Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Today is Tuesday, June 3rd, 700 p.m. Um, to watch the live telecast, go to https www.youtube.com/dailycity-streams or on Comcast channel 7. There are three ways to submit public comments. Email your comment directly to the planning division. Submit written comments via the city's website and attend the meeting in person. To email your comment, simply email a comment to the planner identified in the public hearing notice or send the email to m vanlouenailycity.org. Public comments may also be emailed to uh the same email address by including planning commission public comment in the subject line. To submit a comment via the city's website, please visit www.dailycity.org/aggendas to complete the public comment form. In the comment field box, include the item number and the title of the item as well as your comments. To speak at the meeting in person, please complete a speaker card located at the entrance to the city council chambers and submit it to a staff member as early as the meeting as possible. Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in attending or participating in this meeting should call the office of Michael Vanlocken at 650-991-8158 as soon as possible. We um start the meeting by pledging to the

flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty, justice for all. Now we do a roll call, please. Yes. Uh, Sattorii absent. Pineza absent. Bob Pula present. Chris present. Katar present. Uh so now we go on to the approval of minutes uh for December 3rd, 2024. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes from December? Motion. Second. Voice. All in favor? I. Thank you. And approval for minutes of May 6, 2025. So moved. Second. All those in favor say I. I. I. So um meeting minutes approved for December and May. Uh now we go to uh public hearing. Uh may I call Sarah Turner, please to the front. Hi Sarah. Wait. Um what item is it? Oh. Um, no, no, she's on the item three. Okay. So, Sarah, I'm I'm so sorry. Are you speaking on an item on the agenda? Okay. The marijuana dispensary. Yeah. So, I think that's item number four. So, we'll we'll be giving a presentation and then we'll open it up for public. Okay. Sorry about that, Sarah. Um, and as well as Alfredo M. Yes. So, yes, for the agenda item when when we

get there. Thank you. Any other uh public comments for items not on the agenda tonight, this evening? Call this one. Public hearing on this. So, do we have any um public hearing? Call it public um public hearing uh for 2945 Juniperosa Boulevard Planet Fitness Sign Program. Yes. Okay. So now for we have Sam Fielding uh for the sign program SP-03-25-016 768 for Planet Fitness 2945 Juniper Boulevard APN 00006-364-220 Good evening planning commissioner chair Coutur, Vice Chair Fapua, and uh the remaining Commissioner Norris, and members of the public. The item before you this evening is the 2945 Juniper Sarah Planet Fitness Sign Program. The subject property is located at 2945 Juniper Sera, bordered by Washington Street to the north, Juniper Sera Boulevard to the west, and San Pedro Road to the south and east. The subject property is zoned BART commercial within the BART station area specific plan and designated commercial mixeduse CMU in the general plan.

The applicant is proposing to install a new digital reader sign on the Planet Fitness pylon sign uh along Juniper Sarah Boulevard. City planning staff recommended a sign program for Planet Fitness to allow the digital reader sign and include sign improvements to the other existing second pylon sign as well as defined the allowed signage for the Planet Fitness tenant. And uh this slide shows the entitlement uh required the sign program. The sign program uses chapter 17.32 uh signs for the of the planning code regarding the area and height requirements as a guide. A little bit on the background of the project. Uh the applicant approached the city for approval of the modification of the existing standard text pylon sign to become a digital reader pylon sign and this required a use permit. Staff visited the site and observed that there was a mix of weathered box signs and pylon signs and channel signs for Planet Fitness. The second pylon sign along Juniper was observed to be rusting and have faded tenant signs. The goal of this sign program is to develop a sign program to allow a new Planet Fitness digital reader sign to be installed on the existing north pylon sign facing Juniper Sarah Boulevard and improve the second south tenant pylon sign uh and outline a sign program with uniform style size and materials for the Planet Fitness frontages along Washington Street and Juniper Boulevard. This slide uh shows an overview of the proposed signs uh that would be regulated by the sign program as mentioned before the pylon sign one uh

which would include the digital reader sign on the lower half of the sign and then there's a box sign uh which is the existing box sign that's a letter copy board message sign on Washington Street that would be uh removed D uh the existing yellow sign above would would be rem would would still be uh would remain on the on the wall there. And then as mentioned on uh the pylon sign too, there would be a repair and installation of new tenant signs and the illuminated channel letter wall sign. Uh the sign program would follow the the following proposed sign standards. Uh going over um uh variety and providing variety and diversity of the signs. Um encouraging signs with creative names andor logos. The new signage would would not have phone numbers or email addresses on the signs. uh signs, wall signs that are balanced and in scale with the context of the sign space and building and then the regulation uh you regarding the height and visually proportioned and balanced to the building and then the other two uh items there regarding the lighting. These are some of the existing uh site photos of the site. This is the frontage along a Juniper Sera with the arrows pointing out the two pylon signs. Uh these are close-ups of the sign, the Planet Fitness sign uh on your left there. And then the other tenant signage, the other tenant pylon sign that would be

improved. This is the Planet Fitness sign. uh as it is today. The the lower half there is where the digital uh sign would be installed and these are uh two-sided signs. This is the existing box sign located on Washington Street frontage. So the letter copy board sign will be removed and the building wall painted to match the existing wall color. and the Planet Fitness backlit box sign will remain. So, the yellow uh sign at the top will remain. This is just a a map uh plan showing the location of the signs. This is the uh Planet Fitness sign plan. Uh showing the dimensions of the Planet Fitness sign, 168 in in length and 108 in in height. The overall pylon sign is the existing sign. That's not changing. It's about 19 ft 4 in. Both of the first pylon sign and the second pylon sign are the same same height. This slide shows the digital reader. And look again, it's located on the lower half of the Planet Fitness Von sign. Again, this is showing the locations of the Planet Fitness pylon sign and the digital reader. And then on sign C, you could

see where the Planet Fitness illuminated sign on the wall is going to be added. Uh I believe like currently it's it's yellow, so they're proposing it to change it to a purple color. It's a backlit illuminated sign. And this has the dimensions for the Planet Fitness wall sign. So staff has reviewed the project for the California Environmental Quality Act and uh has determined that it is exempt pursuant to section 15301 existing facilities class one in that the sign involves uh minor alteration of existing private structures involving involving ne negligible or no expansion of the existing or former used and uh also involves changing the existing copy of the signs. Staff finds that the project is consistent with the city's general plan designation and zoning the daily city code sections chapter 17.32 and 17.44 44 and the project is exempt pursuant to SQA section 15301 existing facilities. Staff has determined that the proposal uh see yeah I already mentioned that um staff is recommending that planning commission recommend approval to the city council uh approval of the sign program for the 2945 Juniper Sera Planet Fitness sign program. And uh this concludes my presentation. Um, we also have the

applicant, Bob McClennon, available to answer questions along with staff. Thank you. Thanks. Does anyone have any questions? Any questions or regarding No, I would just say that I think this is a a very nice proposal for a business that's been here for many years and that is a integral part of our community. And uh I I appreciate the fact that the business people in our community continue to improve their businesses and uh it just makes our whole community look nicer and better and so I think this is a real plus as far as that goes. I would support it. Thank you, Tom. No, I I do support it. It's it's about time to change that sign over there, too. So, it's a good way to promote, you know, that corner right there. And it's um it's eye-catching to how the fonts and the the colors that it's going to be applying. So, thank you. Okay. So, can I get a motion um for approving the sign program SP- 03-25-016768? Motion. Second. All those in favor? I I So, um action is approved. Um can we go to next item? Item three. Thank you, Sam. Thank you. Thanks, Sam.

So, for this item three, three, is it three or four? Four. On my sheet, it's three. It's four. Okay. For item four, um, Tatum Motherhead, um, we'll, uh, speak on the zone change ZC-04-24-16507, amendments to the zoning map, reszoning parcels to be included in the existing CC commercial cannabis combining district. Good evening, honorable chair, members of the commission. It's nice to see you this evening. Uh so before you this evening, we have amendments to the zoning map to reszone parcels to be included in the commercial cannabis combining district. Um just a bit of background here. Um the the commercial cannabis combining district was originally uh proposed to have 12 eligibility zones that would include 230 properties. This was back in um 2021. Um and those eligibility zones that were selected at that time looked at um a map and created buffer zones around schools and uh youth centers. Um, but in 2021 after some public hearings, the residents and community organizations did express concerns about the number of eligibility zones because again, there were 12 zones that would allow for a total of 12 cannabis retailers citywide. Um, areas of particular

concern were School Street, Mission Street, and Skyline Plaza. When the city council uh reviewed uh the combining district back in 2021, they um did remove School Street and um Mission Street and also uh wanted to pull out the Beayshore neighborhood. The Skyline Plaza neighborhood did get um approved for a cannabis overlay zone. So, this was the map that was originally used to select the zones. The areas in red were the cannabis zones and the areas in green were parks and schools. So since the adoption of the overlay zones, the city has um had three businesses. U Meabud at Skyline Plaza that's currently closed, so it's not in operation. And then there are two open businesses. one um Catalyst dispensary at thousand 1000 King Drive and Nectar at 2468 Hunibra Sera Boulevard. Um since they've been able to operate uh staff hasn't seen any negative impacts to the neighborhood as a result of the the businesses. Another thing we learned is again with the seven cannabis zones that we have, we didn't see that there was this, you know, um, demand to have each zone occupied. So, this is a little slide to kind of go over what we currently have. So, uh, when it was approved, uh, six eligibility zones were approved with one retailer allowed in each zone. Um then there was an amendment in July of 2023 that allowed a additional zone at 1618 Sullivan. So that makes for a total of seven zones and again we only have two

that are currently operating. The overlay district doesn't require any further discretionary approval. So the approval of the zones then puts um the actual opening of a new facility in a ministerial process, a business license process that does have added review, security requirements, uh background checks, those sorts of things. But that's occurring at the ministerial level. The proposal for you this evening is to reconsider two of the zones that were left out um on the first uh adoption of the overlay district. So we're looking at um including Mission Street and Geneva Avenue. So that would create two new eligibility zones um for two new potential re uh retailers. So this is area A. This is Mission Street between uh Crocker Avenue and Templeton Avenue. So this um this is near the San Francisco border. So this would allow uh one more business in this zone here. There's a lot more property owners here. So in some of the other zones you have, like for example, Skyline Plaza, you actually only have a single property owner. So um like if they don't want a cannabis business, then you just wouldn't have one. So here there's a lot more opportunities because you have more uh property owners. And then the second uh eligibility zone is actually it's it's one eligibility zone but it has two areas. So this is one portion of the area on Geneva Avenue. Uh it's between Talbert Street and Beayshore Boulevard. And then the second area is um between Castillo and Calgary. So in

combination of the two areas, you could get uh one additional retailer. Um and then another background is um this was reviewed by a council committee. So council committees reviewed this. This was also presented to the small business commission because this is creating a business opportunity. So, um, both bodies are recommending that we consider adding the two new zones. Um, staff has reviewed this in relation to the California Environmental Quality Act and, uh, does um, suggest that it's, um, exempt. And finally, staff is recommending that the commission adopt the findings and, um, again reassert that the resonings are exempt from from SQUA. and then furthermore forward a recommendation to the city council to add the two new cannabis overlay zones. Um the city council would also conduct a public hearing for this proposal. So that concludes my presentation available if you have any questions or comments. So um I do have some questions. Okay. So um my first question is the 12 zones that you um mentioned where do they come up with the number 12 and how was that decided? Okay. So again, 12 was the initial proposal. So we currently only have seven. But what we did is we looked at the map um and found the commercial areas that are outside of uh the the sort of green buffer areas. Uh we so we were looking at C1 zoned property uh property that allows general retail type uses. So we do have a couple shopping

centers that are planned developments. those weren't considered because they're planned developments. They're not C1 zoning. And then if you had like a single oneoff, uh I think in some cases you'd have a random gas station somewhere that was C1. We didn't select that one, but um so we looked at the areas that would meet that criteria and that's what was proposed and then then from there that's what was reduced. Okay. But we don't necessarily have to accommodate 12. No. No. Well, no, because some were removed. So, right now the city only has seven zones. So, the Meabud um did we find out why are they temporarily closed? Is that going to be open back? I they are wanting to reopen. Um I'm I think the reason they closed I think it was more of a business decision. uh some owner structure changes, that sort of thing. And then um what are the legal distance between from each zone? There is no legal requirement to create a distance between the zones. That's the city's prerogative. Okay. the one that the one that is um that is recommending for Beayshore and Geneva. There is one already in on not Geneva but it's over there in Beayshore closer to to where I'm looking that if this is going to pass. Um I know San Francisco what is that coming down and then Geneva. So, it's in San Francisco, not Third Street. Behore Boulevard. Is it Beayshore Boulevard? And then Geneva is

the the cutting street. Anyways, there's one right there. It's almost close to the um grocery outlet that is over there in San Francisco closer to Beayshore. Um I don't know if that's considered enough for that for Beayshore. Well, that would be San Francisco. I mean, that's certainly something I know it's San Francisco, but I also am looking at the the youth. I'm looking at I know that we're trying to bring business, but I'd rather bring more business other than cannabis, you know. Um, I rather have other like we need a store there at Beayshore. We need a g we need a grocery store there in Beayshore in that area instead of another cannabis. Um, I I'm all I respect everybody that is used cannabis for recreation or whatever their needs is, but I'm looking at the long run for the youth and for individuals. Not everybody there will want a cannabis. They would rather have a clinic there for hospital. People in Beay will have to climb the mountain or to go across to go to a to a hospital than to have a cannabis. That's just my um but thank you for the presentation, Miss Motherhood. So, can you clarify for each zone um uh a retail cannabis one retail cannabis is allowed, right? Um so, are are there any retail cannabis um stores in these zones? because you mentioned two dispensaries um currently operating. They're they're retail. Oh, considered retail. Okay. So,

um and I'm surprised that this is a um um zone change request for Mission Street on Crocker. when if you're on mission, you see the signage of uh and it wasn't approved as such. So, uh, I it seems to me that they're already operating a retail, um, cannabis business there because of their signage, because of the fluorescent signage that these liquor store slash um, uh, I don't know what they are are um, it's it's I mean those businesses were not approved to of use of that signage. And now I'm surprised that, you know, they're they're e it's being, you know, it's being reconsidered for reasoning because they're already operating like it's a retail business. If you pass through Mission Street on Crocker, I'm familiar with that area. I used to take the bus there. Okay. So um number one we just discussed signage permits um in the previous um item. So can we I mean is it off track but I I feel like it if it's approved yearly signages for businesses why hasn't why have we not looked at signage for those business on Mission Street? They're not even supposed to be advertising these images, right? Like they're not approved for that. Okay. And that is highly residential area and busy

area. We're redeveloping. I mean, we're trying to redevelop and improve that area of daily city with you know um our festivals and you know to have that signage is really really not okay. they were not approved. In fact, um I remember um Mayor Rod specifically said, "You cannot use those images." And every time I pass through there, it's more and more like they're adding more and more. and it's to the public. It seems like, you know, why are we um contemplating adding more zones when it feels like there's a lot already because of those signage that's not even supposed to have those signs, right? It's I mean, dispensaries I know are very discreet. Um you can't even walk in there without your prescription. um it's not supposed to advertise you know what it is. I mean only um those who have health um needs can visit these dispensaries. There's a security out you know by the door. You can't just walk in. It's not like such a retail space unlike those businesses on mission and Crocker now. So, I I think, you know, that's what the public is very concerned about. Um, it's looking like that area is really catering or advertising for people who want, you know, recreational um, marijuana that, you know, Daily City has a lot because of the signage. So, I'm surprised that, you know, they're not zoned for it because there's

certainly advertising for it right now. Well, we can certainly look into those because it is selling cannabis is not Can I ask you a question? Um, are you aware of any of this? Has anyone complained or has the issue been brought to the city in any way, shape, or form? I'm not aware of any cannabis businesses on Mission Street, but we can certainly look into it. Well, I mean, if they would be there, they would have to have a license. They would have to have gone through all of this. That were not approved. They were They're liquor stores. And if they're liquor stores, then they're not cannabis dispensary is Well, but they advertise, you know, the image of what of the cannabis cannabis leaf or Okay. Yes. But do they sell it? Uh I personally have not walked in to um purchase or uh buy or inquire, but anyone who passes through it seeing like that this is a sign advertising for beer or cigarettes and then like a cannabis leaf like you you but we don't know for a fact that they sell anything. But they can't have that sign though. They they're not. I guess that's what I'm wondering is is I'm glad that we're finding this out, but I mean uh how long has this been going on? For years. Well, then why are we not hearing about this? I mean, if if the public has been seeing this for years, why haven't we brought this to the attention of the city for years now to get rid of it? I believe there has been public comment in the past um you know um uh um complaining about the abundance of these you know um reszoned areas selling you know marijuana because of the signage. Like it's a misunderstanding that um that we're allowing this when we're not we're not allowing these signages. they're not

approved for um in that in that zone. I mean, now they're just only applying to sell it when they've been advertising it for years now. I hear you. I I'm not 100% sure that they're selling it, but the fact that, you know, they have signage, they have the nylon signs, they have the light sites that have, you know, these images. So, does that affect then us making a decision about opening up zones? If somebody has a sign that creates an image, but we don't even know for sure if it's legal or illegal. Where does that fit into making a decision now about zones? I mean, I I understand and I appreciate your concern, but I don't know where that fits into the decision makingaking. Tonight, we're asked to add two more zones to the seven that are already there. And that would mean that there could be possibly two more retail places if anyone were to uh apply, qualify, and and be able to open a business there. And I guess what we're seeing also is is that this this this influx of cannabis has had really no effect on the communities at this point. and it's been the ones that have been there have been going on for a while and they haven't disrupted anything and so um they're legal businesses and I think it's kind of hard to say no to legal businesses and I appreciate the fact that the neighborhood in the beayshore needs other types of things but those spots are if they're sitting empty they've been sitting empty for a long time and there is no there's no guarantee that if you say no to cannabis there some stores are going to open because stores haven't opened now and they haven't for a long time. And so that's a whole other issue that I think we should address. How do we get the

kind of businesses we want there? But if those businesses aren't going there, it's not because of cannabis. So I I see these as separate issues. We're being asked to open up other opportunities. Uh and uh I I don't know that I'm hearing a lot that says we shouldn't at this point. Um well um I I say that um it's not a the first time that this conversation it has been uh brought to the city's attention for to have grocery store. Oh I know. And in Beayshore and I I really get what you're saying Mr. Norris. Um but who will not say to cannabis because it's a fastm money and that's what any city will just will go. You know, if you look at the zoning over here, um I don't think neither of us sitting over here or even the city council lives a day live the house next to the campus or even two houses down from a campus. I don't think none of us would do. I can just imagine what the individuals or residents of Daily City who lives and resides near these zonings. And if to open up another two, that will make it nine. That will make it nine. So, well, I would just tell you that my office is right next door to the uh dispensary Nectar, which is one of them that's there. My office is right next door to it. But you don't live there on the same It's on the same block. I'm there more than I do at my house. But you don't live there. And I'm there all day long. Okay. And I don't see any huge lines. I never see people going in or out. The parking lot is empty. I haven't seen it impact my business or the neighborhood or anything. And I'm right next to it. I I've been watching it now since it opened. I was looking for things that

might be negative. So, I can give you that that personal observation that I don't see any problem with it as far as it corrupting the neighborhood, ruining the neighborhood. It's right across the street from McDonald's, you know, and right next door to my office and it it doesn't do anything. I think it's the signage, right? Like the signage needs to be discreet. I think that's an excellent point and I think it like nectar signage is very discreet, right? And I think so to be clear, the cannabis businesses go through a higher level of review. Yes. Um they have in order to open there's a police. It's the non-cannabis approved, right? So there is a lot of illegal signage in Daily City. It's a difficult thing to to stay on top of, but it is something that I think um does impact the the U Mission Street corridor particularly. um that is something that we could look at as sort of a a separate issue because you can have bad signage and be a restaurant, you can have bad signage and be a convenience market or something like that. So, I think that point's well taken and that's something that should be considered. Um but again, that that's more uniform to all businesses that that uh face Mission Street as well as citywide. You know, obviously, you know, bad signs can sort of look cluttered anywhere, but I do think because the frontages on Mission Street are so small and you have that separate ownership, you do sort of have this haphazard pattern of signage and a lot of people do not get permits and so code enforcement is a difficult task, but we can certainly um direct some efforts to that area. So there's a possibility that once, you know, these these areas get approved or reszoned, they're they'll be subject to more string stringent, you

know, signage um laws. The the cannabis businesses will because they're sort of under a microscope. I think some of the issues with the signage in general, um I know there's some complaints about like the really bright LED lights that you know, that's actually not considered signage. That's considered lighting and technically our sign ordinance doesn't address that. So, that would be something that we'd have to look at and maybe potentially bring to the the commission and ultimately the city council coming up with a modified changing the sign ordinance to address some of the new the new features we're seeing happening with signage um everywhere because I think a lot of businesses are incorporating that really bright LED lighting um everywhere. I don't think it's necessarily just a daily city issue. Uh, so you know, I think one thing we could consider is looking at our sign ordinance and again that would apply to all businesses. So you're saying right now there are only two in operation in Daily City. Two cannabis businesses, correct? Okay. I just want Yes. Right. And the two of them, one's on King Drive and the other one is right up the street and their signage is legal and Yeah. And you know, and even if we we don't recommend it to the council or we re we do recommend it, the three of us today, it's really up to the city, the council to say, well, forget what they say. We're just going to go for it, you know. Yeah. So, what we're doing today is to approve to recommend for the two more and also to hear, you know, public comment public comment. So, who do you have? Should call the public comment.

Okay. So, now we call on public comment on this. Read the name. Yeah. Hold on. Um public comment for this item number four. Um Sarah Turner. [Music] Okay. Hello. Hi. Um, so, oh, sorry. Uh, so my name I don't really like this. Uh, my name is Sarah. I live and work in the Mission Street area. So, my main concern is the, um, the area A, this one here. Um, so there is actually, as you had mentioned too, there's three vape shops nearby and there's three dispensaries just a half mile up on Mission Street that is that is in San Francisco. Um, but what I didn't hear you guys talk about is that I have done a little research and I've noticed that the California law says it's dispensaries cannot be within 600 feet of a daycare. And there is a daycare right in the center here at 6133 Mission Street. And there's also a playground link um Lincoln Park. And there's also a couple blocks up um the George Washington Elementary. So placing one in this area, it would be too close to a daycare, which has been there for several several years. Um, I have been working at an oral surgery office for the past 11 years and they've already redone it trying to make it look nice. Um, and the parking is awful. Patients complain all the time. We've actually lost patients because the meters are outdated. People double park. I hear the bus honking all day every day because people are double parked. Um, and so that already is affecting businesses that have been there 11 years that are trying to help the community out by giving services of s of surgery.

Um, so I think adding that is just going to make that area more congested. I've seen people get hit on crosswalks. A couple years ago, there was a shooting over there. So, you know, people are trying to invest in that area to make it nice and clean and welcome. Um, but I also think that you have to remember there is a daycare at 6133 U Mission Street. Um, that's been there for a while. And I think ma mainly, so I don't I don't oppose like the areas B and the other ones, but just this one because of the daycare and there is the school and the playground and I'm over time. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. So, up next, up next, Alfredo Delar Roa. Please come up. Hi, I'm Alfredo Dear Rosa, a build building owner and uh dentist by profession. Uh I'm not in favor of increasing the number of cannabis store in that area for one reason it's that the the recommendation of the staff is very flawed meaning it's not accurate first the general welfare of the resident in that area I don't know the staff if they know 70 to 80% % of people living in that area are renters and they did you guys you don't include the renters to have a say of your plan in this area. Okay. And secondly, the safety. I don't know the qualification of the staff who made a study. If they're a police officer for fun, go to uh you drive 5 minutes going to mission.

The double parking right now when I'm going here say five cars blocking. No respect for the people passing by. And if you have a younger your young daughter or son you cannot live upstairs wherein the cannabis is selling right. And then thirdly, the health issue. Uh like a week ago headline that young adult who are taking marijuana two to three times a week, they are likely to have a heart disease 25% to 45%. And then like five or seven years ago that taking marijuana they alter their sound judgment. Okay. And uh before unwinding my comment, there are 10,396 uh business permit or to operate in the state of California, they close their business. 10,000 out of 10,000 1,58 are big uh canabi seller and they close also. You know what? 2025 they owe $1 billion of not paying taxes just alone to the state of California. I don't know if there's an accountant in Daily City who audited the two existing cannabis store here. You know they are very smart. 10,000 they lose but Governor Nuome try to increase by 25% if more 500% more expensive to do a

cannabis business in state of California because of the booming business of the illegal selling of that merchandise and they're using their expired inactive business but nobody's checking it they know it already that they're understaffed. And secondly, $726 million as of 23, they don't pay taxes. And uh what else? Oh, the the health issue. I don't know the staff if they have a medical background, the side effect of those. And please uh give a break for the poor family residing in that area to have a good life for their children. me all I have three children are all doctors I don't ask a single penny to the government daily city is a laughing stock the the only hospital in the whole California 80 to 90% are on medical uh aid do you want do you do you like that you heard from your peers or from your friend I hoping the city council until they make a plan not to depend on government welfare, food, shelter, and medical and dental. And lastly, what else? I forget. And that's it. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Any other public comments? None. Um so before I go on to staff recommendation, I just want to say that

um you know the income from these dispensaries, these retail um businesses are small. It's not even a lot. I feel like you know um adding more um zones will create a negative um impact. we could, you know, certainly, you know, invite other businesses um for, you know, these areas um that can benefit, you know, um families like in in general. So it's not I'm not saying I'm not I would so this is generating income for the city but I think you know there's there's more uh there's other things we can look at to generate income um than like adding a dispensary. So um for staff uh recommendation adopting the findings as outlined finding that the proposed resonings are exempt from the requirements of the California uh e CEQA pursuant to guidelines section of 15061. Uh recommendation to the city council the approval of zone change ZC-04-24-16507 adding into the combining district parcels fronting Mission Street between Crocker Avenue and Templeton Avenue fronting the Geneva Avenue between Talbert Street and Beayshore Boulevard and fronting Geneva Avenue between Cillo Street and Calgary Street. Um, do do we do a roll call vote? Well,

first we need a motion in a second and then we can vote. Uh, before we do that, I want to appreciate thank the people that have come tonight to speak. Okay. And I've heard you before because you guys came before and I appreciate your opinion because we're all entitled to opinions. And um I I have also what I have experienced. Um just as you heard what was going on in these neighborhoods, uh everybody heard it and this room is not full of people. Daily City is not coming out by the hundreds and people in all the neighborhoods are not here complaining. So I I don't know what to make of the fact that there is no one else complaining about this in the community and there and tonight is the night for the public hearing and so I don't see a lot of people concerned about this. Maybe it's not that big of a concern. I understand the issues of traffic and about health, but um liquor stores are very bad also. People drink alcohol, it ruins their health. It makes them unsafe on the roads. They kill people when they get behind the reels. But a liquor store would be very legal and could go in there very easily. You could get a cleaners go in there as well and have people double parking in front of the street to run in and get their laundry. So, there's all kinds of businesses that impact traffic, that impact health, not just cannabis. And I'm not an advocate of cannabis myself. I'm just looking at a business that is trying to uh establish itself in an area and it's a legal business and um so I'm looking at it only from that standpoint and I don't know that I'm so afraid of it as far as that goes. It does not scare me and uh I've lived by it now for almost a year and I haven't seen the negative results so I can only share my

own personal opinions. So I would move the recommendation of stats and if there's a second then we can vote on it either yes or no. So moved. Do you have a second? Nay. No second. No second. Okay. So the vote is to recommend this to city council. Yes. So since there was no second, we could have another Well, you have to have a second so we can vote yes or no. If there was a second, then you could vote on the item. So you made a motion? I made a motion. If I can have a second. Okay. Second. Now we can have a roll. Moved and seconded. So we should do roll call probably. So roll call vote um to move this item over to city council for approval. For approval. Uh FAU. Nay. Nurice. I couture. Yes. So motion has passed. It will go up to city council for consideration. They can decide. They can decide. Um but you know hopefully we address the questions about the daycare and um the park um if it's within the 600 ft be out there. There too. If there's beayhore there's another one Peninsula Family Service which is not far away. I think it's very important that we point that out with our recommendation that they look at this. City council can hear it. Everyone can come and let them know because they're going to have to make a decision anyway. And um I think all of those points I'm hoping that staff has uh taken note of it and will determine whether or not those are valid because it might just throw them out altogether. Yes. So I mean not just the schools but the daycare centers as well. So thank you for pointing it out. you know, and this is why it's very

important for, you know, the public to come and, you know, express, you know, concerns because, um, yeah, thank you for being bravely to be here and I hope I hope that you guys set the tone for other community members that are not courageously or have the time to be here. So you being here plays that huge role, you know, for advocate for you and for your family and for your community. Yeah. I mean, just from an oral surgery standpoint, we put people surgeries and I understand the story yet, but what's the world is coming to right now with marijuana is that we try to sedate like teenagers and we can't even sedate them because they've been around people inhaling marijuana. So we're using double the amount of medication to put someone to sleep to take wisdom teeth out and that is more dangerous than to just you know do every day and everything. So these young kids around the area it's all densely um you know residential they're all inhaling it and I mean they do it at school too they inhale it and then what people don't want to talk about with the marijuana is taking double the amount just for 45 minutes and that's very very dangerous. So I mean it's not just here actually Yeah, exactly. Anything else? Is that it? Any opposition? No. So, um we move for adjournment of the meeting. Yep. Yes. Second. All favor. All in favor? I I

Thank you. Thank you everyone. Thank you both. Thank you. Thank you for coming.