Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right. Good evening everybody. Welcome to our planning commission. Um first uh can we have um roll call please? Commissioner Slater present. Commissioner Scarboro Echo present. Vice Chair Ortiz present. And just for the record, um, Commissioner Santos and Chairperson Fron are absent.

Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Scarbo Echo, can you please uh join us and lead us into the into the pledge of allegiance? Okay. So, item number three, public comment for items not on the agenda. There are none.

Thank you. All right. Item number four, minutes 4.1, planning commission.

No. I motion to approve the minutes as written for April 22nd, 2026. And I'll second. Thank you. And I'll I'll do roll call. Commissioner Slater. Yes. Commissioner Scar Bro Echo. Yes. Vice Chairperson Ortiz. Yes. Okay. Motion carries.

Thank you. So now moving to public hearing items 5.1 planning commission review and recommendations to the city council regarding amendment to title 17 of the United 5 development code article 4 chapter 4.05 to add supplemental regulations for fuel stations. The state of India as lead agency under the California Environmental Equality Act SQA determine the project is character exempt based on SQA guideline section 15061 B3. Uh we have a staff report.

Yes, we do. We just wait for the presentation. It looks like it's up. Commissioners, it's my pleasure, Brian Halverson, director of community development, to present this item, which are amendments to our zoning code, which is the UDC uh supplemental regulations that have been considered, believe it or not, for we've been working on this for about a year when the first uh comment or concern from the commission uh came up about um we may have too many gas stations. And so staff has been researching with working with the planning commission, the council, and we now have uh draft regulations uh for that code amendment. So just to give real quick background, um I've talked about this quite a bit in the past, but as I mentioned, there's already been a lot of work being being done behind the seeding behind the scene, including um several meetings back in April, as I mentioned over a year ago. um the planning commission initiated us to to look at gas stations and find out what we could find and potentially restrict gas stations. Then on July 23rd, of course, uh we did some presentations, including a presentation by our economic development director um to provide a little more background from an economic standpoint if there's any gaps in um fueling station revenue, which they determined there was. Then also in October uh there was direction input to staff including a recommendation on a moratorum that started to gain some momentum. There was a consensus by the commission that a moratorum should be entertained and brought to the council. And so that was done and the council adopted a 45day moratorum on December 3rd and then um a a subsequent 90-day as well. And then again we started

extending it a little bit more. Another 60-day extension was done just recently on March 4th. And at that meeting the actual the council reviewed the amendments that are before you tonight. There is um one small item that they did not um review that we added to the ordinance and so I'll be presenting that a little bit later in this presentation. Um and it's uh important to to get this moving along because the moratorum will actually expire on June 18th. So the goal is to present it tonight to the commission, get your recommendation and then next month uh before the deadline uh bring the draft code amendments to the council. So, just getting back to I know we've seen this a lot and talked about how many gas stations are in the city of India. Um, as we know, there's 31. Of those 31, six of those are either approved or pending and then, uh, 25 are are actually existing out there. They're built. So um when the when staff started to look at where gas stations are located in the city, we did notice that there are certain areas of the city that are that have u a concentration or those gas stations are clustered in certain areas of the city. So some of those include uh Jefferson Street, Monroe and Boulevard, Jackson Street and Golf Center Parkway. So we saw that on the map and we use that as as u grounds to make some restrictions in the city. So this is the map. It just shows the locations. It's pretty small, but it's in your packet. And we have seen this map a lot. But in this map, you can see an overall um glimpse of where stations are and where they are clustered or saturated in in the city along those streets that I mentioned. So tonight, what we're looking at is propos proposed amendments to the unified development code. So what the ordinance proposes is some lo uh restrictions on the location for example

at intersections uh certain corridor areas spacing um there was a commission brought up in the past last year um wanting additional landscaping so we took that in and uh drafted that into the ordinance. Um the council mentioned um that they'd really like to see more fresh food served sold in convenience stores that are associated with a gas station. So we incorporated um that as well. There's also some other design standards. There's maintenance. There's uh the council brought up uh electrical vehicle uh stations. So we incorporated that into the ordinance as well. And then most ordinances do have an exception, kind of a way out, but it's not exactly an easy way to get out, but you can um apply for an exception. So, I'm just going to real quickly go over these. I'm not going to go over the entire ordinance, but just kind of do some some highlights or some high points, kind of the most important parts of the ordinance. First of all, the intersection limitation. Uh there'll be no more than two allowed, no more than two fueling stations allowed at intersection. These corridor areas uh are the streets that I mentioned earlier where there already is a saturation of gas stations. So those areas um no more gas stations. There is one exception and I didn't correct it uh but we will want to voice it into the record um at the end of my presentation. Highway 111 even though I put that uh there is some more coordination that staff needs to do with uh tribal consultation before we can actually prohibit it along Highway 111. So, that's actually going to be pulled out of the ordinance, but we'll be coming back quickly after we talk to the tribes to make the amendment on Highway 111, uh, spec specifically to to cover that area in the specific plan, the Highway 111 specific plan. And then minimum spacing. Um, I think most people, but maybe not all of them, may

not be may not want to be living um or residing right next to a gas station. So there's some restrictions on uh for sensitive receptors uh as you see here, schools, childc care facilities, seniors and things like that. So this is the map that actually shows those corridors that I already discussed those major streets where there's clustering and you could pretty much say hey we have enough gas enough fueling stations gas stations in those areas. So no more in those areas in this map. Although it may be really difficult to read from this distance, essentially what we did is we mapped the restrictions whether it's um next to residential or the major corridors that are not allowed to have gas stations. And this map basically shows the red areas is bad. You can't have a gas station in those areas. The green areas are areas um where you could. So that just uh shows um both the green and the red areas of the city and that maybe I just go back and that's actually coordinated with the zoning. So you might say, well Brian, how come the other areas what about the areas that are not within um the red or the green? Those are just areas that are not zoned appropriately for a fueling station. So that's why you don't see it on the map. Enhanced landscaping. Um, so we we decided to get um listening to the commission and the council to require more landscaping. So right now it's 10%, we're going to up it to 20%. So any future um fueling stations would be required to have additional landscaping. also tree canopy, 24-in box trees, parking lot shading, all of those good things that you want to see um you know, for most projects, but we're going to even step it up for for gas stations.

There's also a regional tree pallet that we have in in house that will be selected to make sure that the drought tolerant landscaping is selected that that go with the with this particular region as well as a maintenance plan because we all know over time sometimes the vegetation gets beat down the wind tears it to pieces and so there'll be a maintenance plan too. So other things regarding uh the actual convenience store component of the fueling station is the fresh food component. So if someone comes in and they have a convenience store that's a minimum of 1,000 ft square feet, then 5% of that floor area would be designated for fresh food. And we define that in the ordinance. That's not that's not Cheetos and that's not candy bars. So it's fresh food. Maximum store size is 4,000, which is unless they apply with CUP, certain findings are made. I don't think you're really going to see a convenience store that large, although areas outside Indo certainly have probably larger ones, but um that that's a pretty big convenience store. So we have transparency uh additional architectural treatment that we want on the gas stations, public amenities, a maintenance plan I mentioned already and then uh also the EV charger uh council brought up electrical vehicle chargers. So essentially I think the number is 24. So if you have less than 24 parking spaces, an electrical vehicle station is not required. But with this ordinance, even if you don't have 24 parking spaces and irregardless of the green building code, the zoning code uh will require at least one electric vehicle charging station. So that's both the underground infrastructure and the charger that goes above it. So that's that's an improvement as well. So this is new. This is the proposed security measure. So the council did not see this, but whenever we work on an ordinance, we uh

coordinate with different departments. Um, for example, the code enforcement division and uh as part of the police department, Jason Anderson is here tonight and we've worked closely with them as well as other departments to come up with a requirement for a security plan. So that would include exterior lighting um such as motion sensors, 24-hour security surveillance cameras and personnel, panic buttons, emergency access and emergency evacuation plans. And there's actually even more in those security measures. And to be very transparent, it's the security measures are almost identical with some tweaks as cannabis. So, we want to make sure that we have above and beyond um security at gas stations because, you know, they're open late. Sometimes you get, you know, an interesting um audience there and we just want to make sure that the best security is available. There is an exception process that's built into the ordinance. The city attorneys helped us to draft this as well as a lot of the the ordinance. So, the planning commission can grant an exception to the corridor and area restrictions, but the intersection limitations, that's the two as well as the spacing from the sensitive receptors are not on the table as a potential for area restrictions. Now, of course, what when they apply for the cup, they would need uh to meet the required findings and all those findings are listed uh in the code amendment that they would have to um abide by that they would have to meet in order to get an an exception. It's pretty strict actually in order to get an exception from um these new rules. So, tonight we're simply asking for the planning commission to consider the ordinance to the unified development code. Um, and then that recommendation will be brought to the city council. And essentially, it's an amendment to title 17 to add supplemental regulations for

fueling stations and determine the project is categorically exempt based on SQL guidelines section 15061 B3, which is what we call the general uh rule exemption. Um that does conclude the staff presentation, but I also just want to make sure that um any motion that's made tonight that includes um the Highway 111 uh prohibition will be excluded. We'll be bringing that back to the planning commission, city council at a later date. So that does conclude my presentation.

Thank you, Ryan. Um questions from the body to staff. Um, yeah, I did prepare questions and and comments. I apologize in advance for the length of it, Brian. Uh, but we'll get through this together. Thank you.

Uh, so I appreciate staff bringing this forward because I do think it is an important long-term planning conversation for the city. Overall, I support the direction of the ordinance and I think it does a good job of balancing business flexibility while also recognizing that major corridors and gateway areas of Indo are important to the city's future identity and development patterns. Um I really have about five main thoughts that I wanted to touch on. Uh the first is the conditional use permit process and the exception pathway. Uh I understand why flexibility is important because future planning commissions and staff may want to uh have the ability to work with applicants depending on changing market conditions and transportation trends. Um I agree with having a pathway for exceptions rather than creating a complete prohibition on on gas stations. At the same time, if a project is requesting relief from these corridor restrictions, um, such as the proximity to like a school or a residential area, uh, I think the community benefit should be much more clearly clearly defined and substantial. Um, one thing I'd like uh, staff to expand on is whether there was a discussion about adding more measurable community benefit criteria into the cup findings themselves. um especially for projects requesting exemptions along these major corridors or gateway areas. So that would be my first question. Okay, let me get some clarification and then for the rest of the commission, let me just real quickly go over in order to um be approved for an exception to these rules. Some of the things they would have to demonstrate is a market demand and economic analysis. So there's a list of things that they would have to to to prove or provide substantial evidence in order to demonstrate there's a market demand. Um general plan consistency which is usually always um a requirement to make sure that any decision is that's

made is consistent with our general plan. Um no significant adverse impact. So a lot of these these projects are going to require u more environmental review like a mitigated negative declaration. So as part of that they would need to make sure there's no significant adverse impacts. Uh superior design and environmental performance is another one. So u that would could that talks about design features. It could be energy efficient. You know something that makes this gas station superior to say all the other ones that are out there. Um and then substantial public benefit. There's a whole list of them including um improve access to fresh healthy food, provision of enhanced public amenities, meaningful contribution to affordable housing. Um so they they could do some of these things in order to prove that there's a substantial uh public benefit. Now, as I mentioned, the exception would not be um available for the intersection limitation or the sensitive receptors. So taking that in consideration, what other criteria do you think would would you want to add um to this?

Um for example, if flexibility is uh being granted, I would like to see um things enhanced such as like EV infrastructure beyond the minimum requirement of one. So for uh providing an an applicant a conditional use permit for something that's outside of the identified um restricted area or inside with the identified restricted areas. I I want to ensure that there again there's more of community community benefit like can they install two to three uh EV chargers? Are these going to be fast chargers or the like the basic um I'm not too privy on like energy use because I don't have an EV. Um but I just want to ensure that uh we are getting like uh the best I guess quality type of EV charges for our residents. Okay. Um another thing is um I guess was that discussed at all requiring stronger EV infrastructure for projects seeking like these types of exemptions? So it was brought up at the council level and uh that's why we added it to the ordinance is um there's a continued discussion about let's say many years from now we don't use gas anymore. So what will happen to all these gas stations? Of course they would be converted but what would they be converted to? You know would we just be stuck with abandoned buildings? So, um the actual number was not specified by the council, but they definitely wanted to see um EV chargers. We we threw out one as kind of a starting point. And when I presented it back in March to the council at that time, um it doesn't mean the c the planning commission can't recommend more, but at that time there was um no no comment regarding adding more than one. Now remember the green code also applies where additional uh chargers would be required but I believe it starts at 24 parking spaces. So but we certainly if that's u a consensus

tonight we we could bring that to the council uh next month and then they would make the final decision on if they want to require more as part of the exception process. Yeah. And so I think I would like to see that. So before I make an exception for this uh applicant to be developing in an area that has already been identified as a place where we don't necessarily want gas stations. Again, I just want to ensure that we're getting more of a community impact from allowing them to develop there. Um so I guess to do that, would we need to make a motion on that now to be added to what's going to be presented to council or how would that work?

Yeah, at the end at the end of this deliberation. Yeah. Okay. At the end. So, I'll hold my thoughts on that. Um, I do have a couple more comments. Um, okay. So, I I really want to state this uh section of my comment because it's going to tie into what we're going to discuss in two weeks. Um, I think we should be encouraging projects that are planning not just for today, but for where transportation and infrastructure are heading 10, 20 to 30 years from now. Uh I do apprec I do appreciate the focus on corridor protections and sensitive areas. Some of these streets are major entrances into the city and they help shape the they help shape people's first impressions of India. I think land use decisions along those corridors matter long term and I definitely support being more intentional about more intentional about what gets developed in those areas and making sure projects contribute positively to the visual character of the city instead of just maximizing pad development opportunities. So, um I'm just interested in hearing whether uh there was a discussion about enhanced architectural or site design expectations um specifically on gateway corridors. And I mean I based off of your comments. I'm going to going to just assume that that's not necessarily been discussed just because uh council already kind of highlighted what the community benefits were going to be such as the EV charging station, the fresh fruit. Um and I guess my last point would be um enforcement of these conditions on gas stations such as the 20% of it being landscaped and ensuring that they have fresh food fresh food items. um how is ongoing enforcement uh what would that realistically look like over time um for some of these operational standards whether it's like the shade requirements some operational conditions to these sites like does uh staff

currently have the capacity to be overseeing that for for future and all developments.

Yeah. So let me explain kind of how the process works and it's good that we have code enforcement here because if needed he could um piggy back on this. So a plan comes in, let's say it's approved for a new gas station and then shortly thereafter they would apply for a building permit. So plans would come in, it would be reviewed by a variety of departments, planning, building, fire, police, engineering, etc. And then of course, you know, they go out and build you this brand new gas station and convenience store. So the inspectors go out and that can include, you know, most of the departments. So they have to verify that these items are are there um in in accordance with the approved plans. So for example, if there's an area that is designated for fresh food, um that's going to be an additional refrigerated area because obviously fresh food is perishable and it needs to be refrigerated. So um they they would ensure that that refrigeration area is there. It's not for alcohol. It's not for these areas. And then after that's verified and everyone's happy and the gas station convenience store is open, if we get a complaint, um then code enforcement would go out there. Code enforcement works with our department. Um they usually ask for the conditions of the project um when it was approved and if it did not um if it does not have whatever that might be um then they would get a violation from code enforcement. they would have to correct it or they possibly could get a fine. So, um the hard part is is once something's built and it may comply, but over time, you know, they might move the fresh food over and I don't know, put something else that might not be as healthy or they might not refrigerate that area anymore. So, it it is the devil's in the details and it would be

an ongoing enforcement issue. Um, some people in the community are very attuned to things and they might send an email, they file a complaint and then we go out there and we look at it and they get a citation and then they need to correct it. So, um, most of it is pretty easy to make sure that it's, um, put into place, if you will, from the onset, but then later, that's where the challenge um comes in. And that's why we have the police department, code enforcement, etc. to help us because um, even though we're the implementers, um, we are not always involved in the enforcement component. So, I hopefully that answers your question.

Yes, it did. Thank you very much. Um, uh, lastly, I appreciate all the the work that staff has put into this. I know, um, there's been a a lot of information that's been put out on the last week, um, that we as a planning commission have to review. So, um, I I really do thank you guys for the the hard work and the detailed um, reports that you guys put together. Um, and I don't want to make it seem as I'm coming off as anti- business or anti-development. I just really want to make sure that future projects are contributing to the identity uh of our city and are truly beneficial to our residents. Um I guess that that is the end of my comments, but I do want to um make that motion that I had mentioned earlier

after. Okay. Uh, another um, question I had regarding uh, developments that go through the the cup process, the minimum spacing increase. Um, I I know that it was 700 ft. Um, if there is some sort of development that's applying for the conditional use permit, could we maybe increase that 700 ft? So maybe a larger scale development, a gas station isn't um as close to I I guess a residential area or school. Hold that thought, Commissioner Slater, for just a moment and I apologize. Um sometimes I'll miss this, but we're supposed to open for the public to participate first and then this would be the deliberation part or I don't know if you want.

Yes. Um sure. So let's open let's pause on our deliberation. Let's have Yes. So I if I'm not correct me if I'm wrong but first we have like here as a commission we ask questions to staff and then when we're done we open it up for the public so they can you know give remarks or like comments and then we do the deliberation deliberate. Okay. Yes. So that's why I open it up to the you know to the body so they have questions and then after we're done with the questions we open up to the public. That makes sense. Thank you.

Okay. Sorry for interrupting. I I guess regarding the cups, I guess if we can potentially uh look into um increasing the minimum space increase for larger developments that go through the conditional use permit uh built near corridors or intersections because I I know that minimum right now is 700 feet, but if for whatever reason that they want to build a large scale gas station down the line in 20 30 years similar to the scale of what maybe Shal's is um down in in Coachella, uh I just again I just want to ensure that we're ensuring that not 700 ft close to a school um or a residential area down the line because we don't

to clarify that um you're talking about the sensitive receptors. What specifically are you thinking about increasing? Um the minimum spacing increase to the sensitive receptors such as

Okay, so right now the way the ordinance is drafted um it it's adjacent. So basically, you know, it's touching um so adjacent is defined as property that is directly next to or touching another property sharing a common boundary line. Adjacent includes parcels directly across a public rideway, a street. So not just, you know, right next door, but across the street. So, I will say this, we did look into this early on and um even though we could go ahead and bring that restriction to the council, um it will have a very large impact on that map um that I showed. Um it it's going to eliminate a lot of opportunities for for new gas stations. So, even though I'm not necessarily trying to discourage you, per se, but uh here's the map right here, uh it it there was a lot of red all over the map. So, um what we would do is if the there's a consensus and you want to do that, we would revise this map because right now it's only adjacency. So we re revise it to 700 700 feet and it's going to be a very big impact because remember when we're doing conflict of interests we're doing 500 ft which is still quite a bit and now if you do seven um it it it's going to it's really really large. So I just wanted to bring that to your attention because there's a lot of different like options that we looked at before we brought it to the council and brought it to the planning commission. So if that's what you want to do, just be prepared and you know we'll do this new map using our GIS department to show them how the impact would be. So okay and it was just a thought and obviously um I I don't want to limit it to the point where there's

only like one place where we can build a gas station in the future. Um but I'll I'll I'll refrain from moving forward on that. Um, but my next point was actually if uh you guys have this map, is it possible to put together a map where it is allowable to build gas stations or where to just be essentially anywhere that's not um highlighted on this map? So that map even though I apologize maybe the title could be um tuned up. So even though it says prohibited, the red's prohibited. You can't see it's so small, but the green is where you would be allowed. Oh, okay.

Yeah. So that map right now does show where you would be allowed. So you see a lot of a lot of green um north of of the 10 and you also see some some green like on the southeast part of the city, but then you also see see some patches um in the middle of the city. Um so there there's definitely um more opportunities. There's a little patch there on the southwest as well. So there there are still quite a bit of opportunities um to build new service stations um fuel stations in the city. But yeah, this map is showing both prohibited and allowed areas.

No, that's perfect. Thank you so much. It's very helpful knowing that that I should have read the little uh legend. Um okay, I guess my last thing would just be the the EV charging stations. Did they in when they recommended that they add charging stations at council. Did they specify what type of charging station or they just said a charging station?

Yeah, they didn't I know there's the supercharger one. Um they didn't specify whether it would be a fast or supercharger one or regular charger. They just brought up electrical vehicle chargers. I will say that the supercharged ones, even though I'm also not an expert, that that could be challenging because it requires more electricity. And as you know, here in the valley, there are some challenges um with electricity capacity in certain instances, certain areas of the city. So, the supercharger you could require, but then it may not be feasible. So, um just something to consider.

Okay. No, no worries. Um, I'll have to do more research on EV charging stations, but I do appreciate the time you took in answering my questions and um, that's all the comments I have. Mister, thank you, Commissioner Slater. Uh, Commissioner Eko, you have any questions to staff?

Um, just one. Um, did staff evaluate whether these regulations could unintentionally concentrate um, gas stations in other areas of the city like north of the freeway? That's a good question. Uh, let me put the map up a little bit. Oops. So, here's that map. So we did um but at the same time one one thing that's very interesting that we discovered when um we started you know looking into fueling stations and demand and feasibility and the market is when gas stations decide to come into the city they look at factors that we don't look at. We look at zoning and we look at, you know, building codes and we look at, you know, um, first of all, just is the land use allowed on a given piece of property. So, that's that's a given for them. They know they have to go where they're allowed, but they look at a lot of factors that we did not take into consideration like the number of trips uh that pass by the property, you know, future u changes to the city, maybe future roads that are going to go in. Um, a lot of times, uh, the reason why people locate is because there's something nearby, which we don't always know, you know, where this store or this restaurant or or this um, will go in because we, you know, even though it may be zoned, we don't know if someone's going to come in with an application or a building permit to do it. So, that's the hard part. What I was hoping during this that there would be lots of opportunities north of the 10 because we're we are expecting a lot of growth north of the 10 freeway. There's vacant land. Um it's the newer part of the city that we've already seen a lot of growth

in the last 20 25 years and there's opportunities um for gas stations because a lot of the um concentration or saturation saturation is south of the 10. So, we did take that into consideration, but at the same time, we're kind of juggling in a balance act between some items that we want like sensitive receptors and also um restrictions at intersections and things like that. So, um it's hard to tell what the true impact of this code um code amendment will be. Um, but what will happen, what I anticipate is, let's say 5 years from now, you get not a single application for a fueling station. That to me would probably indicate we need to maybe come back to this ordinance and maybe do some revisions. Um but if some of the areas that were anticipated that are shown in green we we get new applications for for fueling stations then we might have accomplished a goal because um and we're they can't go into the areas where you already see like along Monroe you see three that are like right there right before you get to onto the 10 then maybe we accomplished something in in regards to you know um having them more dispersed. So hopefully that answers your question.

Yes it did. Thank you. Now it's my turn. I have a few questions. Um, you mentioned that you guys want to pull uh the high highway 111 restriction. Can you touch base on why are we doing this?

Yes. So, I'll acknowledge um for the record that we needed to do some more coordination with the tribes. And so, even though um the tribes, you know, their authority supersedes ours uh because the original Highway 111 specific plan had coordination with the tribes, even if we cross out gas stations in that area, we still need to have make sure that they can weigh in on that change. So, we've we've sent the letters out, but it's like a 90day review period. And so, we want to make sure legally that we're protected. And so, that's the reason why we're taking it out. But, we already know that the Highway 111 specific plan needs changes. So, the what I'm anticipating is that won't be the only change, but there'll probably be other changes as well, and we'll just combine that with the other changes.

Bring it to the city council. Correct. Yeah. actually planning commission first with the recommendation to the city council. So yeah, we'll bring it back to the commission.

Got it. Okay. My next question is so for the exceptions, right? Let's say that a fellow stationation wants to come into like one of the red areas that we have. You said that they there's like some exceptions that we can like grant them, but the location is not one of them. Correct. if they so can you like specify from that like if like it's a red on the Monroe area the street like it doesn't matter how many uh assumptions we give them if it is if it's in that specific location we won't be able they won't be able to get it or build there correct

correct so there's just two that are not um cannot be on the table so to speak for applying for an exception so that's the intersection um rule no more than two which honestly ly isn't super common, but when we were doing some research, we were looking at other cities because we really wanted to dig in deep and it does happen where you see more than two. It it's not not great. Um, so that one and then the sensitive receptors because as you know, one of the things that came up with the commission was environmental justice, right? And so we wanted to make sure that um when new fueling stations go in, those that are more vulnerable, whether it's your seniors or the youth, etc. um didn't have to, you know, be next to the traffic and other impacts that gas stations have. So, there's just two. It's the intersection requirement and the sensitive receptor. So, those are just not on the table that that would actually require if someone wanted to do that a code amendment.

Code amendment. Okay. So, if it's there's more than two in any section, there's no it's not going to go, right? Yeah. It's that's that's a given. And then um let's say that uh there we have a fuel station application coming into one of the green areas, right? That still is going to go through planning commission, right? It's going to come to us and then we're going to do the whole review and then the whole study session or whatever. Okay. I just wanted to make sure that they we want to be able to review them. Yeah. Yeah. Gas stations will trigger a conditional use permit.

So once they determine there's a property that allows it from a zoning standpoint, then they would apply for the conditional use permit. And then that would come to the planning commission and it doesn't go to the city council. It would stop at planning commission. Okay. Got it. That would be your purview. Okay. And then my last question before we go to public hearing. I know that commissioner Slater was mentioned about the 700 ft uh corridor or like distance, right? How do you guys come up with that number? Like you guys just like use a formula or how how do you guys come up with that? No, we didn't. Um you talking about uh his suggestion for the 700? No, no. I know. I was looking at the document and then it said like somewhere down the line you guys mentioned 700 feet.

Yeah. Hold on. Let me look at that. I think that's the um one along the highway 111. Okay.

Um actually yeah. Oh, sorry. The 700 ft is for all of the the roadways. So Edo Boulevard, uh Jefferson, Monroe, Jackson, Golf Center Parkway. So good question. So we we work with a variety of people in our department. So we discussed it internally and so what we wanted to prevent and this is how the 700 ft came into play is when like say a shopping center goes in or or like a commercial development. What they'll end up doing is it may touch the maybe the piece of the property where a service station, a fueling station may want to go in, but then they end up subdividing it and the fueling station might be located farther back on the property. So, it may not be fronting that major street, but it might be in the back. And we wanted to make sure that we c we caught that provision where the station might be really far behind. Um, and it just kind of rules out just all of the properties that that are fronting even if you subdivide it later. And Got it. And it's a large large development where the fueling station is is really set back, I guess, is what I'm trying to say.

Gotcha. Okay. Well, thank you for looking into that uh including that into the ordinance. Um before I go to open um public hearing, you guys have any other questions to staff? No. Perfect. Thank you. So now I'm going to open it up for uh public hearing. Do we have any comments? Yes, we do. Um we have a comment from Steven Figueroa.

Hi, Steve Figo. I'm a community activist and advocate for children with disabilities. So, I first want to thank the um uh the city for doing the moratorum and asked it to continue. I'll tell you why. There are several things that this study doesn't look at like parks. We don't want gas stations so close to parks, especially when many gas stations, like I said in the city council, we have become the new liquor stores and there's no moratorium on how much liquor is going to be sold. There should be a moratorum on the liquor and not and other illicit things where now when you go to liquor, you go to these gas station, they have mushrooms, they have herbs and all this other stuff that are impacting our kids, especially in high school, vapors and all that. There needs to be a moratorum on that. I thank you, Mr. for your wise questions and looking to the future because if you look on the internet, you'll see that uh Rus was saying the same thing in 2022 to say, "Hey, how come there's no natural gas or hydrogen fuel stations because there's people here that have that in addition and that needs to be considered. So, it needs to be go back to the drawing board." And one of the things I remember when I was with the city and I brought up the issue was, you know, being a senior citizen, there's nothing worse than having diabetes and all the restrooms are broken in all the gas stations. You know, there's nothing mandatory mandating that those those bath st uh the bathrooms be working order all the time. Same thing with air in your tire all the time. It's supposed to be free by law, but not one gas station has it for free. So you got to mandate all that into this into this plan and make it make it go back. There there's a lot of other things as far as like security. There's nothing in the security thing that says you must hire security staff to to circle or to be around here because we all know the vagrants and the homeless. I you know my heart goes out to all of them. I'm a community activist and the the homeless and all that, but we get our kids going in there. we get all this and so it

needs to go back again one more time to the drawing board before it goes before the city council. Think about this thing also near the churches. There's no moratorium to say you know there's going to it's not going to be near the churches because the last thing you need to do is have all this gas and all the trouble and vagrants going to the churches and near little nonprofits. It does need to go back. I think Michael Slater saying thinking about the future. You were so wise in saying that because you know what all you got to do is drive down to Irvine and go wow India could be the next Irvine and you won't see 31 gas stations and you see you don't see all that alcohol being sold over there you know. So there are great examples for you to go back and look at. There's I haven't seen in any of this a police report, a safety report from the police department of their opinion. You know, when you go to other cities and other stuff, they have that opinion put in to say this is what law enforcement thinks. You know, this was what the fire department thinks. What are the hazard? What is a aqmd the effects of all those gas fumes going into our area? But anyway, my time is up. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Jackie Lopez. Good evening, uh, uh, chair, vice, I'm sorry, vice chair Ortiz and commissioners. Um, my name is Jackie Lopez. is I'm a lifelong resident of India and a former planning commissioner and I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. Um when I served on the commission our work was about balance. It was about making sure India had equitable distribution of land of land uses around the city including fueling stations. At that time the city was discussing approximately 22 operating or approved gas stations. Today, the city confirms 31 operating approved or pending fueling stations. That's a significant increase in in a relatively short period of time. I want to uh also commend staff for the work in this draft. The quarter prob uh prohibition, sensitive um receptor protections, landscaping standards, EV EV charging requirements, and operational standards are meaningful steps forward. The statement of purpose is especially important because it says the city intends to prevent market oversaturation and maintain fiscal sustainability of existing f fuel stations. That language matters. It puts um on the record what residents and operators have been saying for years. But the draft still does not contain the operative rules that fully deliver on that purpose. The report tells us where the fueling stations are prohibited, but it really doesn't say how clearly how uh clearly identify how many parcels remain eligible or where future stations could be still built after these restrictions

are applied. Looking at the city's own map, several commercially zoned corridors appear to be remain outside portions of the proposed priority areas, including segments of Madison Street, Jackson, south of Avenue 49, Avenue 48,50, and other scattered commercial corridors throughout the city. That is why a partial eligibility analysis is so important. Without it, the commission cannot fully evaluate how many fueling station sites can still remain available under the proposed ordinance. That is why I respectfully urge this commission to recommend a 1500 ft separation between fueling stations. Spacing standards are common planning tools. They give applicants clear expectations, protect neighborhoods from clustering, and help preserve the physical sustainability of existing operators. I urge the commission to consider a city-wide cap at the existing 31 stations. The spacing rule prevents clustering. The cap prevents the network from continuing to grow beyond what the city itself now acknowledging is acknowledging as a concern. Gas stations are not temporary land uses. They involved underground tanks, environmental risk, traffic impacts, and long-term compatibility issues. Once approved, once they're built, they're expensive to reverse. And it's not about opposing business. It's about responsible planning, retaining, and supporting existing operators. Last week, council member Glenn Miller publicly asked the staff and the city attorney whether additional time remains available under the moratorum process. The permit zoning uh work continues. Staff confirmed that the city has been using shorter extensions and the additional statutory time remains available within the two uh year limit if needed. I just have a few more seconds. That's okay. Sorry about that. Um that is why that is important because the city um still has the opportunity to strengthen the ordinance before the final adoption. So tonight, I respectfully ask the commission to recommend three things before this ordinance moves forward to city council.

First, require a parcel eligibility analysis showing where the future stations could be built. Second, add a 1500T minimum spacing requirement between fueling fueling stations. And third, considered a hard cap at 31 stations citywide. The city is moving in the right direction, but this ordinance should not stop halfway. Thank you. Thank you, Yaki. Um, I have no more comment cards. Okay. So, I'm going to close the public hearing. So, now it's time for deliberations. So, Commissioner Slater, do you have anything?

Uh, I do have a couple of questions. um regarding public restroom use. I didn't read through the entire um like the the 40 41 page report, but is are our public restrooms identified or outlined in that uh documentation at all?

Yes. Yes. So, under it's so on page six of the ordinance, page 23 in the packet. So under public amenities, it says all fueling stations shall provide the following on-site amenities. So clearly marked trash and recycling receptacles at fueling islands and building entrances. Air and water. So free air and water for customers who purchase fuel. So that is a state requirement. Restrooms accessible to the public during all hours of operation maintained in sanitary um sanitary condition. And then there's also a provision for artwork um as well. So um the art artwork if it's included they may be able to wave the the art uh fee that all developments um need to pay. So in that sense yeah the restrooms are part of the ordinance as well as air and water.

Okay. Thank you. Um and are parks considered sensitive receptors uh as part of this draft ordinance? No. Parks are not included. How relevant would that be to the map that's been outlined earlier? I guess are there a large number of parks that are concentrated near gas stations or the green areas that were identified on the map?

So, the green areas uh that that uh didn't take into consideration obviously parks because that's not part of the draft ordinance. Again, if there's a consensus among the commissioners, that's something that we could carry forward to the council. What about churches like the gentleman here said? Cuz that's a good point. You know, churches are like a main gathering point for elderly young people, you know. So, I mean, maybe it's something that you guys are agree with. Maybe we can push it to the city council to add that parks and churches.

Yeah. So, parks and churches um are not included, but again, if you'd like me to to bring that to the council as as part of your recommendation, we certainly could. Um, and we would need to do a new map as well. Okay, one second. To touch base of what the comments that Jackie said, do we have a like a parcel map like to identify like all the possible like tentative like locations that new gas stations can come into the city or we don't have that?

So, if we could put the presentation up again. So, this is the map that we did. So, what I didn't do, um, but we certainly could, is we could get a table, an Excel spreadsheet if you will, um, listing all those parcels that are in green. So, that's something that obviously is very, very easy to do and we could do that. Um, there's a lot more that's in the red than there is in the green. So again, the goal was to to put restrictions at the city on new fueling stations, but um we do have that that list. So um um that's something that if you want again, we could attach to the the council staff report so they could see all of them. I mean, it's going to be a lot, but we certainly could um attach the ones that are uh labeled in green. And then of course if you add other considerations like parks and churches then that's that's probably going to reduce it even more.

And I don't know uh is this map will be available on our website. It's yeah the map is already um posted to the but it's just like a PDF file or like or is it interactive that people can actually see? No, that yeah that's not an interactive map. That's a static map. Um so we we didn't create that. Um, yeah, just static. Maybe we can also add that, you know, the recommendation to make it interactive so people can go to your website and actually zoom in, zoom out cuz it's kind of hard to read, you know, it is very hard. And then so if I have a hard time reading it, I imagine like other residents of the city of Indo might have a hard time kind of seeing the map as well. So maybe making it like interactive so it is user friendly for people to see.

Yeah. And I guess if it wouldn't take all of staff's time, if maybe we could add it as a feature on the development dashboard and have like a gas station link to the side. Yeah, I mean, we definitely could add that to the development dashboard. I think that would be a lot easier. I personally don't know how to make this interactive, but I know there's people that are smarter than me that that probably could. Um, so I can we can certainly again if that's what you guys are thinking we could um work with GIS. Anything else? Do you have any comments, Commissioner Echo?

Um, I'm definitely receptive to putting regulations when it comes to parks. I don't know how I feel about churches just because that's that can be interpreted different ways. If we say churches, are we also going to include synagogues? Are we going to include a lot of things? So, and I drove by a home church like two weeks ago, which I didn't know was a thing, but it's people have churches in their homes now. So, fair.

So, again, it it might that might create a lot of limitations as far as like where we could be developing gas stations. So, um I I'm leaning more towards like parks and community centers or senior centers, more like communal spaces where um youth and the elderly tend to congregate. Um any other questions before I make my motion? Um yes. Um I know we have to add and subtract a few things. So yeah, just you can go ahead and you know make your motion. Okay. Um so my first recommendation would be to include uh parks, community and senior centers as a part of sensitive receptor areas. Yeah, the senior center, sorry to interrupt during the motion, but the senior um it says senior care or assisted is already included.

Included. Okay. Then let's let's include um youth or um community centers such as like the Indo Teen Center for example. Yeah. And youth I believe youth is all also included. Hold on. Let's just let's go to this um just so we can make sure the motion doesn't include maybe things that are already included. Um so it talks about uh school child care facility. So those are the two they have is a school and a child care facility. But I guess maybe what you're thinking is like a a youth center maybe. Is that what you're saying? Yeah, I'm thinking maybe like a desert rec center, a Boys and Girls Club, the Y um any any youth oriented recreation facility.

Yeah, it looks pretty be similar to what we do with cannabis, I think. Yeah. Okay, continue. Sorry. Um, aside from that, I would like to add, um, for projects that go through the cup, um, increase the minimum of one charger to two. Um, ideally, we would like more. Um, I'm not going to touch on whether it's the fast chargers or any anything like that. I don't know that much about EVs, but I would like like to at least see two because if one car is parked there, it might be there for a couple hours. Like, who knows? So, um, those would be the two recommendations that I would like to add on to the ordinance.

And if I have consensus from the body, I would like to add having that parcel map and having it like interactive so people can see it on the website and also uh send it to the city council so they can review it as well. Okay. And then do I have to read the whole thing or you guys? Uh yes. Or can you do that for me?

Yes, I will. Um okay. So the motion is to make a recommendation that city council consider the following specified revisions. Number one in um include parks, community and youth centers um as within the the map

as a sensitive receptor. Number two, for projects going through the cup exception process, increase the minimum charger requirement from one to two, EV charger requirement one to two. Uh, number three, include um an interactive parcel map on the city's website.

Yeah, please. Uh, and number four, um, remove state highway 111 as a corridor restriction. So strike number section A or section C number two subsection A from the resolution.

I think um we're good with that. So if we have a that's your motion. Uh Commissioner Slater. I'll second. Okay. Can I have roll call, please? Yes. Commissioner Slater, yes. Commissioner Scar Bro Eckle, yes. Vice Chairperson Ortiz, yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. All right, that was a good one. Moving on to item number six in the agenda, commissioner comments. Do we have any comments from the body? No. No. I today I don't have a comment. So I guess we can move on to staff uh number item number seven on the agenda. Staff items.

Yes. Um so I have a couple. So I wanted to remind the commission the next meeting. So in two weeks will be the Oasis project. So the Oasis project is a large project. We expect a lot of people attending that are interested in the project. So I just wanted to to give you an early heads up because it is a large project. It's a specific plan with an environmental impact report as well as a um amendment to the zoning and general plan um and a development agreement. So all those things uh make the project quite large and there is a lot of interest um in the project as well. Um the assistant city manager did an interview last week. There's been a lot of public outreach uh for the project and it's it's been in the works for over two years. So that's the first item. And then the second item is um if you watch the news and you read the news, you'll see that there's a big uh uh a lot of you know people that are upset about data centers shortly said. Um and so we are and it was brought up uh by the council recently in regards to do we want to restrict it? Do we want to um move forward with the policy etc. So what we're doing is staff is starting kind of like gas stations. are starting to do that research. Uh one of our planners went to a town hall meeting in another area uh last night or the night before and so we're accumulating um information research. Um one of our planners also went to the national planning conference in Detroit so came back with a lot of good information. So in short, we'll be bringing a presentation to you on data centers and then that presentation will receive comments from the public, from the commission, and then we'll bring that forward to the city council and then from there uh there might be additional action um that the council would make regarding data centers. We don't know

what that would be right now, but there's certainly a high interest in that topic, that land use. And since the commission is concerned with land use, we will be in the near future coming to you with a presentation on data centers. So those are the uh the two items that I have regarding um staff items and those won't be done on the same day. Correct. The data centers and the Oasis project. No, no, those will be separate. Now we're not we're not ready in two weeks. Yes. Okay. Do we have anything else from the from the body? Any questions or anything? If not, uh, we adjourn. Uh, our next planning meeting is going to be May 27, 2026. Thank you.