Planning - Regular Meeting

Please ramp up. Like to. I You can be close. Ready to begin.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America, which is the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Alright. Let's pray. Lord God, praise you in this day, Lord. Thank you for thank you for it all. You know our prayers. We come before you humbly in prayer tonight, Lord. We pray over the citizens of Asperia, Lord, for all the chaos that's in this world going on right now and all we're going through. We pray over the emergency responders as they are responding. May they do it so faithfully, Lord. Watch over them and protect them.

Father, we ask that you give us wisdom for this meeting tonight, Lord, and calm my nerves, please, oh, Lord. Thank you and praise you in the mighty name of Jesus we pray. Amen? Okay. Roll call.

Chair Roger Abreo.

Late but present.

Vice Chair Sophie Stino, absent. Commissioner Dalberg?

Here.

Commissioner Earl Hodson?

Here.

Commissioner Timothy Ammann?

Here.

All right. So tonight on the agenda, we have a reorganization of the Planning Commission. I don't know how to move this on, but I guess would be to like to schedule this for our next planning commission meeting while we have our commissioner Stino here. So what's the proper Go

ahead.

Yeah. I would just suggest a motion to continue to the next hearing.

Okay. Thank you so much. Alright. Do can I motion or would have another motion?

Anybody could.

Alright. I'd like to motion to move reorganization to our next planning commission meeting. I'll second that. Okay.

I'm sorry. Who was the second?

Dale. It's commissioner Burke.

Thank you. Motion passes four-zero.

All right. Public comments. Oh, do we have any revisions to the agenda?

No revisions to the agenda other than the reorganization.

There you go. That's enough.

Right.

Not a

second one. Alright. So public comments. Any person wishing to address the Planning Commission should complete a white card and hand it to the clerk. Comments are limited to three minutes and should concern only those topics within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. Any person who would like to comment on an agenda item should reserve their comments until the public hearing or public comment period is called for that item. Please remember that the Planning Commission is prohibited from considering or taking any action on any issue not previously noticed in the agenda. We now open the public comment period at 06:39. Do we have any white cards?

I have no white cards, Chair.

Thank you so much. Since there are no white cards, we will close the public comment period at 06:39. Consent calendar. Approval of minutes. Consideration of the March 13 Planning Commission meeting draft minutes. Do we have a motion?

I'll motion to approve the minutes of the March 13 meeting.

I'll second that. You are here, right? Perfect.

You changed it. Thank you, sir. Motion passes three one with commissioner Hudson of Zane.

Wonderful. So public hearing, tentative track map TT23Dash00006. The commission recognizes senior planner Edgar Gonzalez for a staff report. Hello, Edgar.

Hello. How are doing? Good afternoon, Chair and Planning Commissioners. So as you mentioned, today, we have a tenant track map to subdivide one existing parcel into 17 single family lots with one common letter lot. This will be within a 4.9 gross acres lot. So this is the site where the track will be located. It's going to be located North Of Hollister Street between Knight Avenue and Joshua Tree Avenue. To the north, have a currently developed track, which the track that we're currently looking at will be extending to. To the west side, we have a vacant lot. To the east side, we have a subdivided lot that's currently vacant.

And to the east south side, we have a developed lot and and a subdivided lot that hasn't been developed yet. So as you can see, current track is within the single family residential R-one 4500 as well as all surrounding property along that track. So, the current R 14500 allows the maximum density of eight dwelling units per acre. As you see in this standard track parcel map proposed by the applicant, there's 17 single family residential lots within four point gross acres. So that equals to a density of 3.4, which is way below of the maximum density allowed of eight dwelling units per acre.

The subdivision includes about 5,000 square foot common letter lot, which is lot a located at the northwest corner of the or west northeast corner of the parcel of the track map, pardon me. The smallest lot within the subdivision is about 6,554 square feet. The average lot is about 8,000 a 139 square feet. And their largest lot within that track is 12,532 square feet. So all proposed lots meet the single family residential r one forty five hundred, which is 50 foot interior lot widths, 60 foot corner lot widths and then 75 foot minimum lot debt requirement.

This proposed lot sizes align with the existing truck to the north, which ranges between like 6,365 square feet to 8,730 square feet. The access to the lots is going to be provided on the existing two different trees along Ringsong Avenue and then Wildhorse Avenue, which they will be extending those streets down to a new street called Colorado Street where those two have cul de sacs, knuckles, and they will have that connection there as well. So, the drive approaches are all going to be within those internal streets. There's not going to be any type of access along Ignite, Hollister And Joshua Tree Avenue. So the development will also require all single family lots to have decorated block walls six feet high along the boundary of the track as well as any part that is visible from public street, which will include any site yards and any return walls as well.

And the development will also require to have precision block walls, which will only be required on the interior side of all lots. The project will also extend all the street improvements on both sides of Ringsong Avenue and Wild Horse Avenue to wrap around Colorado Street as done with the current track on the on north side. This will be a 50 foot wide local street which will be matching the current section, street section from from that track. They'll also be required to do all the street improvements, again, along Joshua Tree Avenue, Hollister Street, and Knight Avenue, which will be, again, curb, sidewalk, gutter, streetlights along the project frontage. And also 26 feet minimum paved access to allow a two way access on the street.

There's a portion on the Southwest Corner which it's already mostly paved. It's about like 180 feet, which they're still going to be required to pave just the remaining portion of it and also the stream improvements on that corner. So this is an exhibit showing the existing water lines. So the existing water line and sewer lines. So all our existing water lines and sewer lines and the extension that we're going to do, they're going to be eight inch.

So you can see in there in the blue lines, that's the water lines right now. And then the green line shows the sewer lines that are existing right now. So as part of this development, the developer will be required to extend those water lines internally, again, Ringsong Avenue, Colorado Street and Wild Horse and then the exterior street, again, Joshua Tree, Hollister and Knight. So I put just a little animation to show that that's they're eventually going to have a loop system on both sides, interior and exterior that will connect all those the water and sewer lines. So the last part of the project, we did review this to basically review from CEQA perspective.

It was an infill project. It was determined to be an infill project exempt from CEQA because it's not larger than five acres. There's no endangered species on-site and it's surrounded by urban uses. With that, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt resolution PC twenty twenty five-two approving tenant track map number 20673. So that concludes my presentation. I'm available for any questions.

I got a quick question. So, can you explain why we're requiring him to loop? Can you can you go back to pull your overlay out for the extension of the water main in the sewer? Yeah. So we're making them extend the water main, bring sewer down Hollister, and wrap it around up. I can't read it. Is that Joshua?

Yeah. So it's Joshua, Hollister, and Knight Avenue.

Is there so what's the I'm just curious. What's the in is it engineering? Who's requiring them to do that?

Yeah. So then the engineering department, as as part of the conditions of approval, are requiring it to do the interior lots with they'll be connecting to. And as part of the development of the track, they'll be because they have frontage along, again, Hollister And Joshua Tree Avenue, they're required to extend those lines as well.

So I'm just wondering. Those I mean, those are backyards that don't impact. So I I mean, I can understand doing Wildhorse, Colorado. And I can't rain

some. Yeah.

I can understand looping all that, but I'm just wondering why we're why we're requiring.

Well, the reason is because they're gonna be doing the street improvements and paving that that area of of those half width of those streets. So they're putting the water lines and sewer lines underneath eventually because if they're not required eventually they will have to come in and dig that up to put sewer lines. But as part of the engineering requirements because they're already improving those size of the streets, they're required to connect the waterline and sewer line.

Okay. So I guess my other question would be why are we requiring them to improve Hollister And Joshua when it's just they're butting up to it. They're putting a block wall like they don't impact that. I'm just I'm curious why the extra

So so that's just a standard requirement for every project. Every time you have frontage along any public street, the project is required to improve those sides of the streets. Even if they don't have frontage, even if it backs up to it, then they're still required to improve those sides of the street. So that's basically how we get our connections. Eventually, if that doesn't get improved, nobody's going to improve it because the project is already developed, Well,

yeah. I guess I just I think, like, as far as developing goes, like, this is the problem with, like, some of the stuff over in the industrial section that we require so much to be done for for those projects to get built. And it it deters people from wanting to develop because they're having to do so much. Like, I would I would say, you know, the lots below, there's vacant land below. And now if those guys come in, they're gonna be using Hollister.

This this this extra development that they're adding these 17 lots doesn't even their access isn't even Hollister and Joshua. I'm I'm I'm just thinking out loud here. Like, it just seems like I wish that you know, I don't know who we would talk to about about this, but I think this is what what I hear a lot with other developers, the amount of work that they're having to do. I mean, this this is a huge undertaking for him as it is, let alone having to add in extra pavement, this the civil side of this, you know, on on an act on an area that he's not even I'm all for finishing roads here. Trust me.

But I just think that, you know, at some point, do we do we look at this and go I mean, why are we what there's nothing even over here on Joshua. You know, why does he have to do it? What about the development? Once they develop over here, it looks like it's already cut up over there on the East Side Of Joshua. How come he didn't have to extend that all the way down to Hollister?

Well, just as part again, as part of the development, they have to do the improvements up to a half width. And then if they if that for some reason, if that road is not fully developed, they usually have to have 26 feet of pavement. So every single project is is is required to develop half width to eventually conform with all the policies of engineering. So you have a kind of master plan of of development of infrastructure. If they don't do it, then nobody else is gonna do it because nobody else is gonna develop on that on that side of the the street.

Well, if I'm looking at it, are these lots already cut up? Because I see them cut up on here. Is that accurate?

Yeah. So there's as part of a a track map, they were able to come in through the planning commission and get it approved, and they could record their map. But once they started developing and submitting, again, construction plans to the building division, then at that point, they started developing the track and

all the improvements coming along with that. So so they they submit a tentative, but they weren't re they were able to get their lots split, but they weren't required to actually do the work.

Well, the the work comes after. So first is the map. It gets recorded. And then after that, once they they move forward with the construction of building plans, then at that point, when they start constructing, they're required to do a lot of infrastructure as well as all the improvements inside.

Right. Okay. So let's say that this that this company ends up ends up breaking you know, getting to the point where he you know, they're ready to break ground first, And he comes in, does he have to pay? Does he have to pay to pave?

So whoever usually, the rule is whoever develops first will have to pay that at least that portion into after a half of the width of the street. If they were to develop first, they'll be required to do the same thing to do at least 26 feet of of payment. But

he's art. But then he would end up being the guy that puts in the sewer and the water. Right?

It depends of how the plan I don't I will have to look back in that track to see how it approves. But if I'm guessing at the time that that track was approved, we'll still require to do the same thing, loop it around, have a loop system to connect sewer and water. So whoever develops first is required to put those improvements on the street.

Yeah. I'm not sure if I like the process. I just think because, like, I I know of another little area over off of Danbury where, you know, somebody went in, they cut they cut it up, it's, and I mean, it's like an isolated little track back there behind Farmdale. You might know about it. And some of the houses were developed, some of the lots weren't. So another guy comes in, buys the lots, goes to build on them, and then we're making him pave or cap. It's got a base course, but we're making him cap the entire street. I mean

There still has to do with fire access to paving because you have to have that 22 way of access, right, 26 feet in case of an emergency. So there's an emergency, you have to have make sure that the fire department has enough clearance to be able to go ahead and service those homes.

Yeah. No. I understand that. But like that instance, he's he's having to cap the entire street instead of just like where it it's in front of the houses that he's that he's finishing on the on the vacant lots. The other houses had previously been built. And This just reminds me of that. And I just feel like I feel like at some point, I wish we could look at this and go, hey. How do we create a fair share for for each landowner if they're going to split it up like these other two that are already split? At some point, they're gonna come in and do it. If this if this project goes before, these guys are like, sweet.

This guy's this guy's doing all the work for us and spending the money, but I just don't I don't like I don't like the fact that we put the burden on one person.

And Commissioner Hodson, I don't disagree with your comments. In my experience, I'm not aware of another track that I've seen where they had to put in like sewer improvements on both sides, for instance. Typically, they have to construct the sewer in front of their project and then they connect to it, but they're not also providing it on the like arterial streets behind them or anything like that. I'm not aware of that. This does have the frontage on both streets, but I'm not sure if that, in and of itself, necessarily makes them install a sewer line that they're not connecting to.

I would I want to believe that the extension of those sewer lines are required in order for them to get the required flow or capacity or some sort of engineering requirement. I don't have that answer for you tonight, though, because unfortunately, engineering is not here tonight. That being said, if you would like, you can include a motion that staff look into that. And if it's not needed for the function of the site, is it possible to remove that condition, right? I don't think we're asking them to construct it simply because they're putting in street improvements and then another project is going to benefit from that.

And then they would be off that other project to the south would be off the hook for sewer improvements. That's not the intention nor is that typically how it works. They're typically just required to do the improvements across the frontage of their site.

Yes. I mean, I understand how that works. I'm just wondering, maybe like if it's going to I know that this is the way that it's been done, but I see I see an issue with the fact that the burden is on this sole project to wrap all the way around the Joshua. So if these other projects I see that have been cut up already, maybe maybe there's some point in here where we gotta go, hey. At some point, we need to we need to prorate a a section of sewer and water and paving to your tentative map.

Like if you want to go through this process, you can. But like maybe that way it's not solely on one project. Does that make sense?

Correct. And we have started doing that for other projects. Historically, the city didn't have a fair share reimbursement. So things like even like traffic signals, we didn't have a reimbursement mechanism. We have done that for other projects recently where they have a reimbursement provision.

We had that long ago. It was called a buyback agreement to where it was like for ten years. If anybody built adjacent that took advantage of the construction that was there, that they would have to pay their fair share back to that property. So those have been in place through the years. Don't mind we got away from it.

I don't know if it was just monitoring, trying to keep track of where the payback or buyback agreements were held. But we used to do that. And in this case, I can see exactly, the disadvantage and the advantage of both what's being said because even though there's no advantage to the properties being built to the north of Hollister, they will have curb gutter sidewalk. And I'm going to guess they're going to be part of the landscape and lighting district that's going to require them to maintain the off-site landscape and lighting that goes in there. And with that 26 foot width takes it to where you can get your fire safety vehicles in there.

And then if the facility to the south were to build, then because that they're the ones that will have the advantage for the water and sewer. Because the other one on-site will have the water and sewer on-site as well. So they're not going to take advantage of that. The advantage will be to the properties to the looks like to the East and to the properties to the South that will actually have the advantage to the sewer and water lines. And again, also just on a private property owner building, they're required to facilitate the sewer line.

I think if it's still regulated that way, it's 200 or two fifty feet past their property, even though they may be connecting on the one side that's closest, they still have to lay the sewer line past their property and approximately or within two fifty feet of existing.

Correct. So the typical standard is that it goes from to the end of the property line. If you're within two fifty feet of sewer, you're automatically required to collect. Yes,

to lay past your property. So you can't just stop it. Say you're on you're going to looking at it, if the sewer comes in and you're going to set it to the west side, you still have to lay the sewer to the east side past your property line in order to provide the mechanism for the somebody next door or down the road that's going to have to pick up from there within the 200 or two fifty feet.

I can't say positively that they have to extend it two fifty feet beyond their front end.

No, think I had that back If they're within two,

that's correct.

They have to lay it to their far side of their property. Doesn't matter where the connection is on the property, but they have to lay to the other side. You know, if the sewer lines coming in from the West, they have to lay it at least to the east side of their PL?

That is correct.

Okay. I just verified that, that nothing's changed in that regard. So because I used to deal with these quite a bit in the past. All right.

How wide is Hollister And Joshua?

Four. 54. Is it 54?

So, yeah. So the street width is 60 for Joshua Tree, Hollister And I Avenue. And and then 54 for the interior one, which is Ringsong, The Wild Horse and Colorado.

So do we what what's 26 feet.

Yeah. So do we know what side of the street the utilities are already existing on? It almost looks like they're already on the South Side Of Hollister. No?

No. So if you look

It's at Hollister hard to see this.

It's all bacon. It's only a small part, so that's that's developed there.

Yeah. So Hollister, but, like, where the utilities if you go back to your overlay for the water line and the and the sewer, Is sewer and water directly down the center of that street, or where does it actually lie coming from the West and coming and where it comes down, Joshua, from the North? It's kind of hard to see, so I don't know. But like is it closer to this project side or is it closer to like say Hollister for example, is it closer to the South Side?

No, it's closer to the North Side.

Yes, okay. I can't really see.

Yeah, the sewer line is closer to the north side. I mean it's kind of hard to see, but you see it with an s there, it's a dash line.

Is this this bad?

So it's a halfway, it's closer to the north side.

Yeah,

okay. I was going to suggest if it was closer to the South Side then.

Yeah, the exhibit here I provided just to kind of to show the wire lines exactly where everything is going to go, just to show the connections and where the existing lines are.

Sorry. And I don't mean to beat you up. I mean, I know you understand how much goes into this and then how much money it costs them solely by the fact of how much work you've put into it. So I'm just thinking if there's ways that we can break this up, spread it across the board a little bit more, especially if there's other projects in the area. That's all I'm that's all I'm suggesting.

Like Ryan said, I think we're look into it. I don't know if that prefers to put a motion on it or just to Well, I don't staff to

I don't wanna hold I don't wanna hold up this project either over over this. I'm just I don't know. I don't really know what to do there. I feel like it

The direction would be to for staff to review the conditions. And if that condition is not required for the track to function in and of itself, then the condition should be removed. If they're simply putting in the sewer line because they're constructing the street, then you can make a motion that aspect of it be removed. I can't say positively that they don't need that sewer line because they need it to function or flow or capacity.

I mean, it seems like it loops through the Colorado and then the function for the track is done. Mean, I know which way

it's Yeah.

And the condition because, I mean, obviously, the flows coming off the track are already gonna be impacted to the north. They're not gonna be a part of the impact there. But the impact they create could cause a a situation where they have to go back and look at the sewer connection on the North Corner of Hollister. And if they have to put a bridge or dam or whatever you want to call it, diverter, and divert the flow no longer flowing north, but flowing to the East and then down Joshua. We've done that in the past as well once we but usually that's done in the modeling of the sewer line. They can verify that.

I mean, engineering even gone that far yet? You know what I mean?

If they check the modeling, it's hard to say.

They should. Well, I don't know. I don't know what I don't know what the I don't know what the positive, like, the positive

Is is the applicant here? No.

The applicant is not here today.

Okay. I was gonna say that might help depending on how fast they plan on moving to, you know, if they plan on doing the track and then

Yeah. Usually, the for this track, as you know Okay. With Metro N, it's their approval is only two years. So they only have two years to kind of go through the process and get the map recorded and get all the improvements approved.

I mean I mean, if engineering's I mean, I'm I'm good with it. I just I just had questions with that. I mean, if engineering's already looked

at it starting a conversation because it's not gonna be the last track that happens like this.

No. Well, I mean, yeah, it's definitely not the first. And it's definitely not the last. So I'm just wondering, you know, and, I mean, my my mind goes over there to the industrial area where I hear a lot of people that I run into talk about, you know, the the impacts and the costs and things that they have to do to develop over there. I mean, anywhere. Right? So things just keep going up as it is. I'm just one I think we just need to maybe help be creative to help for growth. I mean, it's a benefit for the city if we're I mean, we're already on their team, but I think that I always feel like we could do more. That's all.

No. No. I get it.

And Earl, if you if you're looking at the same thing as me, I'm I'm just trying to pull up that same document that you guys are looking at on your screen, and mine says 404 error found. So I can't look into it as closely as you guys been able to look at it. I don't know if that's something we can fix. That way I can look a little bit closer at that document as well.

What

section do you want to look at? Maybe I can zoom in.

Just the same map there at the utilities. The utilities being discussed. I'm looking where the point of connection is for the electrical utility service. It looks like it's underground. Where is the point of connection for their utility?

Oh, that's nice.

There we go.

There's a Now go Pick it up.

Oh, I love this. Can I can you me know where to move Go down to Hollister? Hollister?

Now over to the West.

To the West. See high resolution. There you go.

See it. There you go.

And that's now you're cooking. Oh,

there's the sewer. A little fresher. I didn't know that they were doing that.

Yeah. So that's north of center

Is there

Is there a a purpose the electrical service isn't laid into this portion of the proposed track map?

Yeah. I

think the one is just the street lights in there, but there's no like, you're looking for lines of the connection, it's not showing on the map.

Because it would probably be overhead, so we're not worried about it.

Yeah. I mean, they usually provide that during all the improvement plans, not necessarily the extended parts of the map.

But these would be underground power. Right?

Correct. Yeah. Everything will be recorded to be underground.

Okay. So they're and we're not providing any power on, like, Hollister or nothing like that?

No. My understanding I mean, I'll have to like I said, I don't think it's part of the strike map, it's the improvement plans. I will have to check with maybe the engineer to see if there's a condition in there that was added for that.

Yes. Just because the thoughts of paving the road and getting this stuff installed while the road improvements are being done if it's going to get cut up because the electrical underground service is going to go in later, that might need to be addressed on here.

So what do we want to do? We still need to open it up for public comment if there is any, right?

My understanding of if they're already putting street lights in there, means that the electrical is going be underground off of Hollister. They're not going to be pole lines in there. So you see that you see those kind of electrical lights in there. There's one there off of the Hollister name. There's another one here on the corner. So as I just by looking at them, I don't see the lines, but my understanding is they're probably all underground and connecting to those streetlights.

Right. Say right near the streetlights. Do we have any more questions for Edgar before we open it up for a public comment?

I appreciate the info, Edgar. And I wasn't to beat you up on I was just trying to understand everything. So appreciate that.

No. We're always welcome questions. I mean, the the best you understand everything, think, is we make a better decision. Right? Any

more comments before we open up for public? Okay. Alright. The commission, for, opens at the time for public comment period at 07:08. Or no, applicants. Since the applicant's not here, it would be for public. Okay. So do we have any white cards for this item?

I have no white cards, chair.

Thank you. Close is at 07:08 for public comment since there are no white cards. Alright. Commissioners, do you have any other discussion before we go?

You know what you wanna do? Gives me a

chance to do that once again at the last minute. Hoping that engineering is making a good decision. I why. I don't want to hold the guys' project up. You know what I mean? Chair? We

have one other possible solution here for you, and that would be to modify that condition of approval that requires the sewer to be inlaid to add to the end of that condition the following. This condition may be modified to reduce or remove portions of this requirement by the city engineer upon the filing of final street improvement plans. That would allow wouldn't have to come back to hearing, wouldn't have to have anything to do. But when the applicant when and if the applicant ever does finally move forward with the project, part of that project will be submitting final street improvement plans. And, the city engineer could then look at it again and have this issue kind of looked at again if it's still necessary based on other construction or flow needs or whatever it might be.

It doesn't eliminate it, but it does add another point source to reevaluate.

I mean, I like that idea. I do too. Yeah. I like that idea. It gives them the option to have the engineer look at it and say, hey, do we really need to require him do that? Right. Because I mean, that right there is gonna save a huge portion of money for him.

Right. And allows the modeling to be analyzed again one more time.

I mean, it's gonna encourage him to move on. Maybe maybe they get discouraged and don't do it. We need housing. Mhmm. You know, how do we help people build build more when we need

it? Yeah.

I I think that's a great option. I don't know. How do we how do we word it?

So if you wanted to, whoever was going to make a motion when you're ready to make a motion to approve the resolution, you would just make a statement with the modification of are your conditions numbered? No. So a modification of the condition, perimeter street sewer condition. And if you'd like, at that point, I can read that sentence in again for the record. And then if you have a second and a vote, then that's all it would take. And staff would then follow-up with the revised conditions of approval in the final packet. Does that work for staff?

That's okay. Fair. Yes.

I think that gives them time to look at the other utility services and deal with the streets at a later time. Right. Yeah. Agreed. Alright.

Dale? Dale?

I'm fine with the way it was. Okay. So,

alright. So I'll go ahead and ask for a motion.

I'd like to make a motion to add the modification.

So a motion to approve the resolution as written with modification of sorry, let me turn this on. You can just tell me if I have this right. Is your motion to approve the resolution and project as presented by staff with the following modification to condition of approval perimeter streets dash sewer to add the following line at the end of the condition. Quote, this condition may be modified to reduce or remove portions of this requirement by the city engineer upon filing a final street improvement plans. Correct. So now you just need a second.

Okay. Do we have a second? I'll second.

Motion passes four-zero.

Wonderful. Next item, Planning Division reports, Brian Leonard.

Thank you. So just a couple of quick updates on some of the DRC items we had within the past month. We had one project that was a proposed truck parking and truck repair. This went to the Planning Commission about three point five years ago, and we essentially extended the previous approval. This was it's located off of Aspen on the West Side of Highway 395, but it's essentially the same exact project with the same conditions that had been approved a couple of years ago.

And then there's another project that's located off of Mojave And E. That is a proposal for two industrial buildings that totals about 80,000 square feet. That project was continued until the next meeting. We did receive some opposition letters from a couple of the, I would say, law firms that have been here in the past for some of our other industrial projects. And so we did continue with that to let the applicant reach out to them to see if there is anything that they could settle.

But that item will be going to the next DRC hearing. And so it will likely be approved at the next DRC hearing. In addition, there is also another project, which is a proposed 84 unit apartment project. That project has received significant opposition, and it will be forwarded to the Planning Commission at the next DRC meeting. And so that will be coming to you at the next meeting. In addition, there's another project, which is a proposed truck parking. This is an existing lot off of Santa Fe Avenue, I believe Hercules in Santa Fe. That item, it will likely come to the Planning Commission. They were kind of wrapping up some things, but we're trying to get them to be able to come to the Planning Commission if possible. So you'll likely have those two items coming to the next meeting.

And then in addition, our goal is to have the general plan update presented to the Planning Commission at the second meeting in May. So we have a couple of those items to look forward to next month. I apologize for that sewer sort of explanation there. I wasn't aware that it went behind the site like that. So we'll have a better explanation for you next time, but we'll get together with our engineer to figure that one out.

All right. Well, we have a guest city attorney.

And I have nothing to add tonight. Thank you for having me.

All right. Thank you for being here and helping us navigate this with proper wording, not so where is the director for his director report? Is he okay?

The director is he's fine. He wasn't able to make it tonight. No worries. He's still here at the city. He's still in the office and everything. He just wasn't able to make it tonight.

Okay. No worries at all. Just make sure. We'll be

at the next meeting, Okay.

All right. Planning Commissioner comments.

Only comments is good evening. Thank you again. Hopefully, I can get the air and see the documents on this machine next month. Maybe we can take a look at that. But last meeting, we were asked to take a look and come up with some proposed ideas, workshop ideas for the development code. And I was just hoping that maybe we could get a little bit of guidance on what the goals are around this workshop, the purpose of the workshop.

Yes. So the goals are to come up with some strategies for what maybe we could have a workshop structured around some ideas that you guys would like to have presented to you. Are there issues that you see throughout the city or constituents have maybe raised to you that you have questions about? Examples could be something like maybe types of uses that are allowed. Pallet yards recently have come up in the past, right?

But are there maybe uses that you would like to have a discussion about for what's allowed versus not allowed? Maybe a discussion about development types, what land uses would otherwise be allowed? What are some issues that you have? In the past, there have been some concerns raised with respect to landscaping, for instance. I'm not suggesting that, that be a development code amendment, but those are sometimes some concerns that you have there. But a workshop, can kind of explain to you what our existing requirements are and if you want to have any changes from that point on. Okay.

That's all I've got.

I'm good.

I appreciate you guys putting your heads together and coming up with a helpful solution on that one. Appreciate that. Thanks, Edgar, for putting it together. I mean, as great as it was, I appreciate you considering that. So

I so I don't know how to word this. I'll just kind of it's going come out botchy, so I apologize. So I know some cities, they have certain zones planned for future developments or allocations for homeless, like the city of Victorville has a has a, a center that they have developed. Do does does the city of Asperry have something some area zoned for some other, like Victor Valley Rescue Mission or other agency or whatever that or organization that would want to develop something similar? Do we have an area that would be best and prudent for the city?

I believe all cities are required by law to at least have an area designated for where a shelter could be developed. We do have a zone that allows for that. It's our mixed use zone, which is kind of in the central portion of the city. Okay. Aside from that zone, which specifically allows for shelters, there's also like county buildings or otherwise typically considered administrative type offices. So not necessarily a shelter with beds, but something like a county office or, sort of county resource building or something like that. We have those are just kind of more considered general office type uses. Mhmm. But, shelters are allowed in the what's called the mixed use zone in the central portion of the city. Okay.

Yeah. Thank you. I just the the topic keeps coming up in various conversations that I have, and a lot of it is wrapped up in city of Victorville. And so I had the church that I attend, we reach out to the homeless, and that's kind of a constant thing. So I just wondered. And so that's very helpful. Very helpful, Ryan. Thank you. And I wanna echo, you know, me as you guys see, I'm a mess. And so I'm running through and the the planning, you know, the the the binders are well organized.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Because I am a mess, and having focus is wonderful. And then, also, Easter is coming up, and so I was hoping that everyone would, you know, have a good Easter with your friends, family. And if you go to church, enjoy, going to your church and enjoying Easter together as a church family. So beyond that, I think that is about it. So let's see. Meeting is adjourned until May 8, 06:30 these chambers.

Every time. We those on Friday. Did you?