Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I would like to call the July 21st, 2026 Planning Commission meeting to order. Please note this meeting is being hosted through live stream on the city website and by teleconference via Zoom. I'd like to remind the Planning Commissioners to have their microphones turned on in position so that the audience can hear. Director Monique, may we have roll call, please?

Commissioner Viramontes?

Here.

Commissioner Hill?

Here.

Vice Chair Wirth? Here. Chair Beamsterfer?

Here. Vice Chair, where can we do invocations, please? Agenda item four is public comment periods for items not on the agenda. Are there any members present that would like to comment on an item not on the agenda?

No, Chair.

Okay. And anybody on Zoom or telecom online?

No.

Okay. With that, we're going to move on to the approval of the minutes from our meeting of July 8, 2026. Does Commission have any comments or corrections?

No. No.

No, no comments, corrections. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 8th, 2026.

And I second that motion.

We need to cast our vote.

Yes.

Do it again. There we go, okay. We'll move on to 6A, Receive and File. May we have presentations from staff, please? Make sure you got the green light on.

I don't remember which button.

There we go, magic button, we're in now.

All right, good evening commissioners, staff, members of the public. My name is Eric Bunge. I'm the executive analyst for the Public Works Department and I'm here tonight to discuss an opportunity, a unique opportunity to expand local park systems and preserve an iconic piece of natural landscape. The efforts and the conversation tonight will center around an area called Mesa Verde. So Mesa Verde encompasses over 400 acres and is directly west of Simpson Park and south of Ramona Bowl in the Santa Rosa hillsides. The whole area is within unincorporated county and spans about 16 parcels. And it's kind of that area on the left where it says Simpson Park Wilderness or Simpson Wilderness Park Expansion. Potential acquisition of this property not only adds open space to the city, but it also about doubles the size of Simpson Park. And as you can see, the aerial and from the aerial and the ground views, the site features natural underdeveloped, undeveloped foothills and offers breathtaking views and is home to about 34 different plants and animal species as well as it serves as a wildlife corridor that connects the San Jacinto Mountains all the way down to the Diamond Valley Lake Preserve. Though privately owned, this area already has a few passive trails and could provide additional open space for potential outdoor recreation uses like hiking, biking, and potentially a dedicated equestrian activities as well. These multiple options will allow for different uses that are altogether being used right now by the narrow pathways or some of the narrow trails in Simpson Park where hikers, bikers, Horse riders kind of have to share some of those spaces as well, so to have dedicated spaces for each could improve the end user experience. The area roughly in the red circle there, obviously this is more like a trapezoid, but red circle, you can see on the screen is conserving this area would be consistent with the resource preservation land use of the city, as well as the outdoor recreation designation like Simpson Park is currently. This aligns with a few of the city's 2030 general plan goals. Just to list a couple, Land Use Policy 1.6 calls for preserving natural beauty and prominent landforms and open space networks. Policy Open Space 1.8 focuses specifically on maintaining and enhancing the natural resources and wildlife corridors in the Santa Rosa plateau. That's just to name a couple. And in theory, this opportunity would allow for words on the paper and the general plan to actually be able to come in life in real life. Again, this encompasses, this is in Riverside County, and it encompasses about 16 parcels, and it's zoned under the county as W-2, which is controlled development zoning. There's kind of a specific plan that covers this area as well. For the most part, it's zoned currently as very low-density residential. The specific plan calls out for low density residential. It's basically one house per one acre. And over time, some concepts have been proposed up there, as well as one proposing up to six units per acre to help make the economics work in that area. It's because some of it's flat, but there's also rocky hillsides and different topography up there as well that could lead to making development difficult. but with high density could present some safety and traffic concerns as well as some potential impacts on quality of life for residents in that area. The flip side of that, more houses could also mean that people come to Hemet to shop, eat, et cetera, but they also use our roadways and then potentially could be public safety as well. So the conversation around tonight is just an introductory concept about preserving this land, and we understand that it'll take time and money, and those could be tough conversations to have in a tight budget year. Not to mention the long-term maintenance and possible fire liability that could potentially come with this opportunity, or come with this concept, but there is an interesting and unique opportunity in front of us. There are two state park grants that this area could be an outside chance to be eligible for, as well as conversations with the property owner could result in a below market value sell, which could be leveraged towards achieving those grant goals as well as the matching requirements for some of those grants as well. as well as council has expressed their interest and support in this. There's partners like the California Land Conservancy, and then there are some key stakeholders and volunteers that are involved as well, as well as most recently community support. We recently launched a survey about five days ago. There's already over 210 responses, and 94% of those are in favor of preserving this property, or at least seeing it being used for some sort of outdoor recreation use. As well as there's kind of some ongoing efforts just to gauge the community's interest in the space as well. On August 1st, there's gonna be a community meeting at 8.30 a.m. up at Simpson Park just to talk about the concept as well as present the idea and then to be able to physically see and overlook that space. As well as on August 4th on National Night Out, there's gonna be a booth set up there as well. And everybody's encouraged to take the survey online. So to recap, this is in alignment with a willing seller, passionate community volunteers, and regional conservation goals, alongside a chance to expand Simpson Park. We're here tonight to kind of hear your thoughts on the concept and gather your feedback. At this point, no final decisions have been made one way or the other. Again, we're at the feedback gathering and input gathering stage. before we pursue this concept any further. So with that being said, I'm more than happy to be here available to answer any questions and talk about next steps and whatever that may look like.

Thank you very much for our presentation. Commissioners, questions for staff?

Yeah, I have a couple questions. You said, is it Mesa Verde or Mesa Grande? Oh, sorry, Mesa Grande. Mesa Grande, okay. That must have been for my dinner tonight. I had some Verde salsa, so. Nice. Yeah, it's pretty cool. I think it'd be cool to see, you know, Simpson Park double in size. Do you think that the city of Hemet has enough workforce for maintaining a park that size?

At this point, no, but in, so as part of the Simpson Park elevation strategy that's being continued to draft and developed, part of that phase three is engaging workforce opportunities as well as volunteer opportunities. And there's a couple partners we had in mind for some potential workforce partnerships and some grants from the state that some nonprofits are eligible for, as well as creating like a key, just like we do with our adopt a block program, kind of curating volunteer opportunities within that as well. So from our staffing capacity at this point, No, the answer would be no. But for potential future, what that may look like as we build it out, potentially yes.

Okay, awesome. And when did you say that workshop is?

There's Saturday, August 1st, 8.30 a.m. at the Simpson Park.

Great, because I think it would be pretty cool to see a disc golf course or something out there because disc golf is pretty big now. You have to go to Moreno Valley and pay, or you've got to go to Murrieta and play for free. And ideally, there's no maintenance. It's just 18 baskets and 18 pieces of concrete or some tile or bricks. So it's pretty cool to see that.

I know under the specific plan they actually called for an actual golf course, but maybe a disc golf course is a better outdoor recreation.

No water maintenance or anything. Let them go. That's an idea. Nice. I have no further questions. Thank you.

Hey, Eric. Thank you for that presentation. Can you talk more about the two grants that are available and kind of what percentage that would cover the cost of the...

Yeah, so there's water and land use. They're both state park grants under the Outdoor Legacy Program. And there's one that's for the water and land use that's coming out in the spring of 27. That's a max award of up to $7 million, which with the donation and then some outside funding sources, that could qualify for this property as well, especially with the discount that the willing seller is offering. There's also another program underneath the... forgive my acronym, it's ORLP, but it's under that same umbrella, and that's up to $15 million. It's coming out late 26, early 27. That's for acquisition as well. So the first one is either acquisition or conversion. This would be for acquisition and conversion and construction. So that's potentially up to $15 million. If we take that approach, that could potentially purchase this property as well as help with some of the enhancements that we're looking at for Simpson Park as well. It could be kind of paired as like a... like a one property project is a holistic type thing versus just a standalone for each. Again, that's up to leadership at that point and what direction we want to go and council ultimately, but those are at least possibilities that exist today.

Oh, excellent. I think this is a great idea to get to, to grab this, these parcels and make it part of the park area. Thank you for the presentation.

Thank you. Thank you, Eric, for that presentation. Yeah, just right off the bat, I think from the perspective of our general plan, some of the elements, specifically open space and conservation, there's not a whole lot of areas in the city that provide that kind of an opportunity, especially in conjunction with some of the surrounding areas, specifically the East Diamond Valley recreational area. Can you talk about any kind of concepts of continuity with that plan and how that may may be integrated into a larger benefit to the community from a trail perspective? I saw some exhibits showing some conceptual trail systems. Can you maybe just touch on that a little bit?

Yeah, at this point it's all conceptual, but a potential goal would be to connect actually Simpson Park to Diamond Valley. Whether or not that creates a camp around at Diamond Valley Lake or potentially up in the plateau area, whatever that may look like, but eventually there would be a more or less like a Hiking trail might be a stretch. That's a long hike, right? But it'd be more for like a mountain biking use or something like that. A question could potentially be that as well, but it would connect basically from Simpson Park all the way down the hillside kind of across Gibble, and then it would go into that area as well. And I know that... Gosh, I'm blanking. Valley... Valleywide, thank you. Valleywide that oversees that area right now. I know there's talks of them about... maybe future developing a camp area, RV parking, all that fun stuff. But whether that's in this property or that property, there's at least the goal to connect that. Beyond that, I know technically speaking, there could be potential trail networks that stretch all the way up the hillside and potentially up into the San Jacinto Mountain Range. Jeff might be able to answer that question better than I can, but But at least from this point, the conceptual idea, at least from what we've heard, is to connect Simpson Park to Diamond Valley and make that like a continuous, at least connection as well, which is probably be one of the most impressive ones in Riverside County.

Yeah, I think, like I said, we have some limited areas within the city for these types of really big picture benefits to the community. Not just our own residents, but also something that brings others in. And I think the work that's being done, I forget the name of the committee, but there's an ad hoc committee that's looking at the East Recreational Area and working on a memorandum of intent in terms of Um, what types of resources and opportunities could be had there, including bringing in recycled water for a lake. And EMWD, I know the board just this month approved a study to look at the East Diamond Valley recreational area with a recreational component and a recycled water component. I think this is very complimentary to that. I think also just if you continue driving down Domonogony Parkway along the Salt Creek Channel into Winchester and into Menifee, there's a lot of, There's a lot of potential continuity to neighboring communities. City of Menifee has created a bike trail along Salt Creek Channel that stretches from somewhere near towards Canyon Lake all the way up to the 215 freeway. Coincidentally, the city of menifee came in to emwd last this last week and provided a presentation on some of the things that they're doing within the city and one of the things that they highlighted was something very similar to this where they have a hilltop that became city property that as as open space but access to the community and one of the things that they high they highlighted was the the hiking trails, the healthy lifestyle, and the views that the community was able to get from that location. Driving into the city of Hemet along Dominic Parkway, one of our key entry points, we have such a neat opportunity along that corridor, whether it be along Warren, whether it be along the Diamond Valley Lake, But ultimately coming into Hemet to have something right there that's preserved as kind of a key benchmark for the city of Hemet I think is just a spectacular idea. I FULLY SUPPORT IT AND THINK IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY. IN REGARDS TO THE GRANTS, SO YOU MENTIONED TO, HAS THERE BEEN ANY, THERE'S A WIDE RANGE OF grant opportunities through a lot of different programs that may be coupled with other initiatives and projects and stakeholders might, that there may be more opportunities. Is there, HAS THERE BEEN A LOOK INTO MAYBE A BROADER SET OF GRANT OPPORTUNITIES BESIDES JUST THOSE TWO OR IS THAT SOMETHING MAYBE THAT COULD COME LATER TO HELP KIND OF OFFSET THE COST TO CITY RESIDENTS?

YES TO BOTH. So preliminary, the state parks is what we're familiar with because we were exploring those for our Weston Park, our Weston Park reimagining, right? So some of those through that research is a couple of those we identified that would be kind of a fit for one, Simpson Park, but then two would be kind of also for this Mesa Grande area. There was a letter written to the Land Conservancy as well as a potential partner and funding source as well. A pre-application went through that as well. But we are exploring with our grant consultants some different options, too. But kind of at this point, we were just like, hey, one, does the community want to see it? Two, is the city in support of it? Three, is there funding to be able to even explore to entertain this? And some of the some of the Difficulties with that area is it's a up in the hillside. It's a little more removed from the city So some of those incomes are a little higher in that area which kind of eliminates some of the grant funding sources But you know kind of creatively through narrative we can drive some of those points home of like hey This will be serving the region not just you know the areas in that or the the residents in that area.

So you're referring to the Disadvantaged community correct all those sorts of things. Yeah, that's a that's a that's a THAT'S A GOOD POINT, AND I THINK THAT THE NARRATIVE IS A KEY PART OF THOSE GRANT APPLICATIONS TO WHAT'S THE SPHERE OF BENEFIT, AND THAT CERTAINLY OPENS UP ELIGIBILITY FOR OTHER GRANTS. 94% APPROVAL SO FAR ON THE SURVEYS. OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHAT KIND OF FEEDBACK CAN YOU SHARE? WHAT'S THE 6%?

JUST EITHER NEUTRAL OR OPPOSED OR FOR WHATEVER REASON. I HAVEN'T DIVED INTO THE DATA YET. IT WAS JUST MORE SO LIKE, HEY, LET ME TAKE A CURSORY LOOK AT THIS BEFORE I COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO SEE IF WE HAVE ANY TRACTION. And I was more surprised of like, oh, wow, it's only been open for five days and there's 214 now. So it's, you know, people care, which is great. And it's nice to see that it's not just, you know, a few stakeholders or staff talking about this. It's like, hey, the community really wants to see this. So I can bring back data if that would be helpful. Again, we're capturing zip codes as well. So we can tell you where that's coming from as well from either county residents or city residents to kind of break that down even further. But again, this is all kind of new and sparking and we're just getting the early momentum and keeping it going.

Well, keep that momentum going for sure. Thank you for the presentation.

Thank you for your presentation, Eric. I have a couple questions. The 18 APNs that are on this, is it one owner that owns this entire? I know the owner wants to be held. private at this moment because in discussion, but is that the owner that owns all the 18 APNs?

Correct. Yeah. So it's seen as one property, but it's sparse over 16 parcels.

Okay. And do we know at all what value is being estimated in this?

Yeah, about 13 million over that. And I can say that it's deeply discounted underneath that. I don't, I don't know if we can share figures public at this point for those preliminary conversations that others have had in respect for the property owner. But yes, there's definitely a willingness from the property owner to partner with us on this endeavor and see this space be kept open space.

Because I love the idea, but I know currently what the situation we are with finances with the city of Hemet at this moment. It's going to probably take a couple years to kind of get out of this. And, again, grants are never guaranteed. So what if we purchase the land through a partial one grant and the next grant comes through and it's not anywhere where you're hoping for or none at all? Budget funding gets cut, budget gets cut, no grant, whatever it may be. What is our backup plan financially for the city? Because we know we have to have staff. We have to create bathrooms, trails, gates, liability insurance, fire, in case fires start up there. I mean, it's a really big expense on long term when we're kind of struggling with Simpson Park already. There's a lot of stuff that needs to be done up there that's not quite finished. And that's my worry. I mean, I love the idea. But my worry is, what is our backup plan in case one of these grants fall through?

Yeah, it's a super fair plan. At this point, it would just, you know, purchasing that property wouldn't be feasible without the grant support, right? It's not something that we would take on, at least from my understanding, we wouldn't take on as a city as a whole. Like we would in front the whole amount, right? So it's either we kind of either land the grants, explore other grants or additional partnerships, maybe even that's a private philanthropy, whatever that may look like, to kind of bring it to fruition. So I guess in a sense, a backup plan would just be Maintaining what we have is Simpson Park and exploring kind of some of the improvement efforts that we're already taking and undergoing on that park and then hopefully land future grants and or just hope that The landlord chooses not to sell develop whatever that may look like But just kind of put in a timeline perspective to we're probably looking four years out by the time we're even developing this right so some of these land could plant either the land use or the ORLP grant Say it opens in the spring of 27. It's always a few months to review. There's scoring, there's selection, then there's awarding, and then there's going to be a lot of environmental that have to happen. So that whole process in totality, by the time we probably even bring the award back to council, is going to take a year. So now we're already in spring 28. And then usually these grants have either a three to four year timeline to One, we're lucky because there's technically already trails there, so it's kind of developed land in a way, but then it gives you three or four year grace period to make the improvements to that property. So we're talking anywhere from three to five years from our time of application potentially. So hopefully we're in a better economic standpoint at that point, right? But just, and I guess to a plan B could be potentially leaving it passive recreation in the interim, focusing on Simpson Park and then expanding those efforts as funding is available as well as kind of like a, I guess plan C at that point for different options. Again, we're kind of like in that preliminary conceptual phase, but all fair points that you brought up.

What's the timeframe usually to make a county county territory become the city of Hemet territory. Yeah, that too.

That's a great point. And by the time you even sell the property, acquire the property, that's going to be months. I couldn't tell you what the acquisition from the county looks like or the annexation into the city at that point technically, but that would be months too. So that would kind of be all built into that timeline as well.

I think it's a great idea. I just think there's risk involved when we are completely dependent on grants. to obtain the whole funding and purchasing and everything of it. So, commissioners, any other questions for staff before we open up public hearing?

To that point, has there been any discussions yet with the county in regards to annexation? Do we have any sense of the county's position to support?

Great question. I can't speak to that. Somebody else may be able to, but I can't personally speak to that.

That seems like that would probably be an important kind of due diligence step to at least prime that pump. I think also just to your point, Chair, in regards to the short-term versus the long-term. So the current landowner is willing to deeply discount And I'm making an assumption here, but this specific plan has been on the books for a really long time. plan development for a really long time and it hasn't happened for a really long time. And there's probably reasons it hasn't happened for a really long time. Would that be a fair?

Probably good guesses. Yeah, because part of the parcel too, you know, it's kind of that flat plateau area just immediately west of Simpson Park. But then other parts of that is very rocky terrain, right? As well as there has to be connections to road outlets, which gets really expensive when you start trying to put roadways in IN AREAS THAT THERE'S NOT ROADWAYS, TOO. AND PLUS PROBABLY THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE SOME DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENTAL SITUATIONS THAT DEVELOPERS WOULD PROBABLY FALL INTO AS WELL, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO MITIGATE SOME STUFF AS WELL. SO POTENTIALLY, YES. AGAIN, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE ACTIONS OF THE OWNER, BUT THAT WOULD BE IF WE HAD TO BE SPECULATORY AT THIS POINT, THOSE WOULD PROBABLY BE FAIR ASSUMPTIONS.

Yeah, and so to that point, making that assumption, being speculatory, it's one of those things where you kind of strike when the iron's hot, right? And so... If there's an opportunity now that presents itself to at least secure this opportunity for the future, we can work through that plan, but to at least get it in the city's control when there's an opportunity, even if it's a little bit of a hit up front, I think we wanna take advantage of opportunities as they arise. And so it would be something we certainly would have to plan for later. But I'm assuming that the reason why it's such a quick is because there's an opportunity. And so we don't want to necessarily find ourselves in a position where we are looking backwards with regrets going, man, I wish we would have. Maybe the development market changes to a point that makes developing of that and we end up losing that opportunity and losing that natural resource for the community.

And I would say in addition to that, kind of a part of those preliminary conversations brought excitement in this particular community group and stakeholders as well. So we also want to kind of build on that momentum as well while, like you said, kind of striking while the iron's hot. But yeah, definitely some long-term considerations to take into, long-term impacts to take into consideration for sure.

Thank you. I have one question for Monique more than anything. Say we purchase the land, we receive some grant money, but then now we're running into some financial restraints to keep it maintained. Can a developer with a density of owners law, can a developer purchase an entitlement and develop somewhere else in a different plot of land? Even though because this is an open space, can a developer purchase an entitlement and build

You mean such as a density transfer? Density, transferring the density from this property to, because this particular property that we're discussing is in the county, it's under their regional housing needs allocation. So if it was going to, if this was going to result in building additional units in the city. We would have a credit, but this particular piece of land is currently in the county.

If it became city.

If it became city, certainly we could redesignate it as open space. And what we would have to do is look at the general plan and what that density transfer would look like in another part of the city.

There's possibilities, okay. Any other questions before we go public hearing? Thank you very much, Eric. And we're gonna go ahead and open up the public hearing. Are there any members present that would like to make a comment on this discussion item?

YES, CHAIR. I HAVE THREE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. FIRST WOULD BE JEFF SLEPSKY. HE HAS THREE MINUTES. I APOLOGIZE IF I MISPRONOUNCE YOUR NAME.

SLEPSKY.

Hello, my name is Dr. Jeff Slepskin. I appreciate the opportunity to speak in support of Mesa Grande Reserve proposal. Over the years, I have worked with local conservation agencies, the Riverside County Trails Commission, and developing trails from Diamond Valley Lake through Mesa Grande to Simpson Park, and I have served multiple terms on the Hemet Park Commission sitting right there. I have seen the value of our local unique and beautiful environment. I have also taken high school community college and university students under these natural areas to study the region's natural history and biodiversity. Many people in our community know me through my work developing and maintaining local hiking and biking trails including and especially Simpson Park for more than 30 years. These trails are a valued asset for Hemet's residents and an attraction that also brings visitors to our city. Their importance also is reflected in the recreation trail section of the 2030 Hemet General Plan, which I helped develop. The opportunity to connect Mesa Grande with Simpson Park Natural Reserve is truly extraordinary. It would protect our natural environment while enhancing the quality of life for current and future residents. This project would create a continuous network of protected and open space stretching from Ramona Bowl through Riverside County Reserve across Mesa Grande Plateau and into Simpson Park. The benefits are significant. It would establish an important wildlife corridor connecting the San Jacinto Mountains to Diamond Valley. while also creating a human corridor for hiking, biking, running, as well as safe equestrian use while experiencing nature. It would preserve some of the most spectacular views of Diamond Valley Lake and encourage healthy outdoor recreation for people of all ages. Choosing conservation over residential development would also reduce additional traffic and infrastructure impacts on already busy streets such as Stetson Avenue. At the same time, it would strengthen Hemet's reputation as a community that values its natural resources. Anyone who reads online reviews of Simpson Park can see how much people appreciate these trails. This project builds on that success. Finally, this proposal helps preserve the historical and cultural legacy of the Ramona Bowl, Mesa Grande, and Simpson Park, including their connection to the region's Native American heritage. This is a rare opportunity, one that may not come again. It is a chance to protect an irreplaceable landscape, improve on our community's quality of life, and leave a lasting legacy for future generations. I respectfully ask you to support the Mesa Grande proposal. I'd be glad to answer any questions if you should have any. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Okay, Chair, our next speaker is Ed Sauls, and he has three minutes.

Can you hear me? There we go. Good evening. Very nice to be a part of this. Actually, it's exciting to be a part of this and I really appreciate the dialogue that you've had on this so far. Let me share with you that I am the CEO of the California Land Conservancy. Our organization has the option to purchase this property and I've worked with your city attorney and former city manager to see that that option agreement is one that might be transferable to the city if the city should decide they wanted to pursue a purchase of the property. That kind of started, frankly, I was asked to be a part of proposing development here, and I worked on it for a couple years, and that did not come together. And I just saw this. I do both development and conservation. I'm kind of bipolar, I think. I just saw this property as one that just needs conservation. You just look at those beautiful natural views and the habitat that exists and the connectivity that everybody's talking about. And then seeing what might be done as far as regional trails and people's use of it. So I approached Mark Prestwich about it. He thought it was worth pursuing. I negotiated with the landowners to have an option for a period of time, and they're working with us to provide this opportunity. So I wanted you to know a little bit of the background that's taking place. The landowner had an appraisal that was over $13 million. They've held the property for some time. They're willing to make a charitable contribution for a substantial part of it. We negotiated a price closer to eight million, and actually we have submitted a application to the Wildlife Conservation Board. Because Simpson Park is a wilderness park, This could kind of fit with a conservation acquisition and trails being used along with it. So besides the good work that staff has been doing about parks, there may be other opportunities, as you, sir, asked about other grant opportunities. So all this is coming together. It all starts, though, with does the city of Hemet, do the citizens of Hemet want to see this conserved and purchased? And that's critically important to any grant. So I'm happy to be a part. I want to personally invite you. I think we can get personal tours of the property if you like. Happy to be a part. I think this is a high potential of success to be a world-class extension.

Thank you very much, Ed, for that comment. Next public speaker.

And our final speaker will be Ms. Lori Van Arsdale.

Good evening. Thank you, Chairman and Commissioners, for the opportunity to talk about something that is very passionate in my upbringing when it comes to Hemet, having served on the City Council and watched the Diamond Valley Lake be installed in our backyard and all of the opportunities that were potentially Diamond Valley Lake connectivity for Hemet period, but also been a part, I was a part of when they put the Salt Creek Channel in. and all of the ideas about the recreation and the different things that could be done along that Salt Creek Channel. So as I heard about this through Ed Sahls and took a look at what could possibly happen up there, I got very excited. In addition to that, I've been a part of the Ramona Bowl Board of Directors for a number of years, and we are constantly thinking about what would happen if development happened right up above our heads up there at the Ramona Bowl. So I think that's 5,443 seats. and we're an amphitheater that could have a great core center area that people could gather and then follow up and go on up to the trails and the different things that could be happening up at this property. The Simpson Park, having been on the council not too long after that park was granted to us from the federal government as a trust, and knowing that things that have gone on up at Simpson Park to try to make it accessible, but also keep it as a really great area for preservation, and someone like Jeff Slepsky, I'd like to publicly thank, for the tremendous amount of time he has spent over the years, over 30 years of helping maintain Simpson Park. There are others like him and others that are as passionate as he is. So I think that the, Chairman Beamstorfer, the questions that you had about maintenance I THINK WE WANT TO NOT JUST DEPEND ON THAT, BUT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S OTHERS OUT THERE TO HELP AND THERE'S OFTEN LOTS OF THINGS YOU CAN GET FROM THE COMMUNITY TO DO THAT. SO I'D LIKE TO TRULY ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS AND WE WILL BE PARTICIPATING AS RAMONA BOWL AND SOME OF THE OTHER OUTREACH ACTIVITIES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LORI. ARE THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS?

Oh, Chair.

Okay, with that, we're going to go ahead and close public comment. And there's no motion needed, just receive and file, correct?

Correct.

Okay, receive and file. We're now going to move on to 7a. May we have presentation from staff, please? Russia.

All right, good evening, Chair and Commissioners, Jolene Farris, I'm the Interim Public Works Director, City Engineer, and this is just a quick presentation for tentative parcel map 39473. So here's a picture of the project location. The current property encompasses nearly all of Brubaker Park. It doesn't include the top two fields, and then it includes a portion of Salt Creek there in the south, and this is currently all one property. And so tentative parcel map 39473 proposes to split Salt Creek Channel and Brubaker Park into two separate parcels. That way the city is hoping that we will be turning over Salt Creek Channel for ownership and maintenance to Riverside County Flood Control. And obviously that needs to be two separate parcels to do so. So that is the purpose of this map. There's no development or project associated with this map. It is strictly just for splitting parcels. So after that, staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine the project is exempt from provisions of CEQA under CEQA guidelines section 15315, minor land divisions, adopts the attached Planning Commission resolution and approves tentative parcel map number 39473 and directs staff to file a notice of exemption with the Riverside County Clerk and the State of California. And I am here for any questions or discussion.

Thank you very much for our presentation. Commissioners, any questions for staff?

I don't really have any questions. I think it's a great idea to help lower the city maintenance. I think it's a no-brainer. You know, let the county take care of it, especially for something that's so overlooked as a channel. I mean, no one ever like, oh, that's, you know. Yeah, I just, I think it's a no-brainer. That's it.

Yeah, pretty simple, yeah. You mentioned that we're hoping we'll take over. What's the...

So right now we're currently in the process working with them because the channel hasn't been maintained very well, as you may notice. We have some large trees and stuff in there. So part of the requirements is that we return the channel back to its baseline condition. So we're working through that and then there's also some environmental issues now due to all of that. So working through those fun things. But pending everything gets worked out, then that's the plan. So we are working with them, developing plans to return it to its baseline condition, working with CDFW to get an agreement and everything.

I agree. I agree pretty much. The only thing I have a question about is... the Salt Creek Trail itself. So are we gonna put that in the contract when we propose this to them that we would like to continue with the Salt Creek Trail or are we just gonna let them do what they wanna do with that?

So I believe the Salt Creek Trail, it requires a license agreement with flood control anyways for whoever, I think the county has one with them for maintenance of it further down. So we would just have to have an agreement with them when that trail came in that we would be responsible for maintaining the trail.

And this would be the map we would propose to them?

Not for that. It would probably be on the south side of parcel two just because we already have the path coming to Sanderson and it ends there. So it would probably cross the street at the light across the crosswalk and then continue on the south side if we were to put it in.

Okay. I don't have any other questions. Any other questions? Nope. All right. Thank you for that presentation. We're going to go ahead and open up public comment. Are there any members present that would like to speak on this item? No, Chair. Anybody online? No. We're going to go and close. And may I ask the Commissioners to make a motion?

I motion to determine the project is exempt from provisions of California of CEQA under CEQA guidelines section 15.3 minor land divisions and adopt the attached planning commission resolution Attachment 1, approve and approve tentative parcel map 39473 and direct staff to file a notice of exemption with the Riverside County, County Clerk, and State of California.

Second.

Did we get a second?

Second.

I wasn't listening to IT when they told me to keep it the right.

Got to eat the microphone, John. I think that passes, okay. Now we're going to take department reports. We'll start with our city attorney, Leo Suare. Any reports?

Yes, thank you, Chair. I wanted to share a hot topic that I came across that's going around Southern California, and that's the topic of data centers. So Senate Bill 887 is in the pipeline, so it hasn't passed just yet, but it's a proposed measure that would meaningfully reshape how data center projects are reviewed under California's environmental laws. The bill does two things at once. First, it tightens environmental scrutiny, by removing a commonly used exemption, so it's becoming more stringent. Second, if it offers a faster litigation track for projects that meet an ambitious set of substantially and community standards. So SB887, if enacted, would prohibit the use of categorical exemptions under CEQA for data center projects. Under current state law, lead agencies may apply a categorical exemption for two classes of projects determined not to have a significant environmental effect. SB887 eliminates this option for data centers, meaning every such project will require at a minimum an initial study and either a full environmental impact report, negative declaration, or mitigated negative declaration. Importantly, the requiring CEQA review, this bill would introduce a discretionary element to land use review for all data center projects, even if local zoning allows such use by right. So SB887 simultaneously authorizes the governor to certify qualifying data center projects as environmental leadership development projects that are eligible for expedited judicial review in the event of CEQA litigation. However, in order to qualify, a data center project must meet stringent conditions, such as zero carbon energy storage, using recycled water and water efficient cooling systems, and entering into community benefit agreements. I'll keep you posted on how this progresses.

All right, thank you for that report. Community Development Reports, Director Monique.

Thank you, Chair. I have nothing to report this evening. We'll be providing the commission with a community development report at our next planning commission meeting.

Okay. Future agenda items. Director Monique.

Future agenda items include the 2025 fire code cycle update and development in very high fire hazard severity zones. COMPREHENSIVE SAFETY ACTION PLAN, FINAL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS, CODE ENFORCEMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, VIA DULOS TRESORITOS TENTATIVE TRACK MAP 38979, PRO HOUSING DESIGNATION PROGRAM, THE 2025 BUILDING CODE CYCLE UPDATES AB306 IN RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, PREAPPROVED ADU PLANS, THE FIG TREE FORMER CAGLIERO NURSERY SITE, And conditional use permit, UNOCAL 76 type 21 ABC license.

All right. More gas station type 21s. All right. And future agenda items. I'm sorry. Planning Commissioner reports. Director Monique. Yes. Thank you.

Commissioner Viramontes. I have nothing to report. Commissioner Hill.

Thank you. I have nothing.

Vice Chair Wirth.

Nothing to report, just a comment from the update from legal. There's another, and I don't recall what it's called, but something that is being proposed to modify CEQA requirements in the other direction to make it more easy for housing.

So is there another bill being proposed, you're saying? Yes. For housing development?

I believe it's housing and then also water resource type projects. And there was a... a presentation given by our legislative affairs last week on that, and EMWD took a position of support on that. But I guess it's just interesting that the state is doing two things at the same time that are,

Well, pro housing versus data centers.

So we know how the state is interesting.

I'll look into that and see if I can provide a report next time. Thank you.

Sure. Beam stripper.

Well, the city of Hemet unveiled its first community-led mural on Florida and Carmelita. If you have not seen it already, it looks Florida and Carmelita on where Ori's Cafe is. That mural that's been painted. It's beautiful.

Oh, the mural.

Yes.

Yes.

And I would love to see a lot more of those on some of our big walls that we have. City Council last week had a discussion about 1% tax to the city of Hemet. which is estimated to bring about $16 or $18 plus million towards the city's general fund, which will be used more for road work and street repairs and other things. But they decided to let that be up to the voters on our election. So vote if we want to do that 1% sale tax. And then just for more of the following up, I would like to maybe have our director follow up on a couple of things. One is... As Vice Chair Wirth mentioned, he had questions about the annexing and with the LAFCO, and my understanding is it's not gonna happen, but we didn't get quite a straight answer on that the last time. And the other one that I want to have maybe update on our next meeting is the Hemet Stock Farm, what's going on there, because there's been different public input, and some of it is a little bit alarming, is what I'm hearing. maybe we can get an update from you in our next report, in our next meeting. So other than that, there's nothing else to report for me. And with that, we are gonna go ahead and, I shouldn't hit that already, but we're gonna go ahead and adjourn this meeting to the next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for August 4th, 2026 at 6 p.m.