. The motion by our vice chair Diaz and second by commissioner Guerra, I think. Yes. Okay.

Call for the vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Thank you.

The next item on the agenda is for public hearing. It is for a tentative parcel map case number 0224 for TPM 8 4421. And, the applicant, well, we will yield to our planner who will be doing a presentation on that item and so we give the floor to mr. Aaron Whiting associate planner

Let's see. Good evening.

The, members of the commission, the items before you tonight is for the consideration of approval of a tentative parcel map, number 84421 consisting of the splitting of one lot into two lots. The subject property is located in the manufacturing light design overlay zone and has a general plan land use designation of light industrial. The property is located primarily in an industrial area that is surrounded by manufacturing light uses to the East, the West, the South, and similar industrial uses located to the North in unincorporated Los Angeles County as can be seen on the map. The site is occupied by two warehouse buildings that were approved by the planning commission in 2022 as part of DOR number 189122. The construction of both buildings is complete, and you

can actually see that in this aerial image.

Here's the proposed parcel map. Parcel one measures 8.55 acres, and partial parcel two measures 5.048 acres. Each resulting parcels adhere to the Carson Municipal Code for standards of minimum lot area, street frontage, access, lot width, and each building adheres to the Karshi Municipal Code standards, including setback, parking, building height, and landscaping. Notice of hearing was posted on-site. It mailed to property owners and occupants within a 750 foot radius in a timely manner on 05/21/2025.

The proposed project is categorically exempt from CEQA provisions to section one fifty three one five minor land division, which consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for residential, commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the general plan and zoning. Staff recommendation is for the approval of the tenetoparcel Map. And that concludes my brief presentation. I'm available if you have any questions.

Thank you. Any questions from my colleagues? Seeing none. Thank you for your report. I do have, speakers. I am going to open the public hearing at this time. As I call your name, please make your way to the mic, and you have three minutes to speak. The first card that I have is from Nate. I'm gonna say Broughton. Alright. Come on down.

Alright. Good evening, madam chair, commissioners, panel.

Good evening.

My name is Nate Broaden. I'm here on behalf of UA Local seven zero nine Sprinkler Fidders out of Los Angeles, to express our support for the project and to ask for your support with a yes vote today. We look forward to this project's development. It will provide good paying jobs, hire local residents, and use responsible contractors. The benefits that will be brought to the city of Carson and the local community with this development are a positive addition and a step in the right direction for our city. We are proud to support this project and ask you for your approval and support of it too. Vote yes on this project. Have a great night. Thank you.

Thank you. Jose Pena.

Hello. Good evening. My name is Jose Pina. I'm here representing CREED LA, and we would like to express our support for this project and ask for your supporting yes votes today. The applicant has assured that the local community, the city of Carson, and LA County as a whole will benefit from this development, and this project will bring good paying jobs into the community. Developer has assured that the build out of these warehouse buildings will be an economic asset to the community with good paying jobs and sound development practices. We support this project and the many benefits it will bring and ask for your supporting YES votes tonight. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next speaker, Beto Asunto. State your name in case I didn't say it right.

Good evening. My name is Veto Pasuto. I am with the Downtown LA Anchor Church, and our ministry is happy to support projects like this one with clear community benefits for for the people in our congregation who live and work in Los Angeles. And this project this project will support our local workforce and lead our stronger community development. We urge you to approve this project to give those in need of a second chance an opportunity to improve their lives. Thank you, and god bless you.

Thank you. And our next speaker is Randy Wetmer.

Make sure this thing's right. Hello. Good evening, council members. Thank you guys for having us here tonight. My name is Randy Wetmer, part of the Ironworkers. Represent Ironworkers Local four sixteen. I'm here today in support of this project. I hope you guys are too. The commitments made by the applicant for local hire ensures that our hardworking men and women are given chances to advance their careers while earning a middle class wage and benefits. Additionally, the choice to hire from our local skilled and trade workforce ensures a high quality project that we built right from the beginning.

A lot of times, our men and women, they're driving sixty, seventy miles one way to work. You know, it takes away from their family, their their time when they could be at a baseball game, softball game, graduation this time of year. So projects like this don't come along that much, so we encourage a yes vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Those are all the cards that I have for speakers. Are there any other speakers in the audience who would like to speak but did not fill out a card? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing at this time and defer to my colleagues for any questions, comments that you may have at this time. Any speakers?

Madam chair, excuse me.

Commissioner Huff.

I'm just curious. I keep hearing of how many jobs will be benefited from this project, And I just wanna know, do we have any idea? Has there been any study about how much our community will actually benefit from that? Just a question.

I don't know if we have anyone here tonight that can answer that. Do we?

Okay.

Our planning manager acting planning manager.

Thank you. And, commissioner Huff, this project is, was entitled a few years ago. So this is, simply, dividing one lot into two. This is already a developed site.

Do

I is it actually creating the division? Is that going to create jobs just from the division? Are we speaking of jobs that were there before just kinda being enhanced?

The latter. We're we're talking about some of previous jobs.

Okay. Thank

you. Any other? Are you complete? I'm complete. Any other questions, comments?

As I had an opportunity to drive by the site and take a tour, if you will, outside the gates. It's a beautiful site. Mhmm. Very nicely done. Landscaping, all of that is good.

I'm going to believe that, with the because what we we will be voting on tonight is simply the mapping and subdividing to have two parcels as opposed to one. Mhmm. I I think that will give the owner of the complex, some versatility in what comes to the site. And I believe that the gentlemen who have been speaking about jobs are thinking more of the more versatility they have in who comes to occupy actually occupy the sites that that will bring the jobs that will come back to the site now that the the project itself is complete. So our decision will be on the parceling from one parcel into two, and that's what we will be looking to vote on tonight.

And, if there if there's no further discussion, I'll entertain a motion.

Madam chair? Yes. I moved to adopt resolution 25 Dash2890 entitled resolution of the planning commission of the city of Carson, finding a CEQA exemption and conditionally approving tentative parcel map number 84421 to split one lot into two lots located at 100 West Alondra Boulevard, A P N 6125 Dash 017 Dash 801112 West Alondra Boulevard, and 219 West Gardena Boulevard, and, also, applicable to all the conditions of approval.

I second the motion.

Okay. It has been moved by vice chair Diaz, second by commissioner Hub. Madam secretary, will you call for the vote, please?

Madam chair Thomas? Yes. Vice chair Diaz?

Yes.

Commissioner Takdoso? Yes. Commissioner Kira?

Yes. Commissioner

Haf? Yes. Commissioner Infume? Yes. Commissioner Johnson?

Yes.

Commissioner Wilson? Yes. Commissioner Monte Carlo?

Yes.

Motion carries nine zero.

Thank you. So we're looking forward to more jobs as they make plans for the occupancy of that site. Okay. Next item on the agenda will be item seven b, public hearing for consideration of recommendation to city council regarding zone text amendment z c c zero four two five, and we have a presentation that will be made and given to us by our planning acting planning manager, McKenna Alexander. Whenever you're ready.

Okay. Okay. Good evening. Thank you, chair madam chair Thomas and the honorable commission Makena Alexander here this evening to present this item to you. And if you give us a few more seconds for a bit of technical housekeeping matter.

Okay. And thank you for the introduction regarding this item to consider a resolution to make various amendments to certain, code sections. Okay. So the proposed text amendments to the new space one zoning code, and there also are, proposal to make amendments to the preexisting Carson zoning ordinance, which you'll be which you'll hear referenced as the old code throughout this, presentation. We're asking the part of it is to make changes to obtain city manager's concurrence before approving or conditionally approving, proposed new land use or development as well as eliminating some, burdensome administrative requirements on the city staff, that's related to the phase one zoning code, and also make it a bit more streamlined for our council members to request review and decisions that's made by the director or the plan commission, which was which will be added to the phase one zoning code.

Specifically, again, the project description includes a text amendment, ZCC's number zero four twenty five. Again, to reiterate, the modifications are to both the old and the new code, which we will reference as the phase one zoning code. These proposed changes, within the old code is to section ninety one seventy three thirty one. And within the phase one zoning code, you'll see recommended changes to sections ninety four eleven four, ninety four eleven five, ninety four twelve six, and ninety four twelve thirteen. This will apply to pending and future land uses or development within the city.

Excuse me. A part of the analysis that was done is and when when you review the staff report, you'll see references to bullet one through five, so to kinda correspond with the reading that you've done prior to the meeting. So part of the analyses, for bullet one is to add text to the old code, section ninety one seventy three. And in bold, you'll see the addition to the section, which reads, the director shall not issue any decision approving or conditionally approving a proposed use or development without first obtaining the concurrence of the city manager or his or her designee. Any such director decision issued without such concurrence shall be of no force or effect.

As a reminder, you're gonna see, various, iterations of this change throughout the next, sections that we'll discuss Because the overall reason is to make sure that when we have proposed land uses or development within the city that we keep the line of communication open between staff level, the, executive team level, which is the city manager's office, as well as our, honorable city council. Bullet two, the changes for the phase one zoning code section ninety four eleven, the community development director. And, basically, it adds a couple of caveats, such as subject to the prior concurrence, subject to, approval, the, the director must obtain concurrence of the city manager. And this is added at the beginning of subsections b, d, h, k, and l. And then also a new paragraph will be added that requires the city manager's concurrence.

And, again, you're gonna hear this throughout the whole presentation, so if it's a bit redundant, please forgive me. It's getting to the, crux of the of the presentation. So, again, the second part of this is adding a new paragraph that requires city manager concurrence before the director decision to approve or conditionally approve a proposed use or development. Mhmm. And, again, if it's not done, then it's it's basically void.

Right? For bullet three, we're still moving on with changes proposed changes to the phase one zoning code. The proposal is amending sections ninety four eleven excuse me, section ninety four eleven five and add a notation to the table of ninety four eleven five as well. And that's again requiring the concurrent getting the approval from the city manager's office before staff or director makes any type of, decisions related to land use or, development. And if it is done, then it's void.

Bullet four, references a change to, phase one as well, which is amending section ninety four twelve six, public hearings and decisions. And, basically, in this subsection j two, there's a line out or what we're removing is, the notification of owners and record of record within a 750 foot radius. The emphasis, again, is to make sure that the, council has the flexibility to, one, they'll know about it, and two, that staff is keeping with the, information flow from staff level to executive team and on to the council. In terms of bullet five, which again is another, amendment requested amendment to phase one zoning code. This is amending section ninety four twelve thirteen, the appeals section subsection g, which calls for review.

So you'll see a line that within this paragraph, any member of the city council may call for review of decision. This is, again, making sure that council has the ability to find out about a project and to have discussion about it. So, again, any member of the city council may call for the review of a decision of the director or planning commission within the appeal period. They can appeal it. The call for the review shall be processed in the same manner as the appeal by any other person.

Such such actions shall stay all pro proceedings in the same manner as the filing of an appeal. So, basically, the same process that we have on on the books right now. Such actions shall not require any statement of reasons and shall not represent opposition to or support of an application or appeal. That con that, kind of that, what I presented before you gives a summary of what is being proposed in terms of the amendments to the various code sections. In terms of CEQA compliance, this project is exempt from it, subject to one five zero six one b three as the CEQA guidelines common sense section.

Public hearing notice was done in accordance of city rules and state. And in terms of the recommendation, staff is asking for approval to adopt the resolution twenty five twenty eight eighty eight as, formally read by our our chair. This concludes staff's presentation. Myself and our assistant city manager are available for questions.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

To my colleagues, are there any questions?

Madam chair.

Yes. Commissioner Guerra.

Thank you. I'm somewhat confused as it relates to notifying the subject's neighboring properties. It would appear that it was lined out. Does that mean that specific procedure as it relates to notifying those properties within the 700 foot radius, is that no longer valid?

That's correct. That means that we're requesting for it to be deleted from this section.

My concern is transparency.

May I? I because I think maybe I think you're thinking that this is removing this section is removing it from any project that takes place where notification is sent out within the seven hundred and fifty radius.

That's why I wanted Cliff

to Yeah. So, yeah, that you you're talking about one thing. He's talking about another. Are you with him now?

I am with him. Thank Alright. So to clarify, this is regarding the administrative review of projects. It's really similar to when we're, reviewing, for for instance, an ADU doesn't that doesn't get noticed. So we're making it aligned that for administrative reviews that are done by the director the director through staff. One, we still have to get concurrence of the city manager, and two, make sure that our determination is, in concurrence with the city manager and move it forward aligned with what we've, been doing with the old code And Assistant City Attorney, if you want to expand on that, that would be great.

Yeah, I can expand on that if you'd like, Commissioner Guerrero.

Please. Thank you.

Yeah. So this does not relate to the procedures for noticing for a public hearing. If a public hearing is required under the code for a planning commissioner or the city council, the notice to property owners within 07/1950 feet would still be sent. This this notice requirement relates to when the director is the approval authority. So it's a ministerial approval or approval, as as Ms.

Alexander was saying, where a public hearing is not required in the first place. It's an approval where, like, for an ADU or minor conditional use permit where the director is the approval authority. The code says after the director issues the decision, they have to issue a notice of decision. And this this section is saying that they have to issue a notice of decision to property owners within a 750 foot radius, and that's what's being proposed to be removed.

Thank you, city attorney. My concern, and I wanted to address that issue, is because, commissioner Johnson and I are currently on the Brownfield's commission. And someone mentioned hanky panky. So I I just wanna assure the public that may be watching this that, we take our responsibility serious and we ask pertinent questions, and I thank you, city attorney. Thank you. I'm complete, madam chair. Thank you.

Okay. Anyone else? So very important that we understand what this is doing, and it is not a, I'll say, project that would come to the planning commission. We make a decision on that project. These would be this would be a situation where the director is making the decision or the staff.

It's an administrative decision. So remember at some point, we have in the ordinance that, not every project comes to the planning commission. If it's below a certain amount, if it's less than 50,000, all those kinds of things, those are administrative decisions that we don't see. And so because the decision is being made at an administrative level, there's no public hearing that is held. And if there's no public hearing that is being held, then you're not noticing people within a 750 foot radius.

Everybody clear? Clear as mud. Talk to me. Say what you gotta say.

I just think it should be clearer

Put it in your

I just think it should be clearer in the language that's here.

Well, they're taking that language out.

Which makes it not clear that they're because they're taking it out.

No. They're taking this the requirement they're removing the requirement for noticing people within a 750 radius. They're removing that because it wasn't happening anyway. Because it was the decision was being made in an administrative level.

Madam Chair, I can speak to

Go that if you ahead.

So this is the fourth bullet point in the staff report. So if you read that the paragraph that's in quotes, Commissioner Imfume, it says the first clause of that paragraph is if the director is the approval authority for the decision. Yeah. So that's where it's clear that it's limited to those types of decisions. And as far as whether this has been done in the past, this is a provision of the new zoning code that was recently adopted.

The old zoning code does not have this provision in it. So this was this is part of the process of kind of working out the kinks of the new zoning code, is this was perceived by staff that this is gonna be too burdensome, where they never did this before under the old code. And so now you have the new code, and this is there, and it's a burdensome thing for staff to have to do that.

Everybody got it. Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you, acting planner planning manager, Alexander. With that, I will officially open the public hearing. And at this moment, I don't have any cards. Madam secretary, do we have any speakers?

There are none, madam chair.

Thank you. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to the commissioners and entertain a motion unless we have any other questions. I'll entertain a motion.

Madam chair? Yes. I'd recommend that we adopt resolution number 25Dash2888 entitled a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Carson recommending that the Carson City Council make a finding of act applicability of CEQA guidelines section one five zero six one b three and approved code amendment to ZCC zero four dash two five adoption of various amendments to the text of the city zoning ordinance related to the community development director approval authority and requirements and city council procedures, as, has been addressed before us as we've reviewed and, had an opportunity to discuss. I second that.

Okay. Been moved by vice chair Diaz and second by commissioner doc Dassel. I would like to, add to that amendment if I may. Just a verbiage of that the city council in their reviewing of this or or this recommendation that we add in there that it'd be done according to charter section three one three f urgency any ordinance declared by the city council as an urgency measure necessary for the immediate preservation of public peace health, or safety, and containing a statement of the reasons for its urgency may be introduced and adopted at one and the same meeting if passed by a two thirds affirmative vote of the city council. May you accept that amendment to

your motion? The maker of the motion accepts.

And the second?

I accept.

And with that, we'll call for the vote.

Madam chair, may

I please

just to make sure that we have the verbiage right for the resolution, I think the easiest way to make the change you're suggesting would be in section five. The initial paragraph of section five of the resolution says, based on the foregoing, the planning commission hereby recommends that the city council adopt an appropriate ordinance. I would add on an urgency basis pursuant to charter section three thirteen f to that to that paragraph. So it would say based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the city council adopt on an urgency basis pursuant to charter section three thirteen f an appropriate ordinance, etcetera. And I don't know if the commission wants to provide any further discussion as to what that basis would be.

I think that completes it.

No further discussion.

Thank you. Alright. With that, we'll call

for the vote. Thank you very much. Madam sir Thomas? Yes. Ayesha Diaz?

Yes.

Commissioner Dacdoso? Yes. Commissioner Guerra?

Yes.

Commissioner Half? Yes. Commissioner Infume? Yes. Commissioner Johnson?

Yes. Commissioner Wilson? Yes. Commissioner Monte Carlo? Yes. Motion carries nine zero. Thank you. Next item on the agenda, we have a presentation from again our acting planning manager McKenna project applicant information project summary consideration of a resolution delegating the planning commission's approval authority for certain density bonus applications to the city's community development director with the concurrence of the city manager The floor is yours.

Thank you again Madam Chair Thomas and honorable commission. So as you mentioned this evening this item is consideration of a resolution for a planning commission to delegate approval for certain disability bonus applications to the director. To provide a bit of a history, the phase one zoning code was adopted last year, and which includes a, new section, Carson Municipal Code section ninety three thirteen point nine k two. Excuse the typo on my presentation. This has established the Disney bonus application projects, including requests for concessions, incentives, waivers, which are subject to review and approval by the planning commission, which is on the phase one zoning, code books right now.

There's also the adoption of the new, code zoning code phase one also included a that a project would require city council approval for related permit or entitlement. The planning commission may deny the project or for the recommendation for approval to the city council, which is in in, strike contrast to the to the state law, the state density bonus law, which which does not mandate that a density bonus, including the concessions, incentives, and waiver requests need to be reviewed or approved by the plan commission or council. It actually leaves the decision on the approval authority to discretion of the local jurisdiction, and this is the main purpose why we're here this evening to align our our code with not only the state density law, but as well as our our general plan, our housing element. To bring it together, as a reminder, the project description includes to consider approving the resolution, delegating the planning commission approval of certain Disney bonus applications. And this only, this only applies to projects that do not require another permit or entitlement, meaning that it doesn't have to come before you in a public hearing for a review, needing planning or city council approval in a public hearing.

The language that's also included with the proposed amendment is there will be a one year trial period, which provides you the opportunity to see if it works or not. So, you could so at some point, we can come back. If this is approved, the planning commission can come back and say, hey. It's working. We like to continue this.

Or, you could say, no. We don't like it, and we can make those changes at within that year's time. Staff is anticipating to bring a code amendment to kind of update it to align with what the proposal is tonight to it's basically a housekeeping item again to correct the issue to align our code with the state the state density bonus law as well as our housing element. If it's not if, if it is not, the proposed delegation of authority would expire in one year unless the planning commission revisited before the expiration. Going back to the purpose of aligning it, there's some issues that we need to that we we recognize that needs to be cleaned up.

The state law governs the density bonus law, and it the way it's written right now, it kinda presents some challenges, that requires the planning commission to review it even though this is a matter that is typically reviewed by administrative staff as the approval authority. Then they also adds another layer of review, which introduces additional burdens and delays for this, which could be a more streamlined process. And this motion wouldn't would not necessarily increase the or decrease the city's discretion. It's it's still be there. And then, also, the CMC does not require a public hearing for a planning commission to consider these type of requests.

For residential projects that proposed density bonus concessions, incentives, and waivers without another entitlement application, so that's what was a part of the resolution. So, again, this this is strictly if there's an application requesting a Disney bonus or its related concessions, incentives, or waivers, not related to, a project that needs to go before the planning commission. Approval of the delegation will align with the code, as I mentioned before, with the state law as well as the city's general plan housing element. And, again, it'll streamline the application review process, which is beneficial for our applicants that are proposing new housing our our new new Disney bonus within our city. Continuing, it won't again, it won't remove city's decision making discretion.

The determination could be appealed to the planning commission pursuant to our municipal code section ninety four thirteen thirteen. And, again, it's effective for one year unless it's superseded by the PC or the Planning Commission resolution to either extend it, end it, or we amend the code to align with the law, making the delegation authority no longer needed. With that summary, I'm I'm moving into our environmental, compliance, CEQA. This project is exempt from CEQA section one five zero six one b three using the common sense exemption. And in conclusion, again, this this proposal will align us with the general plan and making it consistent with our general plan as well as in compliance with the state density bonus law.

Adopting the proposed resolution delegating the planning commission's approval authority for certain, state density bonus law projects to the community development director or designee with the concurrence of the city manager will improve the entitlement process to streamline and coordinate the processing of these type of permits, design review, and funding of housing, projects. So, again, this is a a matter of streamlining as well as share of information, making sure that our executive teams, city manager's office, as well as the council are aware of these type of projects. And, another recap is these are for applications that do not need to go before the planning commission in the public hearing. As such, staff recommends approval of resolution twenty five twenty eight eight nine. This concludes my presentation.

I'm open for questions as well as assistant, city attorney Ben Jones. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions from my fellow commissioners? Seeing none, thank you for your presentation. Thank you. We're open for discussion. If there is no discussion, then we're open for a motion.

Madam chair, if there's no discussions from my fellow commissioners, I'd like to make a motion if I may.

Go right ahead, commissioner Yarra.

Thank you, madam chair. I moved to Closer to your mic. Thank you. I moved to adopt staff's recommendation on resolution two five two eight nine zero entitled a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Carson, finding a CEQA exemption and conditionally approving tentative parcel map number 84421 to split Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm on the wrong one. I'm Try that.

We've done that one.

I'm reading this. Back to the, item eight a density bonus, move to adopt staff's recommendation on resolution two five hyphen two eight eight nine, entitled a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Carson recommending that the Carson City Council make a finding of applicability of CEQA guidelines, section one five zero six one b three and approved code amendment number z c c zero four hyphen two five, adoption of various amendments to the text of the city's zoning ordinance ordinance delegating approval authorization for certain density bonus applications. And I'm complete, madam chair.

I second.

Thank you. It has been moved by commissioner Guerra and second by commissioner Johnson. Will you call and we, madam secretary, for the vote? I'm sure you have any issues.

I just wanna make a clarification. Think there's a typo in the title of the resolution. Yes. Resolution number twenty five dash twenty eight eighty nine. It shouldn't be referring to approving a code amendment. There's no code amendment here. So if we can strike the portion of the title of the resolution that says, and approve code amendment number is UCC o four twenty five, adoption of various amendments to the text of the Carson zoning ordinance, it should just go straight from saying, CEQA guidelines section 15 o 61 b three Mhmm. To saying delegating approval authority for certain density bonus applications to the community development director with the concurrence of the city manager. So just striking out those

Okay.

Two to three lines there in the title, if you see that.

Yeah. So we're starting the strikeout where? It says 15061?

It it starts right after it says 15O61B3.

Mhmm.

So you would delete the words and approve code amendment numbers, ECC number O425, adoption of various amendments to the text of the city's zoning ordinance. Because that was left over from the other item. That's not part of this item. It's just delegating approval authority for certain density bonus applications to the city's community development director with the concurrence of the same manager.

So I'm striking right after one five zero six one b three. I'm striking an approved code amendment number n o z c c number zero four two five adoption of various amendments to the text of the city's zoning ordinance.

Right. Those are the words that would be the

And then we stop there. So I'm I I did that on here. And is it all well, we'll call for the vote.

With unfriendly, can we just get a consensus on the friendly amendment

with the motion maker?

I concur with that change.

Thank you. Commissioner Johnson?

I just wanna clarify even revisiting the language. When I look at the delegation of approval authority, I I understand that we don't have approval authority to delegate it. So would would that even be the right

That is it it this is the correct that is the correct title because you do currently under the new code have approval authority for density bonus applications. The new code states that the planning commission makes the decision on whether or not to grant density bonus concessions or incentives rather than just the approval authority for the project. So that's what would be changed here is the Understood.

So that just doesn't align with state law?

Right. It doesn't really align with the city's housing element as far as streamlining policy. State law, the density bonus law, doesn't specify which entity or official within the city must approve density bonus concessions or incentives. But the idea here is that where the project would otherwise be a director approval project, there's no need to have it go to the planning commission just on the density bonus concession or incentive determination. In that so the the planning commission would be delegating its approval authority for that specific determination to the director in cases where the director would otherwise be the approval authority for the project.

With the concurrence of the city manager.

With the concurrence of the city manager. Yes.

Understood. I'm complete. In.

Call for the vote.

Madam chair Thomas? Yes. Vice chair Diaz? Yes. Commissioner Takaso? Yes. Commissioner Guerra? Yes. Commissioner Huff? Yes. Commissioner Infume? Yes. Commissioner Johnson? Yes. Commissioner Wilson?

Yes.

Commissioner Monte Carlo?

Yes. Motion carries nine zero. Thank you. Next item on the agenda then will be the manager's report.

Thank you, madam chair, and good evening commissioners. Don't have much to report. Did just want to thank the commission for using tonight to take care of some housekeeping items and create some efficiencies for the city. Council has made it clear to us they'd like to obviously see some improvements, not necessary from a commission's perspective but from staff's for transparency purposes. So really appreciate your efforts this evening. And then also just quickly that we are in the process of recruitment for the director position. So as those develop, we will be sure to share them with the commission. That's all I have, but I certainly wouldn't relay it over to my acting manager or our assistant city manager or assistant city attorney for any updates as well.

Thank you.

Thank you, Doctor. Lennox. I don't have anything for this evening. When, except for one thing. When, projects are coming up that maybe you've mentioned to staff that you're interested in knowing about a status, feel free to email me, and and we can kind of provide you statuses regarding that. For instance, someone one of our honorable chair mentioned an interest in the, the pet clinic, the Aska pet clinic that, was approved about a year or so ago, the status regarding that. And that project is in plan check with the expectation that permits should be issued pretty soon. So I would say within a year's time or so, we may see that project complete. And that and that and with that, I am complete. Thank you.

Nothing for you. Madam Chair, just

one more addition. I apologize I didn't mention. One of the efficiency items that we are going to be introducing is trying to transition Planning Commission agenda process into the city's integrated platform that we use for city council. So as we roll that out, hopefully we'll have a test run on the next commission meeting. We'll provide training to all commissioners about how to use that. It's fairly intuitive. It will be using the screens that are in front of you. So we don't want anybody to be alarmed. We will provide opportunity for you all to acclimate so to speak. Thank you. All right. Technology. Boo.

No. I'm kidding. Thank you. Okay. Next, we have on the commissioners, oral communication. Let's start at my right. Commissioner Monteclero.

Yeah. Hi, everyone. So I'm feel happy that to hear from another applicant on the project that will open jobs, job opportunities to our Carson residents. And I'm also extra happy when I hear one of the speakers address the commission as city council. I guess everyone got that.

Right? We are. So it's an honor to be to be called city council even in dreams. I'm complete.

Thank you. Commissioner Johnson.

Thank you. Excited to be here, excited to serve and further contribute to making our, our zoning more efficient and in alignment with our our plans. I did want to mention, and even hearing that the pet clinic's still in motion through plan check, I'm I'm seeing other municipalities and, you know, especially dealing around the disaster, people are exploring thing, ways to get things done quicker. So even looking at, like, AI plan checks and other things like that that, you know, may may push us into the future, but excited to be here and seeing us make efforts to to speed things up and excited for what's to come. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Mpume.

Hello, everyone. I'm honored to be a part of this commission, the planning commission. And I just want to say we're just moving forward and the streamlining. I know that the general plan is a living, breathing document, and we just got it. And it's going to be ongoing changes.

And I just want to say thank you to our wonderful staff, planning staff. And kudos to Benjamin Jones. You're so awesome. Like, the back of your head, and you just you just it just rolls out. You you know your stuff, and I appreciate you. Thank you, miss Laura, for all your hard work too. Okay. I'm complete.

Thank you, Commissioner Wilson.

I echo all of the comments that have already been made by my colleagues. And I'm complete. Thank you.

Commissioner Doc Dassel. A couple

of points. I am definitely excited to see that during a planning commission meeting where we are working on efficiencies within the city, our meeting was very efficient. That's a testament to the work that our staff always puts forth to prepare for these. So hats off to everyone involved. I was also involved recently in a city event to celebrate Philippine Independence Day here in the city of Carson.

And that, again, we have a lot of the city staff to thank for the hard work, the heavy lifting that's required. We've been meeting since February for an event that happened this Saturday and we had roughly 10,000 to 15,000 attendees over the course of the day. So that's a massive undertaking. Again, hats off to everyone involved with that. But also, recently reached out given everything that's happened in Southern California and Downtown Los Angeles.

I did reach out to our Carson Sheriff just to find out if there's any, you know, if there's any leads on any planned protests happening locally within the city of Carson. I'm sure a lot of business owners and residents would like to get as much advanced notice on these things happening, at the very least, to prepare ourselves for this. Again, given everything else that's happening, the climate that we're in right now, I'm sure we would all appreciate if there's any heads up to be had, you know, for that to be shared so that we can ensure and pass that on to our networks and and be ready accordingly. And that completes me. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Huff. You just turned it off.

Uh-oh, turned it off. Good evening. I too will say, you know, I have lots of things going through my mind but they're not directly related to our commission. I will say that I had word that there was a ribbon cutting that took place last week, and lots of our residents have been asking about us. But the word never got to our commission, and I'm informed that it should have been announced to us.

So perhaps some of us should have could have shown up at that opportunity because the residents have been really waiting on us sprouts to come in, and they did have the rim cutting, and none of us were there. So, would you please, or however the chain of command is supposed to go, make sure, if possible, that it is announced in our commission meetings?

Yes, Commissioner Hough. We will. PIO typically sends those invitations out, so I'll check and see what went wrong.

Thank you so much. I did all the other remarks that were made, and I am Clint.

You. Commissioner Guerra.

I'll be brief. It's an honor and a privilege to to serve in this commission with my talented commissioners, vice chair, and chair, and I am complete.

Thank you, commissioner Diaz, vice president Diaz.

Yes. Just ditto everyone's remarks. No report this evening. Thank you. Thank you all.

Thank you. And finally, one last chance. Juneteenth celebration in the city of Carson this coming Saturday, Anderson Park, 19101 Wilmington Avenue, eleven to 6PM. Lots of fun. Bring the family. Bring the kids. Fun zone for the kids. Theme, Jumanji. It is going to be incredible. Food vendors, craft vendors, lots of people, lots of fun, and you will not be allowed on the park before 10:30AM.

I know you line up ahead of time, but know that you have to be patient. 10:30AM, our headliner, dirty rice band will be honoring Frankie, Beverly, and Mays this year, and it is going to be off the chain. So it's an event that you won't want to miss, and it's only being held at Anderson Park because Mills Park is under construction. Next year, hopefully, we will be back at Mills Park. There will be no VIP section. Okay. So we have people still calling asking for VIP tables. No. No. No.

No. No. This is Juneteenth. So there will be a 20 by 40, pop up tent with lots of chairs available. The dance floor will be available. Bring your blankets and your chairs to sit on the lawn. If you're bringing a 10 by 10 pop up for yourself and your family, know that it has to be around the perimeter of the park, not in the middle of the park. We don't wanna block anybody's view. You will not be able to barbecue. We will have food vendors.

So if you bring food, make sure it's already ready to go, ready to be eaten, and no pets. It's not a good day for pets to be in the park, and, you know, they have to do their little business, and not everybody is good about cleaning up. And there are people who are allergic, and there are people who are afraid. So let's not do that unless it is a service pet and you have credentials to show that it is a service pet. So let's honor all of those requirements.

Hopefully, you've heard the advertisements on KJLH. You've seen it on the billboards. You've seen it on the flyers. You've seen it, all over the city. We are putting the final touches on everything, and we're all excited. So let's come out this Saturday, June 14, celebrating in Carson, the Juneteenth celebration. That's all I have at this time. Thank you for coming out. This meeting is officially adjourned.