Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

when you are. Thank you. I now call the December 3rd, 2025 planning commission meeting to order. May we have a roll call, please?

Present. Here. Uh please uh stand as you're able um for the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Agenda finalization. Are there any changes to the agenda?

Doesn't sound like song. Okay. All right. Thank you. I'll wait for the clerk to return. Would the clerk please read the statement of participation? This is the opportunity. Thank you. Moving to item number two on our agenda, non-public hearing items. Uh item A, overview of existing specific plans. Could I have the staff report?

necessary. That's what we want to discuss. to see us. But very very categories. We're going to discuss all of them. Hollywood.

So that's going to remain in place. And so that's pretty amended in that regard. Our second category is those that we would consider rescending because um the stated objective or purpose of that specific plan is no longer being met. Um example is the uh spec specific plan referred to 89-38. Basically, that's the year that it was filed. What I'm putting here is um also the aerial so you have context as far as the land pattern that's existing in that particular area. But this particular specific plan when when you go through it, it was clearly established to um for for for infrastructure purposes, a signal at Melrose and East Palm Canyon, a bridge over the wash, the flood control channel is is bisects the specific plan area. Those improvements are not practical with regard to the bridge. If you recall, uh when the commission looked at the PUD for the Nirvana estates, that bridge had gone away because it just wasn't practical from a financial standpoint or a feasibility standpoint. The signal, we had talked about this again during the hearing, um to install it would be in proximity to another signal and you're not going to have that separation. And so when we evaluated it back in 2003, we identified that this specific plan probably can go away. And so to the extent that we review and find specific plans in this particular category, we would um make that recommendation when we get to that uh stage of this evaluation. The third category is um specific plans that have standards in place that make sense but they make sense in a

generalized comprehensive applicable citywide standpoint. So for instance um the specific plans that were attached to the report um there's about five of them between roughly Aino Maravia and this street but I think it is a loss n so north side of Ramon the these specific plans the way they're written um really address the the buffering and the land use interface between the residential to the north and non-residential uses to the south. So along Alisa Road, it talks about um a landscape setback, a building setback, a screen wall. It uh prohibits vehicle access and driveways basically along um Aliso to maintain the residential area. It prohibits them on Raone because the Ramon's a highly traveled street. So it says um within the specific plan that there should be an alley or a shared access point so that vehicle access uses the east west um portions of the specific plan. So you would eliminate that interface. And so things like that when we talk about landscape setbacks, screening methods, um maybe minimizing the height when you have that interface, those are standards that as we look at them, they make sense just from a cityside citywide standpoint. And so perhaps in this instance, this specific plan is not needed. Rather, we would in our new development code incorporate those type of standards. Um and so when we look at categories two and three of course we would do that analysis and consultation with fire department building engineering. So we will make sure that we address those concerns that they may have see how we address them before we take an

action or recommend an action on them. So also when you look at categories two and three you might have a question as far as how do we how do we go about rescending a specific plan? So recision of a specific plan or receding a specific plan is done in the same manner as adopting it. So if it was adopted by ordinance, we come before the planning commission at a public hearing, city council at a public hearing, present an ordinance repealing the specific plan. Um if it was adopted by resolution, we deal with a few that were adopted by resolution. Same process. And so that's how we would go about that. uh when we come to when we're ready to move forward with public hearings with recommendations. Any questions as far as this process so far? Okay. So very simply and then the last category is a category that um we we we want to look at more closely and have a broader discussion um on the specific plan and um standards or policies that are within the specific plan. And the example that we have here, this is a specific plan between or excuse me on the west side of Day roughly between um Ramon and and Dinosaur. So again, there's there's this residential non-residential interface and so the specific plan does contain those type of standards. But the other thing this specific plan does um it allows for mixed use. It allows for residential uh and non-residential it falls back on the uses and standards of the either the PCC zone or the R2 zone and so mixed use the only place we see that is over on the in the down in the cove area where we have that zone district or up in the north north city specific plan where we haven't seen anything develop and so it's a great concept but we don't have a

lot of experience with it in the city as far as implementing that and so um but we know with the code update. We are going to have a mixeduse urban and mixeduse neighborhood um chapters because we do have those two designations in the city limits outside of the specific plan areas. And so these these concepts are going to be discussed. And so it may make sense to have that discussion with those specific plans that have these concepts. And from there we can determine um what mixeduse standards make sense. Is it is can we can we handle it through the code or does it make sense to keep the specific plan perhaps not in the same manner that it is today? Update it update it um incorporate um more clear standards um and then keep it in place as an amended specific plan or or some other tool. Well, there's different ways we can go about it, but um the the point to this is that as you can tell, it requires more discussion. So, that is how we would approach categorizing the um specific plans that we have in place so that then we can come back to the commission and start um identifying those that can go away and those that weren't the further discussion. It could have been. I think it could have been. And so, uh, with that, I would greatly appreciate input. Are we on the right approach? Should we go ahead and move forward with this, um, type of categorization that come back at a later

date? Thank you. Thank you. Let's open that up to discussion here. Um we start uh with Commissioner McFale. Do you have questions for staff?

Okay. Yes. Thanks. Thank you very much. I think this was really interesting and very thorough to to see this uh laid out. I didn't really have a good handle at all on how many there were, what sizes they were, and their history and things like that. And I think one thing that hit me in one of the attachments where I think there were like 37 listed that about 30 of them were enacted in the 80s and the 90s and then it doesn't look like we really do it very much in the in the 21st century. So I thought that was kind of interesting like we were doing it a lot in the 80s and 90s and now we don't do it. And I don't know if we know why that's the case. Is it maybe early on our zoning and our our planning in the early 80s with didn't have some standards in place. We were just doing specific plans all over the place at running. We have so few now compared to years ago.

I did note that in um in SP1014 it actually states that existing zoning ordinance has limited ability to regulate development which was why it said that the special plan was needed. So I'm guessing that that for a while the city felt like there wasn't enough standards, right?

I am a little unclear on the wise and how's uh how special specific plans uh come into to being? Is it the city that proposes this or is it the developers who come to the city and say, "Hey, we would like these five parcels off the road to have certain standards neighborhoods res

either way. It it can be done either way. For instance, um the north city specific plan, I believe that was a city-led initiative and so the city led that and we identified this area north of north of the city, north city. Um and we recognized at that time or it was recognized at that time that uh in order for that area to build roads are needed, water, sewer, uh public uh services, police, fire, and those type of things that um on a peace mill approach probably isn't the most practical. But in a a plan uh approach in the specific plan we identify to support the land uses that would ultimately be there at buildout. What is the sewer needs? What what size um you know sewer lines are needed? Where they where are they going to go? How are they going to connect? Same with water. Same with you know all all the infrastructure. So what's going to be needed to support that area? And then how do we how do we implement that? What what's going to be required and when do we require it? So what's you know the timing of those type of improvements and so and and and if it had been a developer led initiative it would have been the same discussion because the government code identifies exactly what you need to include but but but not to make a short answer long which I just did but it could be either way.

Yeah. Okay. It certainly seemed like the example of those five little ones off Ramon Road, the sort of things they were talking about as I think you're kind of suggesting that maybe for the future and we end up resending that the sorts of things that are in there ought to be kind of covered in our development code. They're very things. So hopefully the development code update may meaning we don't need as many of these in the future. Um I'm definitely in favor of your your recommendation of doing a triage of of them in in the categories that you mentioned and maybe you know looking at the size and proximity one one to the other. The older ones might be the ones that can go first. That all seems very reasonable to me. You already as answered my last question was what's the process foring them? So let's Um, I guess the last little question I have is as it stands now, if you were to get a request for development of some parcel or a couple parcels, it just happened to be in particular spa. Um, do you recall has there been any situations where you've gotten a request, oh, you can't do that because the rules of the SBA say what you want to do can't be done. Have you ever hit any problems with development.

Well, the um the specific plan that um Commissioner Malikov was just asking, right, the single family house.

Yes. Yes. And so um and it was the planner was Dom Counts that that worked on that did a good job of anal analyzing if we make this change, how does it impact other uh areas in the city with that same zoning district. So when when we find that maybe it makes sense to amend a specific plan, we also want to be very cognizant that this change, we want to make sure that this change is is limiting if that's what we want. And so we set those parameters up. So that that's happened. You know, Rio Vista Village that that was also amended uh to facilitate the the new buildout on the west portion of it. I'm I'm definitely in favor of maintaining some kind of mixed use concept with that particular SBA. I think as a you know housing the bands of the housing elements go on increasing I think is probably hoping that as we go through this we we do keep mixed use in our in our questions. Thank you.

You're going to go to Miss Me. Um, uh, great job. I do have a just a couple small questions. The There is no specific plan for the area east of Date Palm at Viscino at the middle school. Correct. Vistino.

Yeah, at the intersection of of Vista Chino and Day Pal. That open land that we have there. The only thing really there is the middle school. I think it's at Baristto or something of that sort. Callum. Maybe it's Callum. There's no specific plan for that area. Do you mean where the soccer field is? Yes. Okay. Okay. So that's over towards the freeway that just it's 30th in Dem not. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Right. So we're not talking if there is a specific plan for that area. We're just not not talking about that particular one. Well, there isn't one. when uh when we go about reviewing the specific plans, we'll look at the specific in this area and determine which category would fit into and then move forward based upon that. I don't I my question I don't understand but I was just wondering if there is a specific plan.

Yes. When you look at know where we had the the gas station sign and the subway sign that we had to talk about and that open land just east of date palm sort of between Vistachino and 30th. Vistachino stops right there, but there is no Well, yes, all this dashed area here on this map along the freeway, these are all specific plans. this dash yellow area. So, I I believe and I'll confirm that, but I because this is such a small it's hard to see uh the streets very well, but I believe there probably is because along the freeway on the south side, you see all those are specific plans.

Okay. So, that is we're just not talking about that specific. We're only talking about the ones today that you're bringing into, right? So, we're talking about the categories and and what was included in the staff report were certain specific plans that substantiate why we're looking at those categories. Got it. Yeah. I just wanted some clarification on that because I thought there was but I wasn't sure. So, and that'll be just addressed at another time.

Right. Right. After we go through the analysis and we have everything sorted into categories, then we'll begin some some more discussion with the commission. So the intent is to look at all 34 specific plans and to categorize them in some way. So this is going to be an incremental discussion. We will be back to continue and further this discussion. We wanted to make sure that we're on the same page in terms of the criteria and really how we're evaluating the specific plans.

Yeah, I I think what you presented is great and I think the one that really needs to be addressed is I think we're all in agreement of that one on date pal that we've already had an issue with uh in that area. You did say mixed use. Isn't the apartment complex just next door that's attached to the Pigford? Isn't this considered mixed use? So, the the zone there's um portion in in the um the cove area that has a mixeduse zoning district um that would allow for a mix of uses, but outside of that zone district throughout the city, there isn't a mixeduse district that we have standards for.

Oh, for some reason, I always thought we were in one like right here, but that's my wrong. All right, then. Those were my only questions. Thank you. So, if it helps, Northgate Church is basically that little white square that's cut out just below number 10. That's Northgate Church right there because I live basically right over here. So I know this intersection. So the in number 10 along 30th, those first two spaces are open land. And then the next that little drawn out box to the right of that is the middle school. And then that little ver uh vertical rectangle is the soccer field. And so the in the area um along Date Palm and the freeway that's the area where uh Arco is. So,

yes, there There a couple of specific plans in there. Sometimes. Commissioner Melikov, I was just going to ask you to please speak into your mic. The stream is having a hard time hearing you.

Sorry, our chair was just Thank you. Do you want me to You don't want me to start over, do you? It's okay. Okay. It'll just be a little bit of an echo, but let's

Okay. Um I think I think that a specific plan at its best can be something like Rio Vista, um which I believe won some awards from the local planning association where you you want a particular style of development to proceed in a certain way. And it would be odd if in Rio Vista you had, you know, a house like that that would be on panorama in there because that's not the style that they were going for. So when you want to proceed with a particular style of development, that's also a good reason for a specific plan. And then oftentimes city councils will ask for a specific plan because they want to see something happen which we did in the north city specific plan which I also think won an award. Um but also um most cities in the valley including us have a specific plan on 111 because they want to see certain things there and they don't want to see certain things there. So, for instance, in India, they have a very detailed specific plan for their downtown, and they made it very clear they don't want drive-throughs in gas stations. Um, and they made it very difficult for those to happen. So, so those are the reasons that you could have a specific plan, and the ones that achieve that are the ones that we want to keep like Rio Vista. Um, I think our downtown specific plan could use some tweaking, but This is probably not a bad idea as to what it was trying to do other than um one of the goals was to slow down traffic which everybody realized it wasn't a good idea later. Um so I think this was a very good report and I look forward to trying to either consolidate or get rid of the ones that just don't

have um aren't conducive to business today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield. Jade.

Um, yeah, I agree with all the other comments. It seems like the vast majority of these, especially the ones that are along Raone, that uh area between Maravia and Day Palm basically, all seem like I don't I don't even understand why they were really created in the first place. Um, I did want to ask about the the one that's along DPOM that we've been talking about, the 8726C. Um, it seemed like it was pretty ambitious. I mean, it talked about having a cohesive architectural style, about having live workspaces. Like, a lot of the ideas in there seemed really appealing to me, and I drive that section of road all the time. And frankly, it doesn't seem like anything that was in that specific plan was ever implemented, and I'm just wondering why. So, if we have a specific plan, why do we then allow developers to just build a mishmash of stuff that don't actually fit the specific plan? Like, what's the point of having them because obviously this specific plan is pretty old. If I'm assuming if it's 87, that means it was passed in 1987. There's a ton of development in that strip that's was in construction when I moved here four or five years ago. So, how did that get through if it doesn't match this plan?

I don't have any answer for you, but we can look into it.

Okay. Um, and I'm not saying those those those buildings are bad. I'm just curious why they weren't um you know why it doesn't incorporate this. I mean my personal opinion is that all of date palm should be a specific plan basically from 30th all the way down to downtown that it should be a a cohesive corridor that has a uh you know a a distinctive some sort of distinctive cohesive characteristic. It doesn't have to all be architectural, but I think that is such a huge corridor for the city that figuring out what we want to do there instead of just having every major intersection. It they look completely changing. And since so many of those uh those areas have lots where we've now allowed allowed people to build out on date palm at the backside of the lots to have a specific plan that kind of envisioned what could date palm be? Could it be some sort of walkable corridor? Um to me seems like a big opportunity. I don't know if that's something that's going to be considered in the the zoning code update, but I would really love to see even if it's not the whole corridor, at least a good chunk of it.

So, if I I can for a moment just pull on that thread a little bit. I I think what you've introduced perhaps is a subcategory of number four, and that's uh specific plans that require some additional discussion. And you know what we've suggested is there may be specific plans we want to retain. There may be specific plans that we want to repeal. There may be new specific plans that we want to create. And that may be an outcome of some of those specific plans that require further discussion rather than have 10, 15, 20 specific plans on the date palm drive corridor that are not cohesive that that are incoherent that that don't u articulate the development outcomes that we want to achieve. Is it possible for us to reimagine the date palm drive corridor and to create that cohesive document? a specific plan really is a refinement of the general plan itself. There are good principles in the general plan. The zoning code is also an implementation of that. We may not want to make the PCC zone district uh the same throughout the city throughout every PCC zone property. We may want to call specific attention to those PCC zone properties on the date palm drive corridor. So that may be a way for us to look at the development code update to set a standard for the PCC zoning district for instance and then to layer on that a specific plan that has a different set of standards a character element if you will. Um we do have a project underway now. We are working with Calpali Samlo Aispo and a design studio. They are actually looking at uh this corridor and we have encouraged them to uh identify bold ideas that may complement the zon and code update. Uh so this may be an extension of the project. I would say it's likely outside uh the boundaries of what we envision that we're going to do

through the zone and code update itself. But certainly if there's a desire, if there is interest, if we see an opportunity to further express the needs of the city and and we want to pursue something of that sort, that may be something for us to continue to have a discussion and even to look to Calpaly San Louis Abyispo and the design studio that we're working with to say, you know, how might we make this better? So, I think that's a good suggestion and something for continued discussion. Great. That actually sounds very exciting.

Is compass blueprint still around? Should that be something that we should look into? blueprint was something that the Southern California Association of Governors used to offer. Is that still around? Can you look into applying for that? I don't know if that is still around but we did a compass compass blueprint project on date palm drive so that is a historic document that is something that we have available for reference now

that never got implemented right

it did not get implemented you were okay um I agree with with the comments from the the rest of the commission I think the the idea of breaking it down the way that you propose is good Um and uh the the idea of some new specific plans that sounds interesting. At the same time, I think we have to bear in mind some kind of principle when we want to have new specific plans or when we may even want to go back and say to city council, you know, the general plan is just not working anymore and there's something you might want to change in the general plan. So, um, I don't know that it's always right to have yet another specific plan to deal with a problem because it they're supposed to support the general plan. So, it maybe there are bigger principles that come into the general plan. I don't know. Um, I I I now understand more, I think, of the process, how these originate, which is is useful. Um but I I wonder too about uh the longevity of a specific plan because of course in the last couple of years we've amended I think three different specific plans as the developers have changed or the the needs for those areas have changed. So um what that means is that whoever had that specific plan, let's take Rio Vista for example, the first developer had a specific plan and a specific idea of how they wanted to lay that out. Um but now in order to encompass market factors and other things, we've revised that quite a bit. I mean that that plan we changed the lot

sizes. We've allowed conominium developments and so on. So um I don't know how that affects things that are already built under the original specific plan when we amend the specific plan, you know. So so that's a concern too. Um the the other thing I wondered about because I've asked about specific plans in the past um and and wasn't really able to to get a grip on them. Is is there a way for us to actually make these documents more public? Um because I can go to the website and download the general plan. But if I want to find the specific plans, I have to come and ask you guys because there is nowhere to find them online. So perhaps that's something that can also come out of this process to to make documents more available to the public and

maybe in the GIS

maybe it's always a theme for me that that I want the public to be more involved in the development of their own city. And so, you know, if we can make it, I don't want to create a million-dollar project here, but if if we can make it available to them in some format, then I think that's useful, particularly as we go ahead and through your program eliminate the the specific plans that are no longer relevant. And hopefully we add some new ones that are relevant. Um hopefully we can also spark some discussion with the public if we're going to add a new specific plan so that they come along and tell us whether we're getting it right because it shouldn't just be our decision to do that kind of thing.

So that's something we can we can simply do as far as making them available to the public on our website. That's very easy to do.

Okay, Mr. Chair, you go to I don't I don't want to direct you to a city that doesn't do it, but There's a lot of cities already. One thing I notic is if it's like a bad specific Good or bad, they're they're public documents. It's not that public couldn't come and request.

Yeah. So, uh yeah, I otherwise I I think this is a great start. I'm wondering how you see the timetable for this evolving alongside the the uh development code changes. Well, so I I would say this is a concurrent effort uh in the sense that there

thought it was something that um we should really be looking at and I don't know if if I know we're doing a lot with our economic development department, but if there's anything we can learn from what they've done um that that would be great because I know we're also trying to bring more unique businesses and and local businesses to the area. So, if you guys haven't seen any of that coverage, there's a couple news I saw I actually saw a national news story about it that they were included on. Um, and then there the local news did a bunch of pieces on it. So, and they had the mayor on talking, but it looks like they've done a great job. And so, I just thought maybe we could learn some stuff from what they're doing and that was it.

Thank you, Commissioner McF. I have no comments. So, um, city attorney is not present. Um, moving on to item number five, staff comments. Chair, we don't really have any comments. We have the standard items that will be on the agenda every time. So, the commission has any questions on the work plan or future items, I'm available to answer.

Yes, we'll be meeting on December 7th. Excuse me. January 7th. Oh, December 17th. Yes. Um, no other comments. Which case this meeting is a place Good job. Try