Planning - Regular Meeting

Alright. We are going to start our meeting at 06:34. Please rise for the pledge of allegiance and the invocation.

Follow me in the pledge of allegiance. 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, with liberty and justice for all.

Let's pray. Heavenly father, we thank you, Lord God, for today. We thank you for the blessing of you and the breath breath in our lungs. Father, we pray over the city of Asperia and its residents, Lord, in a very, very chaotic time. We pray for peace and understanding. Father, we also pray for emergency responders, Lord, that work tirelessly to help us, keep us safe. And so, father, for tonight, we ask for wisdom for our meaning tonight. Understanding the laws and regulations is a lot, and we need the wisdom beyond our years. Patience and eager to hear before we speak, Lord, in your guidance. Thank you, and we praise you.

In the mighty name of Jesus, we pray. Amen? Amen. Roll call.

Chair, Roger Abreo.

Present.

Vice Chair, Sophie Stino. Present. Commissioner Dale Burke?

Here.

Commissioner Earl Hodson? Absent. Commissioner Timothy Ammann?

Present.

Item D, reorganization of the Planning Commission. I'd like to move it or continue it to our next meeting when Commissioner Hodson and all of us can attend before we reorganize, if that's possible.

We can do that. I believe we need a motion.

Okay. I

motion to postpone that item to the next meeting.

Second.

Motion passes four-zero.

Wonderful. All right. Do we have any agenda revisions?

No revisions to the agenda, Chair.

Wonderful. Okay. All right. Public comments. Any person wishing to address the Planning Commission should complete a white card and hand it to the clerk.

Comments are to be limited to three minutes and should concern only topics within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. Any person who would like to comment upon an agenda item should reserve their comment until the public hearing or public comment period is called for that item. Please remember that the Planning Commission is prohibited from considering action on any issue not previously noticed in the agenda. We now open the public comment period at 06:37, and we do not have any white cards for general, comment. Correct?

That's correct.

Alright.

So seeing that there is no comment cards, we close the public comment period at 06:37. Alright. Consent calendar. Approval of minutes. Consideration of the 04/10/2025 Planning Commission meeting draft minutes. Do I have a motion?

I'll make the motion to approve the draft minutes from the regular meeting held on 04/10/2025.

I'll second.

I never know which one to do, I was absent. It's the recuse, right?

Absent? No, it's abstain.

We go.

Motion passes, three-one.

All right. Public hearing. I would like to move Item number three to take these out of order from Item three being in the next position. And after we go through and discuss Item three, we'll move on to Item two.

So as

we start with that

I make a motion to move Item three to Item two for tonight's meeting.

I I don't think we need to have formal action since it's already on the agenda. It's just taking it out of order. Thank

you. Alright. With that being said, correct, item three, consideration of site plan review, SPR 20 two-ten to construct an 84 unit apartment complex on a 4.3 gross acre site within the high density residential, HDR, zone of the Main Street Freeway corridor specific plan located at the South of Smoke Tree, approximately two twenty feet east of 11th Avenue. Applicant is Hossein Mazi. APN is 4050.

The commission recognizes Nathan Freeman as to deliver the staff report. Thank you, Nathan.

All right. Good evening, Honorable Chair and Commissioners. The item before you this evening is a request for site plan review to construct an 84 unit apartment complex, as noted by the Chair, on 4.3 acres. The subject site generally is located in the high density residential zone of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor specific plan area. The subject property is, as noted, 4.3 acres in size and has been zoned high density residential, as far as we can tell, since 2008 when the then city council adopted the Main Street And Freeway Corridor specific plan.

That plan, as I understand it, was developed to support the city's housing element and to encourage a variety of housing options in areas suitable for increased density, especially around the downtown core. Now I fully acknowledge that this area also includes single family homes and a church, which shape the existing neighborhood character. However, these uses are on parcels that are also zoned for high density residential. They are considered legal nonconforming as they predate the current zoning. To the east along 9th Avenue, the site borders commercial properties, reinforcing the mixed use nature that was originally envisioned for this portion of the city.

I share this background not to dismiss what I think will be concerns from the general public, but to clarify that this location was designated for high density housing over fifteen years ago through a very comprehensive community planning process and city council action. The proposed development has generated considerable community interest and rightfully so. Here's a brief timeline of how we got from then to now. So as you can see on the screen, in October 2016, the Hesperia Housing Authority entered into a purchase and sale agreement, I want to clarify that the Hesperia Housing Authority is a portion is a part, excuse me, of the city, entered into a purchase and sale agreement with the developer, mister Hossein excuse me, Hossein Mazi for a future housing project on this site. At the time, as far as I can tell, this transaction did not generate much public comment, likely because many residents were unaware of it at the time.

In May 2022, Mr. Mazi submitted a site plan review application for an 84 unit apartment complex. This is a by right project, meaning that it complies with the city's zoning and does not require discretionary approval for land use. In March, the city's development review committee confirmed that the project meets all applicable standards. However, staff recognizes that zoning and design standards don't always align with the expectations of nearby residents.

In response to public concern received by my staff, the planning commission this evening was scheduled, not because the project requires commission approval, but because we as staff believe community input is essential. We want to provide residents a space to ask questions, to express concerns, and to be part of the process. We as staff know this project is deeply personal for some. Tonight is about listening. It's about being transparent and reaffirming that community voices matter even when this city's ability to alter outcomes is limited by the law.

So as you can see on the screen, we have a rendering of the project. As I noted, the subject site is high density residential, which permits 15 to 20 dwelling units per gross acre. A range within the proposed development comfortably fits, yielding 19.5 units per gross acre. The subject development consists of 10 buildings, nine two story apartment buildings and one single story clubhouse. There will be 84 units arranged to meet a variety of household needs: four buildings with 11 units each, two bedroom two one bedroom and nine two bedroom two buildings with eight two bedroom units each, two buildings with ten two bedroom units each and one building with four two bedroom units.

The unit sizes are generous. One bedrooms are eight seventy five square feet. They are single story, and they have a private yard or will have a private yard. The two bedrooms are eleven twenty five square feet, will be two stories and will include also a private yard. And every unit will include an in unit washer and dryer offering added convenience for future residents.

Shared amenities, as you can see on the screen, will include a clubhouse with a gym, a game room, a wet bar, as well as a pool, a spa, a barbecue area and picnic spots, all according to developer that were designed to build community and enhance livability. The development will also be enclosed for added privacy and security. A six foot high decorative block wall will be constructed along the side and rear property lines, while a six foot high wrought iron fence with decorative pilasters spaced every 30 feet will line Smoke Tree Street, enhancing both safety and streetscape appearance. So this project, as I noted, meets or exceeds all of the city's development standards, including the following: 15 foot front and rear yard setbacks eight foot side yard setbacks, 35 foot maximum height. For parking, 180 spaces will be provided exceeding the required 185 with a mix of covered and uncovered stalls.

And landscaping will cover nearly 16% of the site above the city's 15% minimum, helping to ensure a visually appealing and livable environment for future residents. The architectural design includes tile roofs, stone veneer wainscoting, wood window trim and decorative lighting, all in a two tone color scheme that aligns with the city's quality and character goals. Access improvements include curb, gutter, and sidewalks along Smoke Tree Street, enhancing pedestrian safety. And two decorative driveway entrances with stamped concrete will improve overall streetscape aesthetics. So let's discuss the traffic impact for the proposed 84 unit apartment complex.

Based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers' trip generation manual, we can expect the project to generate approximately five sixty six daily vehicle trips. This includes 34 trips during the AM peak hour and 44 during the PM peak hour. According to the City of Hesperia's Traffic Impact Analysis guidelines, a traffic study is only required if a development generates 50 or more peak hour trips in either the AM or PM. Since this project falls below that threshold, no traffic impact study is necessary. Now moving on to infrastructure.

For water service, the development will connect to an existing eight inches waterline along Smoke Tree Street, ensuring reliable access for future residents. For sewer, a new eight inches line will be installed from 9th Avenue directly to the site, enhancing the utility network in the area. And lastly, in terms of drainage, the project will incorporate an on-site underground retention system to manage stormwater effectively. After an engineering review, it's been confirmed that no significant downstream impacts are expected. The proposed development requires the adoption of initial study or mitigated negative declaration under CEQA.

The environmental review found no significant impacts with mitigation measures in place. A biological assessment indicated minimal impacts with preconstruction surveys recommended to identify any potential sensitive species. No known archaeological or tribal cultural resources were identified, but mitigation measures are included in case any are discovered during construction. The initial study and mitigated negative declaration was circulated for public review from February 12 to March 14, and one letter of opposition was received from a neighboring resident. So in conclusion, the proposed development fully complies with the city's specific plan, the development code and the general plan standards meeting or exceeding requirements for density, setbacks, building height, parking, landscape and design.

Under the California Housing Accountability Act, projects that meet objective design standards must be approved even if they are at market rate developments. The required findings for approval include the subject site is adequate for all required features such as yards, setbacks and parking. The project will not adversely affect surrounding properties or create excessive disturbances. The project is consistent with the general plan, the development code, and all applicable ordinances, and the site provides adequate access despite street and highway limitations. And in closing, while staff fully recognizes and respects the concerns shared by members of the community, given these findings and the project's full compliance with all applicable zoning, design, and environmental standards, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving the site plan review for the project in accordance with state law and local requirements.

So Chair, that concludes my presentation. Myself, my colleague from the engineering division and Ryan Leonard, our Planning Manager, available for any questions.

Thank you, Director. Does anyone on the commission want to discuss anything before we hand it over to the applicant and to the public comments? Okay.

That was a very good presentation. Thank you very much. I just had a couple of questions of clarification. It's hard to see from the handout, but EV charging stations are called out. And I had a question about separate laundry room facility or will laundry washer dryers be provided for each unit?

So to answer your question washer and dryer will be provided in each unit.

And the EV charging stations?

So the California building code requires a certain percentage of EV charging stations. So yes, they will be included.

Okay. As well as just a couple more questions. Is there any senior low income housing in part of

this No, this is a 100% market rate.

Market rate. Oh, that's what that market rate. Oh, I see. Okay, 100%. I think that's all my questions right now. Thank you.

My question is with this high density residential zoning that it's currently in, is there any anticipated changes to the general plan coming that would mean that this would be going outside or will it remain high density residential?

It will remain high density residential.

And to your first point about approval of the project not requiring approval, can you clarify that position while looking for a recommendation to adopt the site plan review?

So typically in a situation like this, this project would be approved at our development review committee level. It is entitled by Wright. It meets all the city's design standards. However, given the public comments, we felt like the Planning Commission was the most appropriate forum for this project. Thank

you, Sher. I had a couple more questions. Was there an original public notice back in 2022 when the applicant signed for the site plan review?

So there would not have been a public notice at that time. So the public gets notified on a couple in a couple of different ways. So the initial study is we notify folks within 600 feet that, that initial study is available for review. And then when an item comes to the Planning Commission, folks are notified within, I believe, it's 300 feet that this item is coming to the Planning Commission. So they would not have been notified immediately that an entitlement application was submitted.

Okay. Not until they completed the planning process and were able to go to the clearinghouse for public review.

So again, when that initial study is in draft ready for public review, we do notify everyone within a radius of 600 feet. We don't send them the document. We make it available make it known that it is available for them to come and review.

But they do get notified in writing?

Yes.

Okay. And then I did I miss the one letter of opposition? Is it in the packet? Yes.

Oh, I did. Yes, was left on your binders. Well, this one right here. Okay.

I have the opposition for the truck. Where? Can I see it? Oh, I missed that. This came with the email. Yes, thank you very much. That's all I have. Thank you.

You're welcome.

I Real noticed it was only an eight inches waterline for the facility. Is that going to be adequate for fire flow on-site? Is there sprinkler systems or other items that's going to seems of that magnitude? And is it going to be master metered or individually metered?

Far as the fire flows, that's a county fire call. They will require a flow test to make sure that their requirements are met. And if they're not met, then we'll have to upsize that line or find a way to provide adequate flow. What was the second question? I'm sorry. Oh, master meter. Yes, it will be master metered and then sub metered on-site.

Okay, very good. My concern is the fire department with their fire flows have been a little laxed and my feelings on what they're providing as I've seen in the past and have made that an issue for me, I appreciate that. The second part real quick is the right on the corner of that lot, I'd call it what the North West Corner, there's a drainage or actually it's actually a pipe that goes under for the drainage from 11th Street down through there all the way to 4th. And is there any impact on that? Looks like it's catching just the corner of it, but I was wondering if there's impact there.

No, not to the site. The two ten foot diameter pipes are actually in Smoke Tree. When the site overflows, when their storage is at capacity and it does overflow, it will enter those catch basins. But that will be once their requirement their on-site requirement has been met. When we extend the sewer, we'll extend that sewer probably to those catch basins. Obviously, we won't be able to go any further west.

Depending on the depth, yes. Okay. Yes, that you can't impact that too much.

Right.

And yes, I just wondered if the two ten foot pipes were going to be impacted on that corner. It doesn't look like it. No. It's hard to tell where they're at in relationship to the easement due north of that. Correct. Okay. Thank you.

Welcome.

With that being said, I think we're probably ready to hear from the applicant. So the commission would like to invite the applicant at this time to speak if the applicant is here.

I'm sorry, Chair. I had one more question now that I fully have the entire package in red. I just want to have a question of staff. Hi, I'm sorry. I had a chance to review the whole packet now. I reviewed the opposition letter. So I have a question about noise. Can you elaborate how the city mitigates noise with regards to a high density residential area?

So the question is how do we mitigate noise? What type of noise are you referring to?

Well, just like we do noise studies. So was one done for this project, guess is my question.

Let me ask Ryan real quick. Forgive me.

So with regards to the noise study, a noise study was not required for this project. Typically, studies are required when the project is going to result in like a different noise level requirement than an adjacent type property. So if this were commercial or industrial adjacent to residential and it had some loud uses like a car wash, for instance, has very loud vacuums. In this case, the residential noise levels for multifamily are the same as for the single family across the street. So those noise levels are the same. We wouldn't have required a noise study in this instance.

Thank you very much. That's all I have.

Thank you, Ryan. Welcome. You're welcome. You're good. I can see your eyes really. Absolutely. I appreciate the questions absolutely from Commissioner Stino. They round up the beginning of this conversation. So we'd like to invite if the applicant is here, we'd like to offer them a moment to speak. Public comment period is at seven Welcome.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Hussein Mazi. I am a developer, actually a contractor. I'm local from here.

I live thirty four years here, and I developed a lot of medical, dental, gas station and house in the local area. Naturally, when I do something before I think about that, so everything should be organized, Not bothering anybody or you know, good for the city and good for me also finally. So, this lot I bought from the city of Hesperia. It was already high density. That's why I buy it from the city of Hesperia.

And, so I talked to development. I talked with architects. He's very, very expert. So we divided all part in nine building, so do not be very crowded in one part. Every building they have a, you know, landscape area, barbecue or picnic area.

And naturally, have swimming pool and all for the everybody. So, in none of my building before, none of my project has any problem and always I see the neighbors and they were very happy. I believe, you know, I try to make the neighbors happy also every time. If they have any problem, if project approved and they have any problem, I personally every day I am in the job site. And then we can discuss and we can resolve any problem.

This is what if anybody has a question, I'm ready to answer.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions? All right. Thank you very much.

Thank you, everybody. All right. Thank you.

So the commission invites those members of the public to comment upon this item to address commission. We're gonna, call persons that are listed at these white cards with the Habitat stack. After we go through it all, the white cards that, we'll we'll discuss it further as a commission. I do want to remind, as we open up the public comment period, the comments are to be limited to three minutes for each person. So when the three minute time limit is up, out of requirement by regulation, we have to stop whoever continues to speak.

So we would like to open up the public comment period, starting off with our mayor, Allison Lee. Oh, yes.

Before I start, I just wanna clarify if this is a public hearing or not. I believe it said so in the is it safe plant? Public hearing? They've referred to it as a public hearing.

Yes. It is five minutes.

Okay. Perfect. Alright. Most of you know me. My name is Allison Lee. I am here as a concerned citizen. I am not here as the mayor of Asperia. I live on the corner of 9th And Smoke Tree. My family's lived there since 1990. Bought that house brand new. I did send you guys some pictures. The one with the red car, that is my house. And in 1990, and that's what everything looked like over there. The other pictures in that packet are towards the project. And I do that because I'm

on the

corner of 9th And Smilketree, and I didn't get a letter. I was told I was gonna get a letter about this, and I didn't. The only way I found out that this was happening is that Judy Baker sent a letter to the city hall to the mayor, and I read that letter from the dais because I was upset. I was told by the city manager in January that she had bad news for me that this project was coming, and I couldn't do anything about it because it wasn't going before the planning commission or the council. So I don't know why he's saying it was done in March when city manager's telling me I can't do anything about it in January, and I was gonna get a letter in February.

So

what else do I wanna talk about? You can get the letters. So according to your traffic study, which was done came out in 2020, which probably means it was done in 2019. So we've got quite a bit more traffic. I don't believe that they took into account that most of the traffic that comes on this street is generated by employees of the police department, city hall, and the county building.

I have a hard time getting out of my driveway already in the morning, and you're gonna add to according to their letters or their numbers, 566 daily trips. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want that on my street. And I I'm sure none of you would either. So and I don't understand why we only have peak hours 35 trips in the morning in the peak hours and 44 peak hour trips in the evening. I don't I don't get that either.

So out of 566 daily trips. So but I think you're trying to keep the numbers below the 50 so you don't have to do any more work on that. I found out about this project prior to being sworn in as a council member, and I was told it was coming, then I was told it wasn't coming, then I was told it's coming, and then in January, I was told it was coming. The traffic is gonna be impacted immensely in this area, and I I don't think it's fair to all of us. And I don't know why I didn't get a letter.

Is it because I'm out of the 300 feet? And I don't know what the 600 feet means. We'll we'll talk about that later. I still have my five minutes here.

So I have

others here that I got going on. She

said five. And

you have 84 units, eight one bedroom, and the other 80 are two bedrooms, I'm guessing. So you're allowing 1.75 parking spaces for the eight units and 2.25 for the two bedroom. I I don't know how you split a car, but and the other item that I gave you is the dirt parking lots of the apartment buildings on C Avenue where all those cars are parked on the dirt. So where are they gonna park on this street? There's not gonna be enough parking in there for all these cars.

I can guarantee that, and I don't want it on my street. I don't want it in the dirt lots, and I certainly don't want it in the cul de sac impeding my other neighbors. You know, this seems to me like they're trying to squeeze five pounds of apples in a two pound sack, and and it just it just doesn't make any sense with the traffic. You know, if you put some single family homes, that'd be great. And this block wall, six foot, they can see into the neighbors on Juniper. That's not okay.

Thank you, madam mayor. Alison Lee, I'd like to go to our next comment, our white card. Pat Lemore, hopefully we're saying it correctly.

Mack Lemore. Yes. I live on the opposite counter of Connor on Smoke Tree, 9th And Smoke Tree from Allison. I have been there since I was a brand new bride of 22. I've been there over fifty years, before Hesperia was a city, I might add.

I would love to leave my house and go down and drive through and go right straight over to Hisperia Road and cut up to hit Bear Bear where I go to work. I can't because the parking is so much that you have to stop, let this one go by, stop that one. So I now have to back out of my garage into my yard. Oh, by the way, on the side of this said building, there's three houses, two of which I own. But I have to back into my yard so I can pull forward out to get out of the traffic on that street.

And I have been doing this for probably it's probably been the last eight years that it's been the absolute worst. And saying that I have two out of the three houses, I also got no stinking letter whatsoever. None. Not one. 600 feet, I might be six zero one. You can't walk another foot and put it in my mailbox. That's ridiculous. That's simply simply unforgivable and unmentionable. It should not have happened that way. And I too, like Allison, feel like our street can't hold that much more traffic. That's all I got to say.

Thank you very much. As a clarification, the three minutes opposed to five minutes, could you help me with that?

The item was agendized as a public hearing item. And according to your local rules, public hearing items get five minutes.

Five minute opposed to the three minutes. Thank you for that clarification. I appreciate that. So everyone here can also hear that. So instead of three, it's five. All right. Moving on to the next white card and appreciate all the comments tonight. Sharon Fleming, please come forward.

My experience with this area started approximately 1952, 'fifty three when my parents purchased five acres. They then moved here in '78. I moved here in '84. I live on Smoke Tree, and I've lived there for forty years. I already experienced, as mayor has said, extremely large amount of traffic, and it it's not just from the city. It's also people coming down Balsam. They can't now go out on Main Street left, so they now don't go around my street. They usually hit about 50 miles an hour by the time they're in front of my house. My other question is, yeah, approximately two cars per unit is a 168 cars. They're not allowing for that many.

Usually, there will be more because it's gonna be a family unit. Smoke Tree, when you leave 11th Street, is wide at one point and then immediately curves down to a very narrow street. How is that going to be addressed? What's the setback? Are they gonna cut back into all the people's housing, including her home?

It it will affect my home the most because I'm on the extreme corner Of 9th And Smoke Street. It'll take city property. I understand that. But the road narrows there, and so it will make the traffic even closer to my fence.

It's not it's not a normal wide street. It is very narrow. I'm vision impaired and walk, and I'm always nervous when I'm walking towards the park that the streets are so narrow, so I'm always having there's just not when you leave where the drainage goes across, the street is very narrow, and that's the project that's gonna be part of that area. So I'm I'm definitely opposed to this unit because I already experienced all the traffic. And when they say 500, do you want 500 cars going up and down your street?

I'm sorry, but I I love this city. I've lived here a long time, seeing the growth, and this is wrong. And why why it was snuck by the council? What is there some way they can make sure we understand things when they made this a high density situation. As citizens, there should be some kind of a notice. So, anyway, I hope that you guys take this into consideration of the that what we experience because we live in it. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Next white card is just named Gina. Is there a Gina that would like to speak? Please come to the podium. I'd like to turn.

Good evening. I actually don't live on the street, but I am here as a concerned Hesperia resident here to support them because I would be very upset if that happened on my street. Basically, I drive Smoke Tree occasionally just to go to the park and to the movies, and there's just no understanding I can fathom why there has to be a complex built on that street. As they indicate, the street is narrow, and even driving there, you have to go slowly for safety reasons. It is a safety issue.

And you can say, oh, we're going to widen the road. Well, there's more problems we're going to have. Basically, I could see residential housing like there is on the opposite side, the North Side, like from down to Travis, Cheyenne. Keep it uniform. You're putting a complex and smack dab in the middle.

It's absolutely ridiculous, and it will have a negative impact on those long term residents surrounding that whole street. Also, why was it that notification was only given to residents in 300 feet of their proposed project? I mean, it seems kind of shady to me. Everybody should have gotten notification of it, and I mean, they're all going to be affected by it. And I remember specifically Rachel Molina stating at a City Council meeting that only people who lived within 300 feet were privy to get that notification.

It does impact everyone there, and they have the right to voice their opinions, and not everyone they have to everybody needs to weigh in and, you know, be able to speak about it. I mean, they have concerns if they have the right. It seems to me that that was just done purposely to slide the project through without opposition, and that's a big problem here in Hesperia and the city management in general. You all know that there are better locations in Hesperia to build this complex or any apartment complex. For example, the existing ones on CE, there's vacant land over there, there's vacant land off of Santa Fe, East in Santa Fe, Hesperia Road in Santa Fe, there's a whole bunch of places around Hesperia you can build complexes and keep it uniform, not where residents live, and you're obstructing their views, and I mean, it's nice that they're going to make this complex all nice and pretty, but what about them?

It's not going to be pretty to them because they get to see that. Basically, you're not taking the residents into consideration. Again, the long term impact will have on them on existing neighborhoods, and the project and the location, again, is absolutely a horrible idea, and you need to do some hard thinking and relocate it to another part of Hesperia. Keep it uniform. Hesperia I mean, you've got car washes going where bars used to be, and that's causing that's going to cause traffic problems, too.

There's no, like, thinking it doesn't seem like where everything is being built. The noise I can see noise coming out of that complex. People party, they have barbecues, and who knows what's going to happen? You know everybody shoots off fireworks on the fourth of July. Who do you how do you know and how can you guarantee that the people who stay there, who live there and rent there are actually going to be on the up and up and not end up like the other apartment complexes where there's issues, you know, well, some are good, but they do have their problems.

And the traffic, well, yeah, you're going to have a lot of traffic, but just remember, you're going to have people moving in there, and there's going to be additional school traffic on top of that, too. So you're adding to traffic on top of those numbers that were presented. And that's about it. And I really hope if that happened in my neighborhood, yes, I'd be upset. And please take into consideration what they're asking. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much. Next white card is Regina Beardsley. Welcome.

Hello. Thank you for having me. I'm a resident on Smoke Tree for twenty two years. I'm I'm at the end, not at the corner, but the next street, the next house down. And I'm really upset about this, you know. And I want to ask about the sewer you're putting in. Does that affect the houses over there? Do we have to hook up to the sewer too? Is that a concern for us? No?

Okay. All right. It's just outrageous. It's an outrageous proposal because I watch the traffic. I'm home. I'm retired. And, I mean, we have the police department right at the corner, and cars are going speeding up and down 50 miles an hour. We have a lot of traffic on that street. Can you imagine all these cars extra coming in, going out? It's not going to be a good thing.

And another thing is I talked to at least six realtors. It's going to have an effect on our houses. We're going to lose our equity in our houses. We are not going to be able to, you know, nobody's going to want an eyesore like that, and they're not going to buy our house, they're going to cut us down on the money. Did you consider that? That's our problem. I can't get for my house what I could have gotten if this thing goes up. That's a real concern. And I know you guys would be concerned too. I just don't think the four acres is enough land to cram all these units on.

It's not, you know. It's ridiculous. It's not the place to put a big structure like that. I mean, when I look out the window, that's what I'm gonna see, you know. Are you going to widen the street, you said? Yes? Anybody?

Yes. It is being widened in front of the project. I that's a question follow-up question I have for staff.

It's already been widened a few years back. Now it's going to go out is that going to be on my side?

Curb, gutter and sidewalk, something the houses along Smoke Tree do not have right now.

I know we don't have them. Never So you're going

to have that now across the street from

Oh, so now they're going to encroach on us?

No. The street is being widened. We'll let staff address that because I have a follow-up question for staff.

Okay. I'm just saying I'm gonna have a sidewalk now?

Yes. I'm sorry?

A sidewalk in front of my house?

No. Across the street.

In front

of the project. Across the The project will be Okay. Conditioned. Alright.

I'm very upset. I really am. Twenty two years I've lived there, and I'm by myself. I have some dogs. And I the safety, I I don't know, you know. I just don't feel I just don't like it. You know, and I think I think you're going to have a lot of trouble renting these units for $2,500 I mean, who's going to pay that? You know? Who is going to pay that? And then what happens if you can't get people to pay that?

Does it turn then into a Section eight? Which, believe me, I'm going to go nuts if it does. That's not something we all want. So, I have one minute left. I don't know. I spoke with you a few times. Thank you. But this is not a good thing for the residents. And I just have a feeling, the way it's gone, that you didn't consider any of us. Forget about, you know, the other street, Cheyenne, it doesn't affect them.

But for us, up and down Smoke Tree from 11th to 9th, it's a big deal. It's a really big deal. It's bad for us. Where's the consideration for the residents? But, I mean, that's a busy area. They're speeding up and down. Even with the police at the corner, they don't care. They're still speeding up and down all the time. And all these extra cars, I don't know. I don't think it's going to work, I'm not happy at all. Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time.

Chair, if I might suggest that the commission hold on responses to comments and questions till after the speaker is done to ensure that all speakers get their fully allotted times and we're not cutting into it with staff conversations.

Thank you. Good point. So Paul, we would just write those comments down and then address it? Yes. Okay, perfect. Thank you. So as we move forward, I hope everyone heard a city attorney had mentioned to kinda expedite to giving everyone time to speak. We're gonna write your comments down. We won't have a dialogue back and forth. Please know that's not disregarding you. That is just part of being efficient and getting all the questions. And then when all the public comments are done, then we'll have those comments addressed by the staff. So with that being said, moving forward to the next one, white card is Judy Baker. Please come up to the lectern.

I'm very nervous and very, very, very upset. We live on Smoke Tree and this project will be a monstrosity in front of our home, straight across the street from us. Nowhere would we ever think that something like this could be built in a single family resident area. I have no idea. I wouldn't even begin to think. Would any of you even think that this was high density and that something like this could be put in front of your home? I dare any of you to think. Put yourself in our place. If you have we have lived here for thirty five years. My husband and I are retired.

We have this, we thought, was going to be our retirement home. We're going to be we can't sit in our front yard any longer. The view of the mountains and the peacefulness that we've had, all these years are going be taken away from us. We're going to have this giant building staring at us. We won't be able to enjoy it, and I don't agree with anything you're saying about the noise level.

Nothing whatsoever. You cannot tell me you're going to put 85 apartments, even if they had one person in there, that the noise level would not be changed in every way. And as far as widening the streets, you're going to widen it just in front of the units and not in front all the way down, and the traffic goes on and on and on. We can't get out of our driveways, you have to time it every time. They speed down this street.

Speed. My husband has been out there several times wanting to even yell at the police officers that are speeding down this street. It is it is so I am so upset and so angry. I just cannot believe that this would be put where it's being put. We are not against a single family dwelling.

We know people have to live, But Hesperia is a very large area, and you cannot tell me you cannot find another place to put this project. We're going to have the driveway. I don't know if it's going to be completely in front of us, but we're going to not be able to enjoy our life the way it is. That is going be taken away from us. We won't enjoy the view of the mountains, anything that we've had.

I want to know how many people are going to be allowed to be in these apartments. Is it going be one family, or are we going have multiple families living in these apartments, which means more people, more noise, more everything. I cannot believe that this was brought would even be thought to be put there. And I feel very strongly that the way it was done, whether it's the rules or whatever, I feel like you tried to slip it in and didn't say anything to any of us, and if some of us hadn't found out about it, this wouldn't even be happening right now. And I want to know why that was, if somebody can answer that.

We received one notice, and why wouldn't everyone around this whole area be given the courtesy to be told about this so that they could have an opinion about what's going on? 300 feet. I want to take a tape measure because when we got this letter, it says that the project is two twenty feet from 11th Avenue, and I know there are people that did not receive the notice, that we had to go door to door to find out who got this letter and who did not. And I want to know who received these letters. I would really like to know who received these letters, because it sure wasn't very many people.

All right. Well, there's nothing more that I can say other than I am totally, totally against this project. I'm sorry if you think that you will have a beautiful place. I'm sure it's going to be very, very nice. I have nothing against you. But I don't want it in my front yard. I don't want it 10 feet across the street to have to be looking at this. I've worked too hard. We have worked for thirty five years to be in this city to have a retirement that is going to be glorious, and we can enjoy our home, that we have worked so hard to keep up and make beautiful to have this being built across the street from us.

Thank you. Next white car is Don Baker.

Yes, we bought this house brand new. And when we bought it, this lot where you guys are at right now was a vacant lot. It was a desert, just like what's across the street from us. And, they've made this really nice, which is great. But, the traffic going down our street well, you people don't even come down it probably, so you don't care.

We do. They go down our street so damn fast, I wanna stand out there with a ball and roll it down, and somebody crashes. I would love that. I would love to have somebody get hurt on our street because somebody's dog, kid, or somebody's gonna get killed on our street because of that building. I'm so pissed off about this whole thing. I don't even know why. You said you mailed out something five years ago or whatever. You did not. You're all bullshitting somebody. You did not send anything out. We would have heard about it by now. The only thing we got is one letter my wife got.

All

right. Thank you. Moving on to George Negrete. George? Sorry if I butchered your name.

It's okay. It's okay. So I live on Smoke Tree as well, and me and my wife bought about four years ago. We live in between Balsam and 11th, and we love it there. But, like, they say the traffic, it's insane. Like, I I catch people going at least 80 from Balsam to 11th, and I have two babies, so that kinda concerns me. Honestly, if I I have the zoning map right here. And as you could see, I know it's high density residential, but honestly, from what I'm looking at, it doesn't belong here. High doesn't and can I pass this to you guys so you guys could We

have that map?

We have that.

We have that map as well as you do. Yes. Can you get to your I apologize because it's public comment so we can record you and hear you properly.

Okay.

I apologize but if you could just stay by the microphone. Okay.

So this, I don't know why this is zoned high density residential. There's nothing but single family residences. This is cool. The police station, the city, the library. I love that. That's awesome, the park. But when it comes to this being built, with all due respect, I don't think this is the right place to put such a big project in between all these homes. It just doesn't make sense from what I'm looking at the zoning map. And from what I'm thinking is, so I pretty much got everything written down. So first of all, it is an eyesore.

Homes in my opinion probably even like one home per acre and this four acres will look better than an apartment complex with who knows how many families will be living in this complex. You guys are gonna make profits and we're we're end up we're gonna end up getting screwed off of it. So, it's gonna be too congested. It's pretty much the last land on Smoke Tree and I love passing by last or the land. It's just beautiful but I would rather see homes on there.

I feel like in my opinion, it's better to conserve it in its natural state as long as possible unless homes are built. It's gonna take away a lot of people's privacy, that's for sure. I mean, in my opinion, I love my privacy especially in my front yard and that's why we put we picked Smoke Tree. It just doesn't match the surrounding area. Residents are not going to benefit from this at all.

It's going to increase traffic. Don't believe that 40 cars, I don't believe it dude. Like it's way more, way, way more and the speeding is crazy. It's going to take away the scenery. It's going to affect, I feel in my opinion, it's going to affect definitely the property values And when we're talking about encroachments or you know or taking other or more more land from these people, that's not right.

Tenant relations and also with the residential relations, who knows how that's gonna be. What if you know the tenants don't get along with the people across the street, the ones that have been living there for years and that doesn't look right. The maintenance is probably gonna be a lot to keep up with maybe the residents the residential side is probably gonna have to put up with who knows a lot of maintenance, know, from who knows trash or who knows what. It may strain the water lines, the sewer lines, and the surrounding neighborhood. It does have potential negative impacts on the neighborhood.

It impacts the character and the noise, definitely. It's it's gonna be louder than they say. And I'm wondering is this gonna affect the property taxes as well? So and just because it's zoned high density residential, feel like it doesn't mean that it has to be an apartment complex. You know, it doesn't have to be that.

It could be still homes because the whole block right there is basically nothing but homes. It's going to affect the tranquility, definitely. Yeah, this development, in my opinion, definitely belongs like on Mariposa Road, Sultana, Hisperia Road, Ranchero Road, Santa Fe Avenue, kind of in the outskirts of Hisperia near Ranchero Road. So, I'm definitely I live on Smoke Tree so I definitely I feel like I will be affected by this and you know because I could see I could see the park, I could see the movie theater from my yard and I and I love seeing the movie theater just because I know that's the park. But if that's built then that definitely is gonna be an eyesore for me.

Five seconds?

Okay. And I feel like you should listen to the residents that live on actual Smoke Tree and don't listen to someone that's just gonna make a profit off of it.

Alright. Thank you very much.

It's Thank you.

Five minutes are up. We do appreciate your comments.

Thank you.

Maria Rodriguez? You have five minutes. Thank you very much Yes. For

My name is Mario Rodriguez. I live on the corner of Smoke Tree And 11th, on the very corner. When they said about the parking, they're not going bring a lot of, I mean, 180 some parking spots. I have four boys, my husband and me. I live in almost a little more than half an acre. We have six cars. Six cars because it's I have four boys, my husband and my car.

So you're gonna tell me

that those families are gonna come and live there. They're gonna have one car per family? No. That's ridiculous. We wanna think that. Plus, the traffic. Yeah. The traffic gets very, very bad. The police comes and hopped in my house asking me they can look at the cameras because there's accidents, because cars drive over there like eighty, ninety miles per hour. As a matter of fact, two years ago, they crashed into my house. I had just put up brand new fence that crashed into my fence two years ago because they were speeding. So, honestly, I don't I didn't plus, I don't know if they can raise their hands how many people got the letter. I didn't get the letter. I don't know how many people are from Smoke Tree And 11th to where the new place is being built. I didn't get the letter.

Who got the letter? Raise your hands. I didn't. That didn't take us into consideration. So I am very upset. And like my neighbor said, our equity is gonna go down. Our house is gonna they're gonna lose value just because he wants to build a big place for other I mean, for his benefit, of course, not for our benefit. So I'm against the the against that. So that's all I have to say.

Thank you very much.

Yes.

All right. Tara Knox.

Hi, my name is Tara Knobs. I just bought my house on Smelt Tree last year. I've been a resident for a year. I came from the busy city down there in San Bernardino, and I needed to get to some peace. And that was the first time when I came. I met my lovely neighbor, Mr. Don Baker. Hi, Ms. Baker. And they do have a very beautiful home, very inspirational.

Just like the gentleman said, the tranquility that when I pulled up in the house needed some stuff done, But when I pulled up, I knew that this was the place I was supposed to be. This is the place I was going to make home. And I agree with everyone here, and that's the first thing that I experienced when I moved in that house. That traffic was scary. And I leave out of my house usually about 06:30 every morning.

It's you can hear the traffic all night long. It's eerie for it to be a quiet street, and it's so much traffic going down there. And nobody lives there but these few houses on the street. I just it's amazing to me. So I do draw the same concern as the rest of my neighbors. The traffic is number one. And the amount of people that will come into that community, I don't know if widening the street is going to help. It's just going to create more problems. So I'm just here voicing my concern. I love my neighborhood.

It's taken me a while so I can go in my front yard and enjoy. But now I sit there and would say, I have to put a fence up. They're too close. They're just right there. And I'm not going to feel safe at night because, like I said, the street is very narrow, and it doesn't take much for anybody to walk up to your house, especially when you have windows in the front.

So now, like I said, I feel that I need to secure my front area of my house just so that I can have privacy and security. And then I'm losing that element that was right there in front of me. And like the other gentleman said, I agree with nice homes or something like that, but such a large project. You know, when you're coming out of living in a tight city where there's housing, especially like in Red Lake, there's buildings going up everywhere, and there's no place to have peace. So that's my concern.

And like I said, it's a very beautiful building, and it will work. But I just kind of want to want to enjoy my home, and I want everybody else to enjoy their home. And I want to thank you guys for welcoming me into the community. And our mayor, she came to my house one day strolling, walking. Oh, hi. You know, and she told me what was getting ready to go on here. And so she was the one who told me at least almost a year ago when she walked by. And so anyway, I'm just here to let my voice be heard and support my neighbors and our wishes that this project not go all the way through.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Have some Chair?

Yes. I have four additional white Sandra Barela.

Hello. My name's Sandra Barela, and I live on Smoke Tree Court directly across from where the the project's going to be going up, and I never got a notice. This is the fur I just recently heard about it a couple nights ago, so that's why I'm here. And no notices. Once again, I don't know why.

I'm right there. There's no reason for me to not have gotten a letter in the mail, somebody come by, give me something. And our neighborhood is so quiet, so nice. I love living on that cul de sac there, and all my neighbors watch out for each other. We don't have any concerns, you know.

It's very pleasant. But, you know, if an apartment complex goes in there, we're not gonna know those neighbors. I can't leave things out on my porch, and, you know, there's always the more people that you have, the more chance of more crime. And, you know, it's just the way

it is.

And like I said, I don't have to worry about that right now. And like everybody else has been saying, the traffic already is so crazy. I'm lucky that my car hasn't been hit already, people making U turns because they don't realize that it's a dead end and coming out, you know, running. Some of them have been running from the cops and doing the u-turn and trying to get away from them. So more people.

There's gonna be more people speeding around there. So I just don't think it's a good idea to go up where it's going. I think it needs to go in an area where there's other apartment complexes. So, anyway, I hope you all take it into consideration and keep it a good, quiet, respectful neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Our next comment card.

Patrick Barela.

Hello. My name is Patrick Barela. That was my mother that came up and just spoke before you. So just a couple little points I wanna make. So a lot of people choose their house based on position. Many people don't want to live somewhere. Headlights are going to be shining through their curtains all times of night. People often buy houses parallel to the roadway for that reason. And then as far as measurements, so I don't know where they're measuring from, but I just measured on satellite from the edge of my property as well as my neighbor's property all the way to the church parking lot, and we're within 600 feet of there. So I never received anything.

I never had a knock on the door. You know? I mean, we have a cluster mailbox, so I wouldn't necessarily you know, only the post person can deliver there, but, you know, come knock on the door, you know, leave it out the door, whatever you have to do. I mean, my neighbors live in within 300 feet, and, you know, I don't believe they've received anything. A few other little points.

We have people who come into our cul de sac, and they do burnouts right there in in our cul de sac. You know, they'll come around, and they'll leave our cul de sac doing, like, 50 miles per hour. You know, in that little stretch of space, they'll, you know, come rev their their engines. I mean, I'm sure anybody who lives within earshot of, like, the police station, you can hear people hit that intersection right there and, you know, burn rubber a little bit. I mean, you know, so there's kids that play around in our neighborhood constantly.

You know? I mean, I see kids walking to the movie theater. I mean so if you have extra traffic I mean, as it is, when we have holidays, you know, Thanksgiving, Christmas, people are parking in the middle of the cul de sac because there's, you know, limited parking as is. So if you had additional people, not including all of their family members, you know, where are they gonna park? I as is when we pull out of our cul de sac, sometimes, you know, it's it's a blind corner because there's people parked all up and along the street, and there's really no proper, you know, curb, you know, situation to park on.

So, you know, I just wanted to come and voice my opposition to, you know, this kind of project. Like my mom said, there's obviously going to be an increase in crime rate. Population density increases. You have an increase in crime rate. Not including a comparison between single family homes and apartment complexes.

I mean, it's just a no brainer. I mean, if you just drive down Smoke Tree, you could see I mean, like, there's occasionally a shooting or something that takes place in the apartment surrounding those areas, and I don't think that's anything that any of us want to experience. So I just wanted to say that, and thank you guys all for coming out. And, you know, I hope that you guys take into consideration everything everybody has to say and what these gentlemen have to say. I mean, I can't speak to it being true in a lot of aspects because I haven't seen it with my own two eyes, so.

Thank you. Next, white card.

Gerardo Cordinas.

Good afternoon, everybody. So my name is Gerardo. I live right there at the corner of Smoke Tree Court and Smoke Tree. We moved there from San Diego here almost like two years ago, so we changed and we like that neighborhood. But now with this current one is the traffic, like everybody else here mentions that people will be speeding there like it's actually a race like a track.

And I have my 10 year old son that sometimes we play basketball in the front or for instance people be flying there, I just stare at them trying to make them slow down. So just that issue alone, just right now, I can just imagine us coming from apartment complex, we know how it is because part one parking is always an issue. It could be handicapped, it could be and like I don't know what the neighbors saying, you always gonna have four cars, you're gonna have six cars because each adult is gonna have a car. So, that's gonna add a more traffic, I guess, more traffic in that street. So, that's going to be the first concern.

The second concern is also trash as well. Because I know we know the apartment complex is going to have a trash, but what about pets? Because now they're to walk outside in new future sidewalk and then you're to see the litter from the pets all over the street and then everything is going to start smelling. Let me see what the second key third key point was. Also what would be the promise of that apartment complex becoming a Section eight?

Right now, it's not promised to be low income, but what about if they can actually rent it out and become Section eight. As you see other cities like Victorville and Adelanto where I grew up, you see all these low income housing like they're not up to date, they're not high maintenance well kept. They become actually trash and everything and that's why you started carrying all this crime. But also to us, the rest of the neighbors, we also have to keep an eye out for people that try to trespass or try to steal stuff from our front yards because now we're going to have this apartment complex in front of us. So, of course, like everybody else, we're opposed to that too because all these things that happened to our house, the crime and all this stuff that's going to go into effect to that, we're opposed to that and that's pretty much it. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Do we have any more white cards?

Yes, we have two more. We have Bill Jensen. Marlene Garcia.

Hi. My name is Marlene. I live or me and my family live right in front of where that building is going to be at. We're on Juniper so it's literally that's gonna be our backyard. That's what we're gonna see. First point that I wanna make is this is a big two story building. It's going to be in the middle of single family homes. It's like literally right in the middle. You don't see any other two story buildings or apartments nearby our neighborhood. So I don't know how this is being allowed.

It's definitely going to alter like the visual character of what this neighborhood already looks like. It's going to be out of sync with what the surrounding homes look like. We have single homes and bringing this in is going to bring too many too much traffic like what other, neighbors are saying. And not only that, but it the privacy. They say that they're gonna put a six feet wall, but they're still gonna look into our backyard. We have kids, and they're not gonna be able to be safe to be playing in their own backyard because of this building. We don't know the type of people who are gonna go live in there. We don't know if they're gonna be, like, criminals or, what they're gonna do. And right now, we are a close knit neighborhood. How are we going to come in contact with all of these people who are coming into this building?

You don't know, well our neighbor, she's really close to us. Me and the three neighbors who are going to be right in front of her, that's what they're going to see. We're all pretty close. We are in communication but our neighbor is alone. She has no other family. What's going to happen to her if someone tries to get into her home? What is she gonna do? She's alone and all these people are going to be living there now. Another point that I did wanna make is the amount of noise. They said that they weren't gonna do a noise test, but I feel like it is required because they're not considering the noise from vehicles and also construction.

Construction is going to take a long time to build this apartment complex. It's going to bother not only us but everyone around it. And also, I did want to say something else. I guess the traffic already mentioned it, but that's pretty much it. That's those are the main points that I wanted to say. So thank you. Thank you for listening to all of us.

Thank you so much. I believe it's Bill Jensen as the last, white card.

One more or a new speaker? If he's already spoke, we

should He's already spoke. He cannot. Right?

We shouldn't we shouldn't allow him if he already has. But if it's a new speaker, you can you can allow

it I'm sorry. You can't.

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Bill Jensen, and I'm here in advocacy of just about everyone. But I'm here mainly to give perspective. I don't believe we could pick a better planning commission to hear this. It may be more qualified at this particular moment in time because of your career fields than even the City Council. But issues like this are what get my fine and good colleague elected to the mayor of the city of Asperia is Allison is because neighbors come out and they find things happen that they didn't know what would happen.

Now, if we're in planning and engineering and architecture and building and safety, we know why this happens. So to the developer, how do I pronounce your name? Hussein. Hussein. Hussein, you have done everything that was asked of you when you bought a piece of property and you found that the zoning was what you anticipated. Staff did everything that they were supposed to do because that was the zoning. And now the Planning Commission is being asked to hear this, and the neighbors are like, What the hell happened? How is this going on? So I'm here to give you some of that perspective because over twenty three years ago, it may have been my administration that was responsible for putting this into play in the first place. The economic development director at that time was Steve Lantzberger.

He made some friends, but he made some enemies. And along that way, if we look up at this map, this building you see on 9th over here, if I'm not mistaken, is the movie theatre. Over to the movie theatre is the police station or is the city hall, the library, then the police station and the county building, and all of that is part of my administration when we tackled this area. Once upon a time, a long time ago, this city hall was supposed to be built out of the freeway on Michael Dunia's property, And we would have had visibility from the 15 Freeway, and Bill Jensen just about fell on his sword to keep that property, this City Hall, out there. Four other councilmen and an economic development director came to me and said, Bill, we're going to qualify for tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars of blighted federal funding money if we will go to the blighted area at the core of the city and rebuild the sewer water power pipelines.

And if you notice from City Hall, goes Smokestree, Chestnut, all the way to the railroad tracks. We built all those neighborhoods. When we built and designed this City Hall, this library, the sheriff's department, the county building, and then surrounding it, what had to be here was high density. This is not just one, but if you could see the rest of the map that is around this area, there are other apartment buildings that are surrounding it as it approaches the commercial. The idea was this entire area had to have more foot traffic to support the movie theater, to support the city hall, to support the library and try to keep the cars off the road.

So what happened twenty three years ago is a plan was put into effect, and zoning was set up to feed the central core of city park and stuff like that. And then, lo and behold, three or four peaks and falls of economies from the Twin Towers falling to the 2008 crash to the Biden administration situation that we've had to deal with and the economics of everything that win and fail. So we don't get to build ever ten straight years that we don't suffer some economic impact. And so the historical knowledge goes away. The only person that's been here long enough to even get me close to this is Nathan, because he worked here once before, and he knows that far back, because we clashed at different times with different people, me mainly with Steve Landsberger and his performance in some cases.

I was very concerned about coming downtown, but I also knew we were seriously blighted. We had lost sewer. We had no water. You couldn't even build on these lots because they were so small they couldn't even have a septic tank. And now we've got sewer down some of these boulevards, and it was a pain in the ass for the city staff, no doubt. When it came to doing the paperwork to keep up with that federal grant money, federal funding, we had to be in compliance all the time. It was a bookkeeping nightmare for the city. And if it's not over, I'm betting the staff still wishes it was over because it was a hurdle every time they had to report to the federal government. So that's kind of where it came from. The developer is not necessarily the bad guy.

He found a piece of property zoned where it was supposed to be. He put a building on it. He spent God knows how many hundreds of thousands of dollars to tee it up and get it ready to go, and then the neighbors go, has anybody looked at the traffic on this? Oh my god. We're gonna get walloped. It's already bad. It's already running up and down the boulevard, and maybe you take after Spring Valley Lake, and you put some them great big whoop de doos out in the middle of the road because the cops can't be there every day. Right? I go through Spring Valley Lake now, and if you crest 35 miles an hour, you're gonna take everything out of your trunk and your glove box when you do it. So maybe some speed bumps will slow the traffic down.

Does that solve the problem of multiple cars to the city residents? No. But maybe when they bought their homes, they didn't know that this zoning was set up twenty three years ago to happen like this. So I offer you the perspective that, number one, you are the most qualified planning commission that I've ever seen to have to sit and deal with this, and maybe you don't get it all done in one night. Mr.

City Attorney, you've got a hot potato to deal with, and I think that the staff only did what they have on the books according to the buyer that bought the property and brought the plans in. And now we have the reality of twenty three years later, who would have known that the traffic would come in and create a situation where we had to say, okay, everybody stop, let's revisit Thank you for

your time, Mr. Jensen. Thank you, sir.

Chair, can I offer a point of clarification?

Can you put in a white card? Yes, please.

You can do it after comments.

You can go ahead and speak and then if you'd like to come back and fill out a white card for me, that'd be great.

Thank you.

Thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Barbara Davis. Two short comments. One, last speaker, thank you so much for your very informed comments that seem to have just now come to light. And my second is a question of all of the residents who are going to be in this new apartment building and their children, what schools will they be using?

That's my question. Thank you.

Alright, director.

So planning question, a quick point of clarification. Our municipal code prescribes the radius area in which staff has to send out notifications.

I need to close the public comment period All this right. I apologize

for that. Excuse me. Since we are holding this as a public hearing, we should probably give the applicant an opportunity for rebuttal before you close.

Do that first.

Alright. Applicant, would you like to, do a rebuttal? Would you like a second opportunity to speak to the public?

Thank you very much, everybody. I heard all the concern. But it come in my mind, who is paying for asphalt, for police department, for the staff, for the city, for the improvement?

You please address the planning commission please sir?

Yeah. Thank you.

You. That's you're Thank addressing you. We can't hear you.

Nobody, I heard everything, but the city needs for improvement of the city, they need the money. Money comes from where? From the building, from the property tax. This building, this right now we pay a couple of thousand a month, but after done, we should pay like 300,000 every year. So this goes to the city, this goes to the county.

I believe the people who lives here, they should think about where money comes to the city for spending for us. That's my question. If they can answer, I will appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. With that being said, we're going to go ahead and close public comment period at 08:03. And now

Nathan.

Okay. Nathan, if you could go ahead and speak.

All right. So as I mentioned earlier, the city's municipal code prescribes the radiuses in which staff is required to send out notifications. So as it relates to draft initial studies, there are two caveats for how far those distances are. If a site is under 35 acres, it is 300 feet. If it is greater than 35 acres, it is 600 feet. So I erred when I said earlier that the radius for that initial study was 600 feet because it is less than 35 acres. It is only 300 feet. So point of clarification.

All right. Thank you, Director. I think we do have questions, but I do want to say address a couple of things kind of along the lines of Mr. Jensen. So I want to thank everyone for coming and know that you have been heard, this is the point of us coming together tonight.

So we're going to begin the conversation. So everyone, we ask that everyone listen as each person is speaking. We're going to go through the process of, one, we did mention high density housing to this property for over twenty years, and the neighboring properties are between Smoke Tree and 11th. We didn't do this. It was this way, and this is how we're here today.

So everyone needs, please understand. So as we move forward in the conversation, we need to understand that the high density housing comes from the concept that the this, this state and many others are in a housing crisis. So we have all been blessed to have homes, but this is where the concept of high density housing comes from. So high density housing allows for people who currently cannot have a home to have a home. So we're not I'm not excusing that, but that's a fact that we all have to deal with.

And so as we're moving forward in the conversation, want to open it up to the Planning Commission for discussion. I

guess I can start this off a little bit. Boy, listening to all this, is a very concerning, I'll call it a dilemma for lack of anything else, Fully understanding what the residents are saying and looking at the scope. I've been part of the city for thirty seven and a half years before I retired. And I was in the public works sector as a director of public works starting in 2002 up until 2015. So I saw what was going on as Mr.

Jensen spoke about the economic development group Nathan was a part of early on. I don't know if you were part of this piece here or not, but I don't recall that. I recall this being done back when RDA was doing a lot of stuff out there as Mr. Jensen had acknowledged as far as the blight. So understanding the concept and not looking maybe this could have been what you might have looked at as far as the bigger picture on what was there, what wasn't there because we were dealing with a lot of stuff in this particular area like I had mentioned with the storm drain 11th Avenue between Juniper all the way over to Smoke Tree on a good rainstorm was virtually flooded.

The homes on 11th had been damaged numerous times. So trying to correct that. So I'm and then looking at Mr. Mazza's situation on the fact that he followed the criteria that was put before him. The city gave him in good faith, and he in good faith followed those rules and did what he was supposed to do.

That's a difficult situation I say for us. And again, I'm looking at the fact that as I think it was mentioned that we as the commission, it really didn't even have to come to us at this point because of what was already in front of staff as far as the requirements. So I'm a little concerned on what that is. Another concern I have is what, how can we rectify this if there is any way to do that through changing this RDA? Is that possible?

I know back in the days, we used to swap lands. The city had some lands we could swap and make it more equitable in different areas for different things. I don't know if that's capable here. And with the state requirements that we've seen lately and the changes that they want certain designations and we can't change that. That's the way the state says it is and that's the way we have to deal with it. So that's a question I have for staff. Is that what we are looking at right here, right now with the amount of time and effort that's been put into this?

So to answer your earlier question, no, I was not around when this was rezoned. Again, this is going back to 2008. So the then city council approved this as a larger adoption of the Main Street and I-fifteen specific plan. And again, none of the staff that were here then are here now. We are left to interpret what some of their actions were.

So as best as we can tell, these properties were rezoned to support what was supposed to be a downtown core. And the idea is to engage a downtown core, you have to have higher densities. And I believe that was the logic behind properties. So in terms of land swaps, you know, we live in a post redevelopment world. The city doesn't have lands that we could swap. In this case, the property was owned by the housing authority, but there's a state mandate to sell all of your old redevelopment properties. So the city at the time when we sold this to Mr. Hussein was complying with state law.

Okay. Right. And to, to as I identify, it's not only the the residents that have to follow state law, so does the cities. And there is a large part of that that's going on tonight. Any other discussions, questions?

Just

taking into consideration everybody's comments here, it sounds like the majority of the houses that I can see along Smoke Tree of driving the site myself. We have a lot of people here that are from that area that have come out and voiced their concerns against this project. Since this was put on the calendar agenda for public hearing, I think that it's valid to say that it's important to consider the public's understanding in response to this. If the project did not require it and it didn't move forward that way, this may have been their opportunity to have a chance to voice their opinion on it. So I think it's important to consider.

One thing that I picked up on was that the developer here has purchased the land from the city at a point in time. When that was purchased, it was a high density residential zoning as stated at that point in time. Understanding that maybe the general plan was not you know, necessarily perfect at the time that high density residential was looked at for this greater plan of putting a more dense community closer to City Hall here in the core. I know that we have a need to meet affordable housing requirements that California state has set rules doing. One of my questions was does this project meet those requirements?

Does this project follow those guidelines to check that? And could I get an answer on that again just for clarification?

I'm sorry, the question was that does this follow the state guidelines with respect to sort of the housing and development standards? Yes. With regards to the state guidelines, they are not prescriptive in the sense that they define what the zoning standards are per se, But they're much broader goals in that the city has to have high density residential and then when properties are zoned for high density residential, the city is precluded from reducing the density or rezoning it to something else without simultaneously rezoning another property at the same time. But the cities are obligated to allow for multifamily housing as an allowed use. And in terms of those requirements, we're following those, but the cities can then establish their own zoning and standards.

Were there other properties that were purchased at the time of this land purchase that are zoned in high density residential that are not currently developed?

That I cannot speak to I don't know.

That's my only questions. Thank you, Commissioner Allman. Commissioner Estino?

Thank you Chair. Well, this certainly is an emotional evening and I take all of your comments seriously. Out of the 17 people that spoke at public comment, most the majority of you live right in the neighborhood that this proposed project is going into. And a couple of you asked, can anyone share in this dilemma that you're facing? I can.

I lived forever on 8th And Sultana. I moved down now south of Crystal Elementary off of Farmdale, and the new the secondary point of entry to the Tapestry Project is on my corner. So my views, my tranquility, my noise, my traffic will change forever, has interfered with my lifelong. I've been in this very resident since 1991. We lived in our first home for almost twenty four years.

I've been living in our new home for almost ten years. That being said, I have many comments and answers to some of the queries and points that everyone brought up. I think the comments from both the applicant and those neighbors and additional non neighbors in this area are very important and are well founded. First and foremost, I believe that this project should be re notified. Out of everyone that talked, only Mrs.

Your lady right here. I'm sorry. I have to look at my notes again. Yes. Missus Baker received two notices. I don't believe missus Baker's residence is the only one within the 300 radius of this property. I would also recommend that another good point brought up and I can't remember the speaker, but I highlighted things. So I'm going to highlight some and try to respond to some of the comments. I would like a discussion as to whether or not this Planning Commission might feel that a traffic study is warranted. And there were some comments that were made about traffic that support that.

I know that there are many stop signs or I shouldn't say many, additional stop signs that have gone up to help traffic. This is a big issue. Transportation is a big issue. Streets will never keep up and highways will never keep up keep up with the demand for traffic. I don't care if you're in a small rural little town like Hesperia or you're on the I 15 or down down the hill or parking issues that I rarely go down to the beach because of parking.

I would hate to be a resident at any one of those beach communities and have a party. So I share that. However, in the progress of development, certain issues we can't disregard if the applicant has addressed all of the administrative and bureaucratic concerns that are required by law. I second the notion that California is has a big push for affordable housing. With regard to everyone that brought up property values, I could sit here with my crystal ball just like everybody else.

And right now we're in this area that's suspended. Someone did ask whether their property taxes would go up as a result of this development going up. Yes, they will for the developer. His property taxes will increase. There will be additional revenue as minor and unfair as that percentage is that the county gives us of property taxes.

So going back to the stop sign, to the traffic issue. There were some additional stop signs in this area. I do travel this area because I have to frequent City Hall, and I also frequent the commercial businesses along Main Street and in the arterials. So there are ways to mitigate traffic and to ensure better safety or to ensure that safety is being followed. The question about schools, well, that's a public choice that parents make.

Person can be homeschooled, not schooled, public schooled, or private schooled. School district is separate from us. So when they have a need to build more schools because the demand for public school use goes up, then they do. That's under a whole different jurisdiction than the city of Asperia. There were a lot of good comments.

I'm going through them one by one. As Nathan pointed out, our director, because this property is 4.3 acres, less than 35 acres, there's a 300 foot, not a 600 foot radius requirement. Again, I'd like to echo that I think that needs to be redone. I don't think this is going to be your last meeting to voice your concerns. However, we'd like to work together so that everybody understands what the process is and what can be done.

With regard to your views, your quietness, your peaceful tranquility. Unfortunately, you cannot prevent the property owner across from you or down the way from developing. That is an injustice to your neighboring property owner. As far as aesthetics, I think we should also look at and traffic will address this. If the project maybe staff can confirm.

There is no additional beyond the property line improvements or widening to include curb, gutter, sidewalk, tapering into and out of the subject site?

So with regards

to Oh, right now Okay. Yeah. Please clarify where the street improvements exactly The

street improvements are across frontage of the project site. So curb gutter sidewalk across the project frontage to the ultimate right of way which is 60 feet.

So that's where you go. Has everyone understood that? The ultimate right of way which means the width the ultimate width of the road is 30 feet on one side, 30 feet on the other, 60 foot wide. So right now where Smoke Tree is 60 foot wide or or 30 where is along your your developed area, they're the they're gonna go to the center of that street and then 30 feet towards their their property, the developer's property, which is going to include, according to the setbacks, the the engineering, the science behind it all, curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, decorative wall, okay, all of which, help mitigate noise, aesthetics, respect for your neighbor, meaning the single family lots. I will note that your single family lots on Juniper seem to be, an acre or half, at least some of those are bigger than an acre perhaps.

So there's a mix there. I'm not a realtor so I can't address what people are saying that because you live next to an apartment complex, your property value is going go down. So I can't speak to that. I apologize. I can't do that.

I think so I do disagree with it being an eyesore. I can understand that your views might be obscured a little bit. But again, for the people on Juniper, their views, they're not going to be impacted of viewing it because their house sits very close to Juniper itself. So they have a very big distance towards the perimeter of the subject property. I think it'll bring value to the thought of having a walkable downtown area.

Don't know how successful that has been. Unfortunately, we have the Italian restaurant that has gone defunct and hasn't been able to be resold. But these are these are commercial aspects of our world that we don't have control over. We just administer whether or not a person is eligible to construct a project on his land. And then I would ask legal if they could well, based upon our discussion, I might have further comments.

Let's just I believe I've and I believe I that's all the comments I have right now. Thank you very much. I am a little I I feel for you. I feel for everyone in this situation.

So Commissioner Stino, no questions currently for legal.

Well, I want some healthy discussion.

Okay, absolutely. Yeah. All right. So as we move into discussion, we talk or continue discussion talking about this apartment complex has several one bedroom homes and two bedroom homes. As far as how many people could be in a one bedroom home, there's there are requirements, but we all know that there's a difference between what is required and how it's overseen.

But there is a maximum by in the code on how many people can occupy. So, the amount of cars is kind of an unknown as one of the residents here had said that multiple people can. But I do have a question on an apartment complex like this, and and and this might be just part of discussion or whatever. Is there a limitation if a if a resident on how many cars they can park in there, because that does also limit the guests. And I know that was also another another resident's question.

So an example, if you have one person living in one bedroom home is the ideally question or comment. And then if it's a two bedroom home, there's two people or three, something to that effect, potentially, there's, you know, two or three cars. Is there a limit? And then how does that impact the guests?

There's not a city requirement for a limit that I'm aware of, but typically, those limits are enforced by the Property Management Association.

Okay.

So as a sit as a city, I think big part of what was discussed tonight was concern about safety and traffic. As a city, can we discuss, at least at the beginning of this, what can we do as a city to reduce concerns about the the speed of the traffic granted that that people that are driving above the speed limit, we cannot they're already breaking the law. So when they're caught by a police officer, they're automatically fined. But there's as we all know, and it's why, you know, you know, I pray always for the our our emergency responders, police officers. They're you know, there's not enough of them.

They're they're they're overworked constantly. But what can we do? You mentioned Spring Valley Lake doing speed bumps. Is that something we can even do? Because I know that Spring Valley Lake is different than City Of Asperia, but more stop signs, more is even speed bumps an option to reduce the traffic speed?

Or any other options, I guess, I should say.

Well, I'd like to know, I noticed this design is more like some of the apartment complexes along C. So there are no enclosed garages at all to any one of these units, correct?

So, Vice Chair, can we just answer one question at a time?

Oh, sure. Thank you.

I'm not a traffic engineer, but typically speed bumps in city right of way is a liability. And so we've never used them since I've been here for twenty six years.

But

the city or county of LA, they do use those Santa Monica, a number of those cities down off the 405 incorporate in the residential. Now, that's the other problem is some of these areas and I don't know if this street is classified as residential due to the lack of housing in that development. So I do know that a number of the cities have incorporated, I think even down towards San Dimas and those places, Sierra Madre, they incorporate the speed bump. They're really more of a not really a speed bump like you would normally see. They're more like over eight feet in length and they rise up probably four to six inches and you'll go over it and so forth.

So it probably be wise to check on those coats to find out how they develop that. On this particular case, it'd be difficult because you don't have curb and gutter on both sides all the way through from point A to point B. So they would just drive around in the dirt and go around them or do something else. But I think it is feasible.

I'm sorry, Vice Chair, can you repeat your question?

Well, actually, don't really have a question. I'd like to discuss what the Planning Commission thinks about redoing, revisiting a traffic engineering. One of the comments were that the original traffic or when was the original traffic study done or TIA, traffic impact analysis. That's prior to any kind of full blown traffic study, just

So for the scoping

typically, we require scoping if the peak volumes exceed 50 in the morning and in the evening. If they don't meet those, then we don't require scoping to analyze intersections, and then we don't require from there, we don't require the full TIA, which would analyze intersections more fully and recommend some type of mitigation, whether it be four way stop, a signal, fair share, whatever it would be. So this particular project didn't exceed that. And so a TIA

When was never was that?

2021. That would have been during entitlement. That decision would have been made.

No. When was the 30, 35, under 50 during peak and PM time calculated? When was that analysis done? What year? What month? Whenever

this was go ahead. I'm sorry. '23. Ryan is telling me '23.

2023.

And the guidelines were set in 2020 per per the document. The guidelines per the city of the Superior Traffic Impact Analysis guidelines, which was July 2020. That's when

it was developed.

This was

done in 2023.

You can't talk to her.

I'm sorry.

So this is not I apologize. It's not open for a public comment period at this time.

Yes. So the city established traffic study guidelines in 2020. In those guidelines, it establishes a requirement of if you have more than 50 peak hour trips in the AM or the PM, then you're required to prepare a traffic study. And so those guidelines establish that basic principle. In this case, the project applicant, as a part of their entitlement, did do a traffic scoping study. The scoping study analyzes how many trips the project would generate. In this case, it did not generate more than the 50 peak hour trips, so they did not require the next step, which, in this case, would have been a traffic study. And that was done during entitlement, which is during 2023, 2024 in that time range.

Okay. So if I could jump off of your question.

Yeah.

Okay. So to help with some of the math, because the math here for clarity to help, I think, the residents here tonight and also, I think, for some of us on the commission is, it says that there's five sixty six daily trips. Right? So then we do the math, and then we say, okay. Well, there's 35 during peak hours and 44. How is that generated? Because the math doesn't seem to add up. But if I could have someone of an expert to kind of maybe help explain so that can connect the dots.

I'll do my best to answer. I'm certainly not a traffic engineer or a traffic expert by any means. But the trip generation factor, I believe, was in the neighborhood of about 9.6 or something like that, 9.6 trips per unit. And so that's spread out throughout the day. Those trips can be during the A. M. Peak hour, which usually is like from seven to eight or eight to nine somewhere in that range. But the nine trips that each unit generates are spread throughout the day. So it be at lunchtime, it could be at three in the afternoon, 04:10 at night. And when you spread all of that out, it doesn't create like a large demand during one particular peak hour. Example of peak hour traffic is something like a McDonald's or something that gets a lot of their peak hour traffic during breakfast, lunch, or dinner.

So when we say 35 trips in the AM, that doesn't that means for the whole complex, correct? So in the peak hours in the morning, so it's only?

That is correct.

Okay. And then likewise, in the PM, it's 44 per we're not saying per unit, per whatever. It's literally for the whole complex. Correct. Okay.

And that stop sign on

In terms of the other cars, the traffic scoping study would analyze how many trips the project itself generates. It doesn't account for pass by traffic or cumulative traffic that is already traveling on the road. It is simply does it generate more than 50 peak hour trips, the project itself.

Right, which is a good point as the residents talk about the amount of cars that are currently traveling.

So right now, there's currently a relatively new stop sign on 9th And Smoke Tree. Is there one existing on 11th And Smoke Tree? Is that a possibility for discussion?

To have the stop sign?

I Well, would certainly

It would help.

I'm not sure where people are picking up speeds of 60 miles an hour on this arterial between 11th and 9th, but you know, there's some fast cars out there. And the way the street does taper because part of it, you know, is widening and So it's like further widening

Smoke Street and 11th, a stop sign for East West traffic, but not North South. Is that correct?

Right. Okay.

So it's a

Okay.

Let's It's a two way stop sign. It's East West, but there's no stop sign. It's not a four way that where it's on 11th that goes north South.

Right. But it is on 9th.

9th is a four way, correct.

Right.

In terms of can we add that, I can't speak for the engineering department. I think the Planning Commission has the authority to potentially add it, but it's not part of the traffic study and it was not analyzed but there needs to be further analysis of if there's a traffic warrant that would be really what would require that.

Back to my original recommendation.

That's where I was going to jump in here. A lot of this conversation while valid and helpful for staff to communicate some future needs and things to look into, are not things that we could necessarily condition the applicant on. They're really decisions that the traffic and engineering need to look at, things like your traffic calming methods or, you know, looking at roadway that so they're really kind of independent of the project and what we can condition the applicant for. But they are important and valid things to raise for staff to consider and bring back to the public works department, police department to look at and monitor in the future if those things are warranted.

That's not necessarily my complete understanding of the way that works. However?

If they weren't part of the original warrant or analysis or the sequel document as a mitigation method or something like that, we can't impose additional new improvements that aren't part of that. So that's But we

could discuss the possibility.

Certainly can, absolutely. It's just who pays for it Correct. And under and also, some of those decisions can't be made by this body or these members of staff. They'll take analysis by traffic engineers and warrant studies and things like that because there are things like changing the speed limit and, you know Correct. So they're a little beyond our scope, but we certainly can discuss them and make recommendations.

Right. But I believe the speed is on most residential streets 25, is that correct? Maybe, I don't know, do we not have the right person from engineering?

And the question is, is that actually residential as my comment earlier, that since you don't have the density, you may not be able to classify that as residential. It would have to be either rural, which at that time it's 55. So you have to take that into consideration on what the actual element. It posted as 25 Or if it's not posted as 25 and it is not classified as residential, then technically the street is could be at 55. So that's been an argument for a long time.

I know that was a rule back when say back in the 80s on the sunsetting rule. Apple Valley fought it and it was some situations there that but a lot of different questions on that.

I still have my concern about public notices not being received on those property owners within 300 foot radius. And I believe that 300 foot radius is taken from the edges of the property lines. Is that correct?

That's correct.

So everyone along between 11th And 11th And Juniper Smoke Tree in that little area should have been notified.

It's mailed to the

As well as some people across the street if they fall within that 300 foot.

It's mailed to the property owner on record with the county tax assessor. So yeah.

So I have a I have a concern about that. I have a concern about traffic. I think we should continue this item. I would like to maybe have legal explain what the options are for now.

Because the land is I'm just trying to interject while you're talking. I'm

not

trying We to were together. Absolutely.

So the property itself is high density residential. So the option is high density residential unless the the land is to be rezoned, which Ryan Leonard had identified that there's a state requirement that's not possible. Correct?

Yes. State law would preclude the city from down zoning the property or reducing density. The only time that that would be allowed is if another property at the same size is simultaneously rezoned to the equivalent amount of units. So there'd have to be another 4.4 acre property rezoned to high density residential.

Right. And all that is regulated by the state.

And if another 4.4 acre property is rezoned to high density residential, it has to be like it would have to currently allow for zero units. It can't I don't believe it can go from medium density to high density where it's only allowing 15 more units than what would otherwise be allowed. Understood.

So with that being said, with these requirements and I think I will defer to our city attorney Paul, but there are a lot of moving parts here that are part of state law and that everyone did file within the right the codes, the requirements, the regulations at the time that was set forth, as mister Jensen said, over twenty years ago. And we're trying to our best. And then the property owner did do absolutely his due diligence on a property that provides housing. And I speak as Commissioner Justino says that it actually does look it's it's a nice piece of property. It's an it's not it adds, not takes away.

So, Paul, if you could kind of add to some of the, like, the regulations and because it how there's a repercussion here.

Yeah. So I think almost all the facts I've heard tonight are accurate and true. I haven't heard anything that's caused me any concern on that ground. I think the biggest issue here might stem from the perception of what this commission can and cannot do, what authority it has under both the municipal code and state laws. For those who stick around for the next item, you'll see that this commission has a great deal of discretion and authority.

There's a variance involved. There's a lot of discretion. And it used to be that way for almost everything in the land use decisions made by planning commissions. However, when it comes to residential housing, the state has basically cut us off at the knees and provided a number of very strict restrictions and objective criteria for when you can and cannot deny a project. The staff report lays out for this particular type of project at the very end of the staff report the four findings that you need to make to approve it.

And in order to deny it, you would have to find that you can't make one of those four findings. The consequences of going beyond, those state limitations, are legal action usually by the applicant. But also, we're seeing more and more legal action brought by the state, Department of Housing and Community Development, HCD. They have their own enforcement bureau now and are coming down on cities. Few cities have decided to fight the state, so that is certainly something that some cities have chosen to do and can do, and and there's lawsuit spending.

They haven't been very successful yet, but those happen. But again, that's beyond the purview of this commission. That would be a council decision if they wanted to oppose it. So where we are today is we have a property that was zoned for this use by the council. The first finding, the subject site is size and shape to accommodate the required features. You've been given that information. I'm going to skip No. Two because I want to come back to that because I think that's where most people are talking. Finding No. Three, the proposed use is consistent with the general plan, development code, and applicable ordinances.

I think staff has provided you all the information to show that that is all true as well. Fourth finding is that the subject site provides access to street streets and highways, that there's no access issues, that there's ingress and egress, that type of thing. There's been no issues raised with regard to that. Where most of the public is speaking, you might consider falls into this Finding two, which is that the proposed use will not adversely affect surrounding properties or generate excessive disturbances. And while I empathize with most of the comments here and agree with them to the extent that if I lived in one of those single family homes, I would be opposed to this project as well, If we look at that finding and what the government code, the state says is a specific adverse impact, it is defined as a significant, quantifiable, direct and unavoidable impact based on objective identified written public health or safety standards, policies or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.

Inconsistency with zoning ordinance or general planned use designation is not an adverse impact. The considers impacts would be rare. It is the intent of the legislature that conditions that would have a specific adverse impact upon the public health and safety arise infrequently. So we're talking when we say objective, we're talking about we have found chemicals beneath the surface that will be released. I mean, there's defined specific adverse impacts that will come about.

And the types of impacts that we're hearing about are the same types of impacts that every multifamily project is going to bring to any neighborhood: increased traffic, increased noise. These are not and they're subjective. We don't really know what those are other than what's already identified in the reports. So it would be very difficult, based on any of the evidence provided tonight, to make a finding that we've to have an objective identified public health and safety standard that is being violated by this project. So, again, this is unfortunately where the state has put us today.

It's unfortunate that that's the case, but that's where we are. I will note that the decision of this body tonight to whether or not they find those four findings is an appealable action, which means that should the applicant or a member of the public, not be happy with that decision, the council will then, have to hear it, but they will be stuck in the same quandary of whether or not to either find something there that's not that we don't have yet or challenge state law in that facts and deal with the consequences. If you asked what other options are available, it's certainly possible for the applicant and the city to negotiate. You know, the city can, you know, at its discretion can can decide to do various things with the property. It could it could purchase the property back if it wanted to.

It could develop a park. It it there's a number of things it could do. But as you heard before, the biggest difficulty there is going to be even if the city wanted to do that and wanted to invest the funds into doing that, it could only do that if we could identify another parcel in the city that we would then upzone to a higher density to maintain the same number of housing units that are possible today. So it's a very difficult proposition. I don't know the lay of the land in Hesperia well enough to say how difficult that is, But in most cities, that can be nearly impossible to do.

So I'd like to continue on this a little bit. So this is not the only property in this neighborhood that's high density residential. So this entire block

all the red ones are

red. Correct. Correct. So all the ones that are red are high density high density residential nonconforming use. So what that means for those that do not know, that means that they're not breaking the law by being there. But could you explain when this high density residential would be applied? One would be as if they wanted to redevelop the land by brazing or taking down the home and building something else, the zoning would apply. Correct?

Yeah. Usually, a cessation in the use, the current use would end your nonconforming status and you'd be only able to develop it into the new way or an expansion of the use as well. But since we're talking about single family use, the expansion is usually moving into high density, so that's not typically going to be what's going to trigger that. So those properties those single family homes would still be allowed to stay on those properties indefinitely. It's just if one of those property owners wanted to redevelop the property to a higher density use, they could. Understood. I don't know if the Planning Department would like to add to that based on your

own comments. Would just add that I don't believe they're legal nonconforming in the sense that typically legal nonconforming means that those uses are not allowed. Maybe they were grandfathered in. A single family residence within a high density residential zone, I believe, is still an allowed use.

It's lesser use, yes. So they're conforming as they are as single family.

Right. Right.

Not a nonconforming. With respect to the church, the church is also an allowed use in any zone. So that's also nonconforming. It could be nonconforming with respect to parking or something else, but the use itself is not a nonconforming use.

Understood. Any more discussion?

No, I guess not. Well, guess I will make some final comment then that if you heard our legal counsel as he mentioned, whatever happens here tonight, if there's a decision taken and someone is not happy with it, is against the project, they can file for an official appeal. And then that appeal will be heard by the City Council. I really feel for you folks because when Tapestry came out, I wanted to appeal. And my husband recused himself from this planning commission so that he would be able to speak on the project because he was all for it.

So I'm a house divided just like I'm a Viking fan, he's a Green Bay fan, and that'll never change. We live in a situation in a world that is growing. This development looks like it is very well thought out and great expense has gone into getting it to this point. So again, whichever way the decision goes tonight, I just wanted to reiterate that the public has a right to appeal to City Council and then that decision will be made by city council at that point. And again, even though I said I'd never swear doing this, happened to me before in one of my projects by a city council person who told the public, if you don't like what the decision at the appeal meeting at city council will be, then you can always take it to private litigation or public, you know, in superior court and go take your battle with the courts.

Thank you.

All right. So before I open it up for a vote, I know this will be belabored and has been said many times, but everyone is doing their part here. But ultimately, we're coming before that there has been no laws broken.

The

regulation, the requirements have been set for, betterment for the community. And so, I echo what commissioner Stino said. So I would like to move forward and do a motion. Is it possible if I could do a recommendation as a chair?

Oh, absolutely. Yeah. You can make the motion.

Usually, I don't make a recommendation because I talk the most. But I would like to actually motion to adopt Resolution PC twenty twenty five-six, approving the site plan review, SPR 20 two-ten. Do I have a second?

I'll second then.

Again, I just I understand and respect everybody's position, their ability to voice their opinion here on this project. But absent finding the requirements that would allow us to not consider the project in this situation, thank you for providing clarification and legal counsel there on that. I really believe our voice is our power, and that's a passionate thing that everybody from the Smoke Tree area here showed up and did. So understanding what our responsibilities are in the zoning that we're in, I am also affected by the Tapestry project, I can completely understand and sympathize with it. So I must vote in support.

Motion passes, three, one.

Thank you everyone. Are going to now move into Item two. Item two is conditional use permit CUP 23Dash00010. Alright. May we take a restroom break? Okay. I stole your thunder, Edgar. I'm sorry.

Mericruz? Mericruz? I don't think Justin. Justin is the IT guy.

Oh my gosh.

That was your first hot seat. How was it? It was warm. Yes. It's different on this side.

Are you having computer problems again, Tim? That fixed. All right. Everyone get their restroom break? All right.

I'll go ahead and back to Item two, conditional use permit, CUP 20 three-ten. The commission recognizes senior planner Edgar Gonzalez. Hi, Edgar.

Hi. How are you doing? Good evening, chair and planning commissioners. I won't make this too long. I hope you've been here for a

while

now. So this is a conditional use permit to allow to or to establish an outdoor semi truck parking and maintenance facility on the former 84 lumber site. This contains three existing buildings four metal built or canopies on a 8.6 acre site. Along with this CUP, the applicant also submitted a variance. So this variance has been filed to modify the required materials for screen walls and to waive the requirement for fully screened semi trucks from public view along Hercules Street.

So as part of the CUP and I'll talk about it a little bit more through the variance, we're kinda asking the planning commission to make the termination on the variance of to approve or deny the variance. This is a a general map for the site. It's located South Of Hercules, West Of C Avenue there on the corner. The site currently sits there. It's a general industrial zone within the Main Street freeway corridor specific plan.

The site and all surrounding property owners are within the same zoning designation. And then to the south side, we have the railway. This is a current site. Like I said, there's three existing buildings. There's one building on the Northwest side, another building there at the Southwest side, and then the third building is underneath the canopy.

You can't see it from this angle, but it's underneath canopy on the South side. And you can see there's three or four existing canopies there. The side is kind of fully paved except for those the improvements on the both Hercules And C Avenue. And there's a portion of that's vacant on the East side that will remain vacant and will not be used as part of the operations of the of the business. To the north, we have like a recycling center.

I think we have a building wood construction company to the West And then to the to the East, we have a construction company. And then again, to the South is the railway. So this is a site plan. As as I mentioned, the the applicant is trying to use the site as is. They're not trying to do any improvements.

There is minor improvements done on-site. Some of those improvements includes a trash enclosure, which is south of that canopy four on the south side. There are striping parking as part of the requirement to include parking for those uses which is south of that canopy and then close to the street side on C Avenue. They're also striping oversized parking for vehicles for the truck parking which I believe there are gonna be 59 oversized vehicles on-site, which will be underneath those canopies and some of them on Hercules, but mostly on the center of the site. Like I said, to the east, you have that vacant site that will remain vacant.

And as part of this proposal, they all will be required to do a sweep improvements along Hercules And C Avenue. Again, curb sidewalk and gutter along the street lights and some dedication on C Avenue. They're not extending any lines. But Hercules, there are I think they were in septic. There are a conditional approval requiring them to connect to sewer on Hercules as where the existing line is at.

And then also, they are doing improvements, I think, to the interior of the buildings. I mean, throughout the years, it seems like the buildings were kind of ventilated. There's people inside, broke into the and then they're doing some improvements to the inside of the building and to the exterior as well. These are the floor plans for the existing three buildings. Floor Plan Number 1 is gonna be used as an office building.

It's about 3,600 square feet. It'd be two stories. Again, it consists of just offices and bathroom on both stories of the building, which is the floor plan located on the west side of of your screen. Building Number 2 is kind of the North East Side which will be the smallest building which will be 310 square feet and that would just be building under the canopy which will be used for bathrooms, for exterior bathrooms for the truckers that will be there and then for storage as well. And then we have Building Number 3, kind of at the south side of that your screen, which is mainly open with a bathroom and an office, which will be used for as maintenance to maintain those 18 wheeler semi As they come in, there will be main there will be maintenance inside of those buildings.

Elevations. Currently, the buildings, again, are existing. They're gonna be remain the same. They are required to do some enhancements to the building. Building Number 1 and Building Number 3, are kinda adjacent to the street sides, Hercules And C Avenue.

So those will be enhanced, established or part of them to include, they create window trims, they created cornices, they're gonna be repainting the buildings and adding stone veneer on the base of the buildings. Building Number 2 again is kinda in the center of the of the side underneath that canopy, so it's not really seen from public view. It's pretty small, so that will remain the same. And again, bringing up the bearings again, like I mentioned, staff is asking the planning commission to make a determination to approve or deny this variance. Just kinda giving you a little bit of background and justification for kinda both sides to for you guys to make a determination.

So just a little bit of history of municipal code. There's in section sixteen sixteen three sixty five k which talks about truck parking, specifically on Number 3. And that section talks about that all trucks and trailers within outdoor storage area should be screened by buildings or solid walls made of decorated concrete masonry block or tilt up walls. So that's pretty much saying that you have to screen every single trucks from public view and include decorative walls on-site. The applicant's request, again, is to replace that decorative concrete mason block or tilt up with their proposed of our iron fence with sheet metal to be served as a screen wall as well.

And the other request is to waive the requirement to fully screen semi trucks only on Hercules because the truck parking is kinda close to that wall. If I go back to that site plan, there you can see the truck parking off of Hercules. You could see some of the truck parking which I'll show you a section in a minute on on C Avenue. There's no that issue. They're both gonna be a fee but how the trucks are set far back enough and provide screening with the a fee high block or a fee fence proposed.

So this is just kind of to give you a visual. This is what the code requires right now. If they were to comply with the code, it will require, they create a screen wall, which will be typically a split face, what you see there on the on the image on on the upper image. And then on the image on the south, It's kind of blurry, this is an image taken from H C C 1, which shows you the white tilt up wall will look like, which you have some type of pilasters in between. So those are those are the requirements that the court is asking for pretty much those truck parkings that come into the city.

This is a proposed screen fence from the applicant, which they're proposing to have a screen fence, is a wrought iron with a sheet metal on the back and which will be eight feet and will serve us to screen while proposed off of Hercules And Sea Avenue. There are other requests, again, is to not screen the trucks from Hercules Street. So on this section, you can see the line of sight that was taken from Hercules. You clearly see the wall that's being proposed at safety high where the truck parking is at. That's kinda higher elevation from the street.

And if you were driving off of Hercules, you could see the top of those trucks. Right? So they're not properly screened. We did have conversations with applicant to maybe remove that parking in corporate somewhere else or at a higher wall or reposition the wall higher to the elevation to the pad. Maybe have to increase a couple of fee on landscaping, but the proposed for the applicant as part of this variance to keep it the same.

Just a couple of justifications again for and for approval and denial. One of them, again, for approval is just that there the applicant is occupying the building. I mean, the building is pretty much being vacant for fifteen years, so it has become a blight area to the city with vandalism and break ins. A lot of cars for service have been issued to that site. So I think it'll be coming into this building.

Again, it'll benefit the city in a way that it'll be another business coming in and that will reduce cost for service or vandalism in that area. The cost for the block qua versus the Ryan fence, again, substantially higher. Now talking with the applicant with the terms that are coming in, I think it was estimated above, like, 300,000 for a blocked ball. Now we're getting a little bit higher on the Ryan fence. So in this statement, it might not be true.

If that those tariffs are gonna impact, then maybe the applicant could come forward after and kinda explain that. But it seems like the the cost of the Ryan Fence is getting close to that block wall. The the other thing is lot of traffic volume within the area. So you have a lot of undeveloped sites while surrounding properties. So that pretty much will minimize the potential visual impact because you don't have a lot of traffic going on in the area. If you look at Hercules going east, I mean, it's all their roads, so it kinda stops there. And then Sea Avenue going north, I think a block or two, it stops there. There's no more paving in this dirt road. So there's not a lot of circulation going within that area. Justification for the Nile.

Again, the obvious one is just it's gonna be inconsistent with the municipal code. Right? So this municipal code was approved probably three years ago. I think it was July 2020 with it came through the planning commission and the city council and we approved those requirements. Could also provide or create a a present for future projects, again, underlying the city requirements of outdoor storage.

And with this, we have the third note which if we do approve it then eventually start we'll have to bring it bring back this as a future court amendment to allow all the developed sites to establish semi truck parking facilities to waive those requirements. So if we if we're doing it for one and the planning commission is approving it, we should maybe have a development code amendment to allow for others that are in the same scenario. That's not a a vacant site, but it's a full developed site of someone bringing that use to that area. Lastly, again, this project was required to submit an initial study meeting negative declaration. This was distributed for a thirty day public review from 04/02/2025 through 05/01/2025.

One common letter was received from Hobby Desert Quality Management District, which pretty much just had standard requirements about getting a permit through them and as as specific requirements, whichever project follows. And the environmental consultant included those requirements as mitigation measures under that sequel document. So at at the end, staff analyzed that environmental document, determined that projects will not have any significant impacts on the environment upon the implementations of the mitigation measures. Lastly, we did receive a common letter which was provided to the planning commission there. I believe the applicant said he was going to be here.

I'm not sure if he's here today, but pretty much I was opposed to this project saying that having the truck facility in there will impact the surrounding site and will not be beneficial to the surrounding property or the neighbors. So with that, I think staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt resolution PC twenty twenty five dash zero three approving conditional use permit, c u p twenty three zero zero zero ten and to make a determination between variance options either to approve the variance BAR25002 by adopting resolution number PC2025Dash04 or deny variance BAR25Dash002 by adopting resolution number PC-twenty20Five-five. So that concludes my presentation. I'm here as well as the applicant to answer any questions.

Yes. Calling for the applicant to, speak. We're opening up the public comment period at 09:16.

Okay. There'll be three of us. Is that cool? To speak or do we get a certain amount of time? We have to be quick.

It's perfectly

Here I go.

Because you

are the applicant.

Thank you very much for the help. Have been working with Edgar and Ryan on this for a long time and we have made a lot of adjustments to get it to this point and a lot of the things that have happened along the way and the major topic of discussion right now is going to be this wall. And the materials of the wall is what I want to talk about because we've had different prices go up and down, tariffs, steel, and now it seems like it's done a 180 on cost. And what I'm proposing is maybe we can get a combination of materials because I know the code strictly says concrete wall or block wall. But can we have some kind of, implementation of something that just blocks it visually, a vision wall, no matter what materials we choose to to come up with and then have the planning department go yes or no on that because we don't want to say plastic or vinyl is approved.

But if we can find some other materials or combination thereof, let's say the bottom part of the wall will cost X amount of dollars and we could put some cheaper material on top that's comparable to a vision wall that would be approved. That's something I would like to discuss on this variance. I know we didn't write it up that way. It's just something that has happened along the way as time has gone by since we submitted that variance. But some other things to talk about on this project other than that, the owner, when they purchase it can we put up the site plan real quick?

Okay. So United Holdings, they picked up this parcel and it's a little bit larger than they actually need. They only anticipate 10 to 15 trips per day on their trucks and they anticipate that those trucks will be parked closer to the building where the main office is down there on the south corner. What the intention is, is for a driver reset. So the truck drivers will come in, they have so much hours that they have available to drive on, and so they want to park their truck there twenty four hours, get back, get on the road.

I know that we submitted a truck path, so none of those trucks are going on Main Street. They're coming on the approved truck route from Bear Valley, and there will be no idling. None of these trucks are gonna idle. So they're all going to come in, park, park them, they're going to be turned off. So there's no idling there. And we didn't get to submit a picture of their trucks, but they got a brand new fleet, all California compliant, brand new trucks. They're not pokey looking trucks. They're they're nice. They're it's a fleet of brand new blue ones. Let me see what else I got.

Yeah. That's so I wanna set some time for them. They want they wanna have some some time to talk about it. Thank you very much, Edgar, for your help. That was very helpful.

Thank you. For the record, do they need to announce their name or?

I will.

Right. Are you ready now or you just you want to

read this? You can just give it

to them. It I will

to them. Just give

to them.

The first one? Yes.

Okay. One at a time. Just give it to them. You. Ms. Meyer, we have a few comments here.

You. I'm just going

to address the first one. The first one has the first one looks like this. He'll explain this one. The second one will start with a photo that looks like this.

And the first one has some pictures in the back of the trucks. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Alam Soho, and I'm an agent of the owner. And I have been working on this project since the first day we bought it. I was here with the owner when we came and bought it here. So I know the entire history. I also negotiated the purchase, and we've done some research before that. So we could you please give me this letter?

I'm sorry, all of them are different. You have copies of all those?

No, it's just one copy.

I'm sorry.

Just one copy?

Sorry. The pictures are all different. So we're a little confused on which ones you want passed out. So they're not one copy of each slide for each one of them. They're all different.

Apologize. Yes. He only brought one copy set. So the whole copy set just has to be passed down apparently.

So you'd basically like us to just pass them down? Okay.

I'm sorry for the inconvenience. So this is basically a letter which I'm going

to speak on right now.

I just wanted all of you to have a copy. This is a bit formally written. I'm just going to explain it to you briefly. The pictures are of our fleet and it's just to show you that the trucks are not bad looking or lack maintenance or anything like that. They're very new trucks and California also has the strictest policy for maintenance of trucks and trailers.

So we have to comply with it. So it's best of the business. So when we came and researched this yard, we've been operating for the past twenty five years and we operate in all 51 states. And we have other facilities in different parts of California and different parts of the country for the same use and for the same purpose. And when we came here and saw this yard, it was way better built than most of the things we've seen all over The U.

S. So since we're in California and California is stricter, so I'm going to talk about California. We have yards in other places and we've been working with so many other larger companies even Swift, Amazon, Home Depot, Ashley Furniture, Fortune 500 companies. Some of them have yards much worse than this. So when we came and saw this facility, we assumed that most of the work here is already done.

And all we had to do is redo the fixing of the inside of the offices, the electrical stuff, maybe some fencing for security. When we got into the matter with and that was a fault at our part. We should have conducted our due diligence and we are at fault there. So I'm not blaming in any way for all of this to I'm not putting any blame on any of the city people or any of you guys. I'm just here to tell you what we're going through.

So since we couldn't start our business here, we had to secure an alternate industrial property on short notice to park our fleet, and we were operating under the assumptions that approvals would be in place by mid-twenty twenty four at the latest. This has cost us nearly $600,000 until now in the past two years. One of those pictures is an actual yard we recently leased in San Bernardino County and then they only asked us to put the fence, which is also in the pictures. And they said that you can start your operations because trucking is a very, very expensive industry. Each truck costs $2.5000 dollars in the market past COVID, major trucking companies with fleets of 1,000 trucks and trailers, 10,000 trailers have gone bankrupt.

So it's a very, very grave situation that trucking is in. If we had the money to do everything quickly, we wouldn't have wasted anyone's time. We would have just done it. But we are in a problem here. So that's why I'm just enlightening you guys with all these situational things.

Now trucks have to drive miles and the costs we calculate are per mile. So our company cost is 1 point dollars 7 per loaded mile for anything we haul And it's 150 for every empty mile the cost to us. So since we couldn't use this facility and it's closer to many of our operational warehouses where we have to drive to, we have incurred a cost of about $192,000 a month. Every month, we still do it. We will keep on doing it until we can start using it.

It won't end immediately. It will go down to $100,000 then maybe to $50,000 then it will eventually end Because the trucks have to put in more empty miles, they can't come here and park, they have to go elsewhere. So we have to pay the rent about 25,000 a month and then the 1.5 for all the miles. Then due to a lack of secure facility, three of our trailers were stolen. So the claims cost 147,000. That's not even a big figure. So it's just putting it out there. Some we had some totals in the amount of 43,000, not too significant either. Now we lost contracts with major clients like Home Depot, Samsung, LG and HP. Some of them are Fortune 500 companies.

Now that is millions of dollars in revenue and a loss of goodwill in the industry. So that's the largest impact. So also we had to operate from another facility in Fresno, which added to these costs. So this letter is just to show you that we are going through a very tough time having to use other facilities when we saw this facility and we operated under the reasonable assumption that it wouldn't take too much time. No other place or no other yard that we've worked with have ever required us to build a screening wall or improve the road or a pavement.

And some of the cities are as big as Hisperia II and some are even larger than that. So but that was a fault on our part. We didn't do the proper due diligence. So what I'm here to tell you is that we are bleeding and we need your help. We don't ask for any concessions. We want to go exactly by the code, exactly by the book. All we ask for is reasonable discretion. For example, the pros and cons list we just saw. The only con that I saw is that the code says it. Anything else was commonsensical, it was fact.

It was a fact that the area is not a very aesthetic area. I've seen the area. This is probably my twentieth trip. Everything around that is not too aesthetic. Now we're not saying that we do not want to build a wall.

Just let us start operating so we can get the cash flowing, reduce costs at other places and then utilize that money that we're otherwise wasting and do all of these things. And then the biggest surprise to me was the Joshua Tree issue. Now I was completely oblivious to how important a plant could be on this planet, where human lives sometimes are not even worth 25 rupees in some countries. So then I, being a curious person, I did some research as to why the trees are so important and they have biblical historical value and I completely respect that. So we chose to exactly go by the plan.

We hired all the best people. Mr. Jensen and Mr. Hale have done a wonderful job. And we intend to keep doing that.

All we ask is whilst we do not touch that side of the some area from a certain field, whatever you guys say, let us start the work on the other side so that our project could be completed earlier, even two or three months of it becoming completed earlier than possible would save us hundreds of thousands of dollars. And then there is one more document that Bill, if you could pass to them. This is a few examples in the surrounding area, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, where the government helped businesses that were coming in and how it benefited both of them. Just a few these are about 10 examples. I'll just give you three for the sake of brevity.

So the San Bernardino's Amazon Mega Hub in 2020, the government expedited the three year process to eleven months. They did everything, just the process was expedited. The business profited in the sense that they built the world's largest Amazon Hub. And the government profited by 1,500 jobs and €200,000,000 a year in local spending. That's a huge impact.

The Inland Empire warehouse boom where the business were given tax breaks. So Amazon saved €1,000,000 on fulfillment centers and the government the business profited $500,000,000 and the government benefited from €5,700,000,000 in annual taxes and 200,000 jobs. Then the Tesla Gigafactory, the business profited again, the five year process was just cut down to eighteen months to help them expedite it. The business profited in €100,000,000 local spending and then 12,000 jobs were created. Now I'm not saying we're the next Amazon or Tesla yet, but we have been talking to many of our partners all over California.

All of Los Angeles is full. There is no it's saturated. There is nothing else to park. Everything is going to come to Victorville and Hesperia. So you guys have to be prepared to invite those businesses in because they're going to bring in millions of dollars. Of course, they have to do everything according to the law, according to the codes and according to anything that the citizens think is correct because the most important people are the citizens of Hesperia. But the code, I believe, is too strict. I just I'm here to request some lenience. We will do everything according to how you want it. Now when earlier, some people were talking about so when Mr.

Hussein, he had to spend $300,000 a year And then someone just said commented from the back, it's just a drop in the ocean. Businesses can only run if they borrow money. We also have money, but we always take loans. So businesses do not ever have cash. Some people think businesses are sitting on piles of cash. It's not how it works. You all know that. You've been part of the process. How like Ma'am said, that this is how commercially things work. Even governments have to take loans. Who's richer than the governments? Governments have to take loans too. So we also need money. Just because we are operating a large company doesn't mean we have money and the industry hasn't really been doing well. We also want to compete it as fast as possible.

So that is my kind request to all of you. And one more thing, sorry, is I would encourage all of you to ask me any questions that you might have because Mr. Jensen and Mr. Dale do not usually know all the ins and outs of the trucking business. So if there are any concerns that you might have, I am ready to answer them.

Is that okay?

All right.

So Tariffs are impacting construction.

Yes.

And

I watched a webinar coming from the American Institute of Architects today. Construction is being impacted all over the place, which impacts truck driving jobs to port jobs to, steel costs. And you're about or and you're proposing to build a fence made out of steel. Just as a comment, I, unless you've already done the cost comparative, but I would encourage you, if you have not, to do so because steel is, projected to go up quite a bit. So I don't know.

So where I think some of the discussion we'll have tonight is kind of that comparative of setting a precedent. And doing so, I'd like to ask Gru that question. Have you done that analysis yet?

Yes, we have. And because of that, we have sort of come to the conclusion that building a concrete wall would now almost be equal to or if not, there wouldn't be too much of a difference. So we are open to you allowing us to build the concrete wall, the eight foot concrete wall because the price difference wouldn't be too much. That is a very astute observation and the price is significantly higher. And even we want something that is long lasting, long standing and a concrete wall, can agree to that.

So the variance part we can agree to right now. The request I have is to so we since we bought this property about two, three years ago, we've had six break ins. Some before we improve the property were very normal. Now even after improving the property, we are always worried. We've had three recently. We're always worried about people who vagabond or homeless people who you all are familiar with the area. It's not very secure. People have tried to come in and steal the very expensive. We've spent maybe $304,105 $100,000 on the improvements as of now. So that is one of our concerns.

We just recently bought a facility in San Bernardino. The police the city police, they came and said thank you to us, saying that this increase of activity has lowered the rate of theft and crimes in the area. Just by building a fence that could make such an impact, this would also have a very positive impact. Once people start populating any area, naturally crime will go down because there is more eyes to see, more people to stay there. I was going to ask for 20 to 25 trucks, but even if you can allow us five trucks to be parked there for now, people coming in and going out would just prevent us a lot of money in theft and the whole area would be made more secure.

And it would help you guys too. Now one more thing is about the Joshua Tree. I am ready to sign a bond for $50,000 $25,000 If we damage the tree in any way, if you allow us to do construction on the other side, if we damage the tree in any way, I know we can also go to jail, but we know that we won't do that. But we're ready to pay hefty fines. The time that we save by concurrently doing other things is a lot of significance to us in money and both time.

So these are the two major things to allow us to have maybe five trucks start running from there whilst we do other things and to allow us the five trucks and to let us build the other things whilst we keep on completing all the other things as the city wants us to. We do not want to have any exemption, just discretion where reasonably would not impact anyone.

I have one more question.

Commission, if I may. I'm a little concerned as I'm listening to the applicant's presentation and reading what's before the commission tonight and they seem to be contradictory to each other and very different things. So we need to be careful where we go with this and how we proceed. The application before you, besides the CUP, the variance application before you was to change from a block wall to a wrought iron fence and steel. I'm hearing a number of other requests that haven't been brought here, and I'm hearing concrete wall is okay, which is not.

So with respect to the variance, if this is the direction the applicant wants to take, we need may need to step back from that and and have to submit a variance application so that those issues can be flushed out and brought back to the commission at a different time because we don't have those issues before us tonight. So I I I kind of will defer to the applicant on where he's headed with this but I'm just I'm hearing a lot of things being asked for that aren't what was in the variance application that are different.

Can we talk to Alan, please, for one second?

So we might it looks like we might need a brief recess for them to confer, but we can still stock about

the If I next could just few add one quick thing. I believe that the Planning Commission were to approve the variance as it was requested tonight and the applicant chose to construct a block wall or a concrete tilt up wall, approval of the variance does not preclude them from still constructing that wall. It just grants them the allowance to either construct the wrought iron fencing in lieu of the block wall, But they could still meet the code requirements in the event that the variance is approved.

I understand that.

However, I have to agree with our legal representative that there are questions which the applicant is asking that is not our say so, you know, to operate before you have a CFO, before everything's built out.

Know the

fact that you even spent 300,000 on your property concerns me because you don't have a CUP. So I'll blah blah blah blah I don't want to hear that really.