Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, good afternoon. We're used to conducting these these meetings without so many people in the audience. Thank you guys all for coming. This is the regular meeting of the Lancaster Planning Commission. Uh we're going to start our meeting off with the invocation by Commissioner Bearden and then our pledge of allegiance by Commissioner Curio. If everyone can please stand. Dear heavenly father, we thank you for this opportunity to come together in service of our great city of Lancaster. I ask that you bless the the city staff. I ask that you bless the commissioners here. Bless Chairman Bosen is absent. Bless the residents of our city. all those sitting in the audience today. I ask that we uh service the city amicably, that we come to peaceful agreements, that we have understanding of what it is that we're talking about, and that we speak uh with love in Jesus name. Amen. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Okay, roll call please. Chairman Bose is absent. Vice Chairman Dairberry, I'm present. Commissioner Burden, present. Commissioner Co, present. Commissioner Aloa, present. Commissioner Moore, present. And Commissioner Underwood, present. We have a quorum. Okay, perfect. Public business from the floor. Any person who would like to address the planning commission on any agendaized item is requested to complete a speaker card for the recording secretary and identify the agenda item for which you would like to discuss. Each person will be given the opportunity to address the planning commission at the time such item is discussed by the planning

commission. Speaker cards are available at the rear of the council chambers. Individual speakers are limited to three minutes each. Individual comments are limited to three minutes unless otherwise announced. Our first item today is approval of the minutes from the regular regular meeting of the planning commission of March 17, 2025. Commissioner, do you guys have an opportunity to review that yet? Anyone have any comments, changes to the minutes? No. I'll entertain a motion. All right. I move to approve the minutes from the regular meeting of March 17, 2025. A second. Okay, let's vote. Sure. Everyone's sitting on the edge of their seats. Do you want us to do an oral vote? It was six six and one absent. Okay,

perfect. Motion carries. Okay, next we'll go ahead and open the public hearing for item number two. This is revocation of conditional use permit number 23-005. I think Miss Brekie, is this yours? All right, floor is yours. Thank you, members of the planning commission. The item before you today is the initiation of a revocation for conditional use permit number 23005 and associated existing operations at Kingbar on Avenue I. The item is being brought before the planning commission in response to several public safety concerns, including those outlined by Chair Vos at the previous planning commission meeting. Today's item includes only the potential to initiate revocation processes, which would be then heard in full at a later planning commission date. The revocation action itself is not on today's agenda. The project site is located near the southwestern corner of Avenue I and 30th Street East, just north of the Leo Mobile Home Park. The property is zoned commercial planned development or CPD. King Bar is considered a legal non-conforming use on the property and has been in operation as a bar for some time, meaning that it has a deemed approved status under the municipal code. Last year, the planning commission approved a conditional use permit to allow for entertainment at the project site. This entertainment included indoor entertainment with the potential to add outdoor entertainment if certain criteria were met, as well as setting operating hours for all uses on site and establishing security requirements. The applicant provided a notorized acceptance of all conditions at that time. For context, the site plan for the project is provided on the left with the bar building shown in a yellow outline, the proposed outdoor event area in red, and a required CMU wall with landscape

buffer to screen from the um residential uses to the south. On the right is the floor plan of the bar building itself with standing and seating area, a bar area, and a DJ booth. Condition of approval number 12 of the cup requires a regular condition compliance review by planning staff. The first of these reviews was completed earlier this year and staff found that community preservation had received no new complaints on the site and that the applicant had begun processes to legalize unpermitted structures and construct the required buffer CMU wall, but the building and safety was a awaiting resubmitt on those items. Uh, in addition, between June 2024 and January 2025, LPD had received a total of seven 911 calls on the site. And on March 1st of 2025, an incident occurred on site involving assault with a deadly weapon involving at least three victims and the suspects now in custody. In addition, staff found that the permit may be in violation of several conditions of approval. Based upon the facts and these incidents, there are grounds to initiate revocation proceedings concerning concerning conditional use permit number 23005 and the deemed approved status of the alcohol beverage establishment at a future hearing date. Um, I should clarify at this stage that it is both the cup for entertainment and the deemed approved status of the alcohol beverage establishment which would be up for revocation under this process. The municipal code states that the deemed approved status of an alcohol beverage establishment is subject to revocation if the operator has permitted the operation of the business in violation with the performance standards set forth in section 174210 or otherwise in a manner that constitutes a public nuisance and or threat to public health, safety, and welfare. In conclusion, staff recommend that the planning commission adopt resolution 25503 initiating revocation proceedings

concerning the cup and the deemed approved status of the establishment located at 2822 East Avenue. I I'm available if you have any questions. Commissioners, any questions for breaking? I also wanted to mention that we have um officer Adam Oliger from the Lancaster Police Department if there are any questions related to any of the incidents that Miss Brookie mentioned. I've got a question. Uh you mentioned there may be potential violations. Uh are there any documented violations in terms of building and safety? Uh community preservation had received no new violations on the property. So there are no new recorded um like building permit violations on the site. the existing unpermitted structures on site and the required CMU wall were in process for building permits. Do we know what the 911 dispatch calls were about, the subject matter of those calls? I have a list of them or if it may be um more appropriate to defer to LPD to answer that question. Yeah, we can who whoever whoever wants to speak about is fine. Okay, chair, if I might just ask, have you formally open the public hearing yet? I'm not sure. I thought I said that. If not, we'll open the public hearing. Thank you. Just want to make make sure. Good afternoon. My name is Adam Mullinger uh from the Lancaster Police Department. uh one of the six sworn officers that were uh brought in in uh January. Um since my tenure there, I've been brought uh it's been brought to my attention the establishment that we're speaking of, the 2822 East Avenue I uh of which that I've been looking at in

depth is the uh most recent one shooting that occurred. Um there has been some arrest and there's been also several complaints in regards to that. As far as the 911 calls, I don't have did not have that list in front of me. We're in the process of switching and getting all of our ducks in a row. So, I so I'm sorry I can't speak to that, but I'm sure if brought to my attention I can uh perhaps speak of them of my knowledge. I do have a summary of some of those incidents in general. They appear to include harassment um assaults and vehicle theft at a glance, which is part for the course for the crime trends in the area along with arson. So, any questions for the deputies? Thank you very much for your return. Y'all appreciate you. Do you have any speakers on this one? No speakers on this one. I think Mr. Maid is here. Does he have any Does does he want to speak? No. Okay. So we can go ahead and without objection go ahead and close the public hearing on number two and entertain a motion. I move to adopt resolution number 25-03 initiating revocation proceedings concerning a conditional use permit number 23-005 and B the deemed approved status of alcoholic beverage establishment located at 2822 East Avenue I. a second. Oh, we have a speaker now. Although we close the public hearing, counselor, it's uh within the discretion of the chair to reopen with the consent of the

full commission if you wish. It's discretionary. Is it Mr. May you want to say something? There's the applicant himself from the from Is that okay with you? Commissioners, everyone can sense. Go ahead. Let's give us one second. I don't think the microphone's working. Good. Okay, there we go. Hi, good afternoon guys. Uh just about the seventh time call 911. Um most of them it's medical issue. Someone fell down or something like but only one issue and it was not inside the bar. It was outside the bar. It was at the parking lot. Uh it's happened in second and everybody know how this accident will be happen. Uh we try to control everything. In last 6 months we spend more than $64,000 y and security at the bar to make it this area better and safety and we spend a lot of money to come to this point about the outdoor event. I don't make any event yet outside because till now I don't have real approve from the city because they ask me about about the plan and all this approved from the city I'm not got yet and it was not event it was like just regular night when this happened the shooting happened was like regular night from any bar or maybe happen in any mall or Walmart anywhere this is what happened um but we I more now about the parking

lot. We already we're talking about with the professional security company to make a Bing at the parking lot especially in last 1 hour because my experience say like most of problem happened in last 1 hour. uh we have all the approved we follow the law we we not allowed in and out we're not allowed any lettering not allowed anybody at the parking lot and but the accident happen and believe me we don't like that to happen we not be happy if something happened at the bar but never ever any call happen inside the bar but if the parking lot is almost like 4,000 ft uh I cannot I cannot control everything but I will do my best of course you know um that's the point and any question I'm ready too can I ask um the the incident that the officer was talking about the shooting incident were these customers of your bar that night oh yeah it was customer and it start inside the bar and when we tried to get him to leave I don't know I think I think and maybe the police department know more than me I think they have like some personal issue because how it's happened is happen in second you know like start inside the bar we take him outside outside the bar to make everybody safe it was like just a little bit agreement and also far away from the bar like end of the parking lot you know and that's what happened exactly and I think the police report you will show you and do you ask me last time 6 months ago to got the security camera we have the all the bar is monitor by 32 camera. uh already I give the police all the cameras all everything and they have the security professional security uh with but the everything as a security way I do my

best you know but happen is happen I you know I I do my best I do my best but I cannot control like some people from the street to do to do that in maybe happen anywhere you know I'm sorry for that but that's exactly what happened thank you thank Any other questions for Mr. Ma? No. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Okay, we have a We'll go ahead and reclose the public hearing on that item. We have a pending motion from Commissioner Bearden and a second by Commissioner Moore, and we'll go ahead and take the vote. Six to six and one absent. Six years. Okay. Okay. Next up, we'll go ahead and open the public session on item number three. This is general plan amendment number 21-001 along with zone change number 21-001, tenative trap map number 24-001 and conditional use permit 21-001. Before we get started, Commissioner King needs to advise the commission. I just wanted to uh recognize that uh I was um reached out to by um people on this development plan. Uh just to go over to see if there was anything, but there was no comment made. I just went seen it and and

uh and I left. I didn't really give them an an opinion. I didn't want to I didn't want to leave one, but I did want to say just because I did go and I just want to be uh transparent about my actions. And chair, if I may uh point out that there is no harm in the commissioner having done that whatsoever. It's fairly common for applications and applicants to come before uh a commissioner or council member in advance of a hearing. and due process has been followed and the commissioner may continue to participate. Wonderful. Thank you. So, Miss Swain, I think this is yours tonight, isn't it? Yes, it is. Good afternoon, Vice Chair Dairberry and members of the planning commission. Before you this afternoon is a mixeduse development consisting of a general plan amendment, zone change, tenative track map, and and conditional use permit. The project site is located in the central portion of the city surrounded by a variety of land use developments including rural residences, multif family residential uses, um specifically town homes and apartments, single family residences on 7,000 foot lots, commercial medical parks, and the freeway. Specifically, the project site is located on approximately 10 acres at the southeast corner of 15th Street West and Avenue L. It is bordered to the north by Avenue L and to the east by State Route 14. Rural residential uses exist to the south and west while urban residential uses exist to the north along with vacant property zoned as office professional. The proposed project consists of the development of the project site with two multif family residential buildings

totaling 181 units, a 235 room hotel with a 3,800 ft clubhouse and 12,800 square ft of commercial uses on three pads. In order to develop the site as proposed, the applicant has requested a general plan amendment, zone change, tenative map, and cup. The project site is currently designated as non-urban as shown on the left. Um the properties to the west and south are also designated as non-urban while the properties to the north are designated as office professional, MR2, urban residential and hospital. The properties to the east on the east side of the freeway are designated as commercial. The applicant is requesting to change the designation of the subject site to mixed use. The project site is currently zoned as ZRR 2.5, which is rural residential minimum lot size 2 and a half acres. The properties to the south and west are also zoned as ZRR 2.5, while the properties to the north are zoned as office professional in purple, highdensity residential in brown, R7000 in yellow, and hospital in blue. The property to the east is zoned as both commercial and commercial plan development. The applicant is requesting that the property be reszoned mixeduse commercial. Both the general plan amendment and zone change require approval of the city council. The project site currently consists of four parcels. The applicant is requesting to subdivide the project site into six parcels ranging in size from 0.59 acres to 4.53 acres. The size and dimensions of the lots are in conformance with the development standards of the municipal code. One building or land use would be placed on each parcel. Two parcels for the multif family residences, three for the commercial pads and one for the hotel and clubhouse. Reciprocal access and

parking agreements across all the lots would be required between the parcels and the entire development be required to record CCNRs. Development of the project site is proposed would also require the approval of a conditional use permit due to the requested zoning and proposed uses. The applicant is proposing to develop the site with 181 multif family units, 200 235 room hotel and commercial uses. The multif family residential buildings would be located along 15th Street West shown as buildings A and B. The hotel along the southern property line shown as building C. The clubhouse which is building D is located um along the freeway and the commercial uses along Avenue L and the freeway frontages of the site would be FG and H. A total of 799 parking spaces would be provided on the site between surface parking and parking located under both the hotel and residential buildings. This is consistent with the parking standards of the Lancaster Municipal Code. Access to the project site would be from two driveways on 15th Street West. The primary driveway would be located in the center of the site and a second driveway would be located at the southern end of the site. The project would contain two multif family residential buildings with market rate units ranging in size from studios to two bedrooms with each having a private balcony or patio area. A total of 330 parking spaces would be dedicated to the residential uses. Both the mult both of the multif family buildings would be four stories over parking or 58 ft 8 in. A large outdoor open space patio area with private pool would be located along the eastern entrance of each building. Pedestrian ent entrances would be located on the northwest and south

elevations. Entrance to each building subterranean parking garage is provided on the eastern side beneath the pool areas with internal staircases and elevators to the residential floors. The architecture of the multif family buildings consists of a combination of primary light gray and secondary dark gray concrete planes that alternate in height creating visual interest at the roof line. The buildings also feature dark brown accents that frame sections of the facade along the upper floors. The 235 room hotel would be five stories with a maximum height of 58 feet 8 in which is the same as the multif family buildings. The building height would vary from a low point of 52 feet to the maximum height of 58 1/2 ft. The mixeduse zone limits commercial buildings to a maximum height of 50 feet. However, the Lancaster Municipal Code allows buildings to be higher with the approval of a conditional use permit. The hotel would be set back 42 feet from the property line and a 6ft block wall would be located along the the property line with landscaping buffers, drive aisle and additional building landscaping. Access to the underground parking for the hotel would be provided from the drive aisle on the southern end of the property. The architecture of the hotel building is designed to complement the multif family buildings and overall commercial center. The hotel is designed with sections of alternating colors and textures, predominantly medium gray, brown with limestone textured finish and dark cream. The three commercial retail pads would be provided on site along 15th and the freeway. Two of the pads would allow for quicks serve restaurants with drive-through lanes, and the pad in between these two would be allowed for sit-down restaurants or other retail uses. However, no drive-thru would be permitted at this location. All three of the buildings would be a maximum of 23 feet in

height. Landscaping would be provided around the perimeter of the project site in the surface parking areas around the buildings for a total of 71,776 ft of landscaping or 16% of the site. 38,662 square feet of open space would also be provided which is separate from the landscaping shown. Public outreach was conducted by the applicant including two public outreach meetings at the residents in on February 3rd and February 26 from 3:00 to 7:00 p.m. Additionally, the applicant met with individual members and small groups within the White Fence Farms residential community. As a result, the applicant has agreed to fence 15th Street West with a remote access gate at the southern end of the project site to prevent cut through traffic through the surrounding neighborhood. This fence and gate shall be installed in accordance with all city regulations and standards and requires fire department approval. This has been included in the conditions of approval as condition number 87. The applicant has also agreed to fence the White Fence Farms water easement located south of the project site to prove it protect it from vandalism, um crashes, accidents, and other forms of of damage. This has been included as condition number 86. An initial study for the proposed project was circulated for public review from August 14th, 2025 through September 20th, 2025. Sorry, 24. Um, a revised initial study addressing applicable comments was recirculated for public review from March 19th, 2025 through April 18th, 2025. All comment re letters received on both initial studies have been provided to the commission for their review. Staff recommends that the commission

adopt resolution 25-04 recommending approval of GPA 21-001 and zone change 21001 to the city council approving conditional use permit number 21-001 and tenative track map 24-001 contingent upon city council approval of the general plan amendment and zone change adopting the revised initial study and mitigation monitoring reporting program and authorizing staff to execute and file the NOD. I am available to answer any questions along with the applicant's development team. Thank you, Miss Wayne. Before we invite the applicant up, does anyone have any questions for Miss Miss Wayne? No. Okay. I think we're all eager to hear from the applicant or his team. Welcome. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Vice Chair, commissioners, and staff. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today regarding our project Lancaster Village, the proposed mixeduse center at Avenue L and 15th Street West. First, let me clearly state that Westlank Partners has absolutely no affiliation or association with the Maverick Gas Station, whose previous proposal was highly controversial. We are a small group of family and close friends dedicated to creating a vibrant community oriented development that enhances Lancaster. With me today are my brother-in-law and one of my dearest friends who along with others are all partners of this venture. Our architect and engineers are also present and can address any questions that any of you may have. 20 years ago, my sisters, our family, and a few close friends acquired this 9 and a half acre property with the dream of creating something meaningful and beneficial for the city of Lancaster. Over the years, we've thought we've uh thoughtfully considered several uh possibilities. Initially, a retail center was

considered including a Target store, but we recognized such heavy use uh such heavy retail use was inappropriate for the location. Instead, our careful deliberation led us to propose Lancaster Village, a pedestrian-friendly low density, mixeduse development featuring muchneeded multif family housing, a boutique hotel, and attractive restaurant spaces. Located at the northeast corner of the White Fence Farms, adjacent to the freeway, and a major arterial road, our development is designed as a sensible transition and buffer for the community. As well, we know as we well know, Avenue L is part of a peripheral loop in Lancaster, but is also serves residential areas. So, it was important that we plan carefully. We believe that our plans have met that goal. We understand some neighbors prefer no development at all or only large lot homes. However, in the past 20 years, we have received numerous unsolicited purchase offers from developers, but none of them have ever expressed any interest in residential construction due to the site's location in the shadow of a freeway, excuse me, in the shadow of freeway on a major roadway. Our mixeduse approach align seamlessly with existing professional office and multif family uses nearby, offering a transitional use where now there is none. Lancaster Village incorporates thoughtful design principles. Our parking is strategically placed in the site's interior, minimizing impact on the adjacent neighbors. The project's aesthetic is inviting with pedestrian-friendly walkways and drought tolerant landscaping to ensure sustainability and water conservation. We've carefully considered lighting and adhere to dark sky principles so that the neighbors will not be bothered by with the lights in the evenings. On the topic of neighbors, engaging them has been central to our process and we are proud

of the work that we have done. We have consistently communicated with area residents. We have held productive discussions with White Fence Farms community leaders including a gracious gathering hosted by Mrs. Sharon Hartwick. We listen to their concerns and proactively offer tangible solutions. In working with Bit Farms, we have committed to building an iron gate at our expense at our property's southern border on 15th Street West. This will allow allowed remote access entry exclusively for White Fence Farm residents. In doing so, it will it will eliminate cars trying to cut across the White Fence farms. We were told that on New Year's Day, someone had driven through the water easement on the south side of our property and damaged the water man. So, we have committed to building a fence across that easement and only provide access to authorized personnel. Again, this will be done at our expense. In addition to working with White Fence Farm leadership, we also host the two open houses on February 3rd and February 26th of this year, inviting residents both north and south of the property. Our full project team including architects and engineers provide a transparent presentation site plan and detailed explanation at the open analysis. The attendees had access to our entire team. At these events, we received questions about a few other issues that I would like to briefly address. Storm water drainage, water usage, and public safety. When it comes to storm water, our project is designed to make significant improvements to what's currently there. Right now, heavy rainpool at Avenue LM15, creating mud, mess, and headaches. We will fix this by directing storm water into drainage systems along the eastern edge of the property. This solution will dramatically enhance the situation compared to what is happening today. We've also been careful to address water

supply concerns. We are currently we currently have a serve letter from Whitefence Farm Mutual Water, but we're also exploring and very open to the possibility of annexing into LA County Waterworks District 40. This would ensure that White Fence Farms resources are not impacted in any way. And so we are exploring that option as well. No matter where our water ultimately comes comes from, our plan emphasizes sustainability and smart water use. Finally, we understand that public safety is a big priority for everyone and that includes us. Our future residents and visitors will want to feel safe and secure just like our neighbors do. Over the years, our vacant land has attracted loitering and illegal dumping, but Lancaster Village will eliminate those issues. Plus, it will generate hundreds of thousands of dollars each year in new tax revenue for the city, contributing directly to essential community services like police and fire protection. While we recognize it is impossible to satisfy everyone fully, our commitment to being good neighbors is heartfelt and sincere. We took forward, excuse me, we look forward to ongoing regular communication and responsiveness to community input and approach we believe should be standard for all developments. If ever an issue emerges, they will have immediate access to us. We're in it for the long haul. Last, I'd like to emphasize that we are a dedicated group of family and friends and not distant developers looking to impose highintensity development on Lancaster. Our vision is a welcoming, vibrant village that provides essential housing, attractive amenities, new jobs, new city revenue, and other substantial economic benefits for our city. We respectfully request your approval. We're confident that thoughtful planning and and active

community engagement has created a proposal that will genuinely enhance the Lancaster community and will be good and will be a good neighbor. We all know it will be something that we can all be proud of. Thank you again for your time and your consideration. Mr. Torque, anyone else from your team speak tonight or just you for now? Well, our team is here. If you have any questions and they'll gladly answer for you, both our architect and our engineers. Uh, but if there's any questions I can answer for you, I'll gladly do so. Does anyone on the commission have any questions for Mr. Torque and the applicant here? I've got a few um and I'm not sure if you're would be answering or maybe your team of consultants would be best. Let's see what your question. Uh first question would be you mentioned uh housing quite a few times. So what's the uh market rate I guess on that like just curiosity? Okay. Unless the city requires any affordable housing within the project, we Okay. Yeah. We're we're strictly looking at market rate housing and our target will be professionals that work in the area whether it's at the hospital, aerospace industry or any other industry that that people are looking uh for a nice apartment building to stay in and we're going to include some nice amenities for the residents in in those buildings. Okay. Thank you. My pleasure. Any other questions? Have you had an opportunity to review the CUP? All the all the terms and conditions required of it? Yes, I have. And do you have any objections to any of those items? None. Your team consents to the to the CU? Yes. Wonderful. Okay. Just one quick question on the maintenance of the gate. Who's going to be required to maintain the gate dayto day? Is it is it in terms of if there were any repair needs, repairs, any damage to make sure that the uh the residents around if it's approved get continue to maintain access? Well, I I haven't really given that any

consideration. However, uh I'm assuming that once we build the fence or the gate, I should say and provide remote access to all of the residents that maintenance should be handled by them thereafter. Do you guys have any other questions for the applicant before we open public comment? No. Okay. We might we there might be something more from you later. So, no problem. I'm here for you. Take a seat and enjoy the show. Thank you very much. So, we we I'm assuming no public comment tonight, right? None. None. Okay. You guys all came for nothing. All right. So, what do we got? Okay. We have quite a bit of cards. We're going to start with Betto Basulto and then after that is Walter Flores. Vetto, are you here? Is that Vetto Vasulto? Come on down. And just so everybody's aware, we do keep a timer. We have a threeminut um speaker time limit and Sandra our recording secretary will keep track on that clock right up there. And while we're waiting for the speaker I think it should be noted that we received a number of letters on this item. I would say over about three dozen public comment letters from the community. We received letters from the supporters alliance for environmental responsibility their council. We rece we received letters for the advocates for the environment. Um the law firm representing Creed LA along with Animal Valley Air Quality Management District, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Um and like I said, a couple dozen um public comment letters as well. So, thank you. Tell us who you are. Hello, my name is

Walter Flores and I'm here to speak against project 15 because it's is very inconsistent with the general plan policies calling for affordable housing. The project proposes two apartment buildings with a total of 118 units with zero affordable units. The general plan calls for mixeduse developments like this providing a mixed use of housing type at different levels of affordability. So the project is consistent with this policy and the California Air Resource Board scoping plan states that the project should be should make at least 20% of the affordable units to lower income residents. This project is also inconsistent with that policy. The project should include affordable units to meet the city's RHNA requirements and it's also inconsistent with this policy. I just hope that you just vote no on this project. Thank you and God bless you. Thank you. Our next speaker, Mr. Basutoto Alfredo is after Mr. Hello. Um hello, my name is Veta Basuto. Um thank you for um thank you for this um afternoon for allowing me to speak to you guys. So my name is Beth Basuto. I am with the DTLA anchor church and our community is in need with this project is large. This development has an opportunity to be a beacon of support during these hard times. We know that a project of this size will give back so much to our community, but it doesn't seem that well. So, the city of Lancaster deserves better. Please vote no on this project. Thank you. Thank you, Alfredo. Alfredo. No last name.

Alfredo going once. Going twice. Okay. No, this him. Oh, that he's coming here. Merry is coming. Thank you. Uh my name is Alfredo and I am also against the proposition just like the gentleman um just came in. Thank you. God bless you. Thank you sir. Zack Stratzers and following Zach is Johnny Escoedo. All right. Good afternoon. Thank you for your time. So, uh, first of all, uh, I recognize that there's a big decision ahead of you today, but I think you're more than aware that 100% of the community that's here is opposed to this project. Now, they may be opposed to this project for various reasons, but I came representing Creed LA, and I'm going to tell you why Creed's opposed to this project. First of all, it's absolutely morally reprehensible that there's no affordable on this project. So, the median area income in Lancaster is 76K and 2.2K in mortgage payment. These are medians. Is that not enough for this project? Is that not enough to warrant putting some affordable in unless we're just trying to gentrify? Unless that's the objective here today. Uh secondly is energy. So if it's not giving anything back to the community, if it has no substantive community benefit program that really everybody is interested and obviously the community is not interested, then the very least it could do is provide its own power. Because when you're talking about hundreds of rental units and hundreds of hotel units, do we not think that that's going to put a significant drain on the area's energy grid? And we've already had fires that have killed people and have decimated communities. So when we're looking at something that does not in the wake of the fires provide any affordable, does not support its own energy. And not only that, puts a ton of traffic on the road. Why do people

oppose all of these warehouse projects that come through? Because of what? Traffic. And this project with the small cars rather than big rigs is going to produce an an extreme amount of traffic by comparison. So I don't think that it takes anyone that has a doctorate in city planning to understand that the community doesn't want it. The grid can't support it. It's essentially illegal based on the reena projections. And then the reality of it is nobody here at in any way benefits other than the developer. Deny this project. Johnny Esco and Joe Hammond after Johnny. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Johnny Escobido. Every project that is brought forth in front of you is an opportunity to strengthen the middle class in Lancaster and in the surrounding areas. It is a chance to fight for working families and their children and and to send a message to our constituents that you are about their needs and their economic mobility. This developer has failed to make a commitment to use responsible contractors that will hire from our lo from local skilled workforce and until they do, we ask that you vote no on this project. Thank you. Thank you. Joe Hammond and Tony Pium is after Joe. Good evening. I'm Joe Hammond. Thank you, commissioners, for hearing us. Uh, White Fims Farms is one of the last farming ruler areas in the city of Lancaster, not the county of LA, but the city of Lancaster. This area is basically not just a housing area, but it's a lifestyle. Most people in the area have farm animals. We ride horses on the

streets and have animals that that are livestock that could be easily injured. If there's ever an accident or something on say like Avenue L and 20th already currently the diversion is L4 and 15th West. The speed limits that they do in a hurry to make it around this accident to get to 15th and and cut across is way above the limits of a residential area. With this, if they build the gate on their property at the end, you're just going to have angry people when they find the gate with angry U-turns requiring angry driving to get back out of the area. So, the gate is not a good solution. That being said, uh currently I live on L4 and that is a very high traffic when there is accidents or any diversions. Avenue M is 15th Street. It's the same diversion. Whenever there's an accident at 20th and M, everybody goes back and cuts down 15th. And if that gates there, that means they're going to make a turn and hit the L4 to make their diversion around. It's constantly at least once a week we have an accident in L and 20th and that's the diversion in the same right now the zoning is currently RR 2.5 converting it to a mixed unit multi I'm sorry mixed unit commercial is doesn't make sense. We're we're a rural area. Everybody lives a rural lifestyle

and to have multiple families is not the same. If you built 181 houses, there's time for development. There's time for for families that like the lifestyle of the area. This is an instant 181 multiple unit families that are now going to be in the same living area with minimum roads to cover for alternate routes. We'll say traffic patterns and such. That to me is my biggest concern with for our kids, family, livestock, and other pets that that we do have. Just simple walking down the streets. Second, real quick is our area is also not maintained by the city. Our streets are private, so we have to maintain them. Thank you, sir. We appreciate your comments tonight. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Pium, Tony Pium, followed up by Jordan Sisson. Good afternoon. My name is Tony Pium. Thank you for uh having us here. Uh like Mr. Hammond said, we are opposed. I think everybody I've talked to, I think it's close to 100% of the of the White Fence Farm is opposed to this development. Uh this might not sound like it's relevant yet, but I this month, April, 40 years ago, uh we opened a business in Lancaster. We've been open 40 years now. We've had a strong business here. And through the up and downs, we've made it through. And uh my wife was born here. Uh graduated AV. I I've been here for over 50 years. Graduated at Palmdale High. And we have at our business always fully supported. Uh everything that Lancaster has come into our store, which they do often, uh Lancaster and other city things, we always support them um

in any way we can. And when they ask, we do it. Uh so what's relevant there is I'm asking for for you guys to support us in the decision of opposing this and knocking this out because we want to keep this a rural area. Uh it was incorporated over 50 years ago. Uh White Fence Farms is something if anybody that's lived here for any amount of time has always looked at as a different kind of place. Uh people that are able to have the animals and such. Not that we're not going to be able to have animals still, but we are a rural area and we want to keep it that way. Um 2009, uh 35 of the council members, uh planning commission, the the citizens that uh also helped the planning spent a lot of time, a lot of hours to make that general plan. It's a huge plan that was put through and passed having an urbanizing area which that project would fit fine in an urbanizing area. We are in the rural area outside of that urbanizing plan. And if you guys just stick to the plan that they did, Rex Paris and some of you may be on the board were also involved in that in 2009. We're just asking that you keep that uh keep it. The hotel is uh a nice hotel. I don't have any disagreement that it doesn't look good, but I don't I don't want to see it. I'm the closest one to it. I built a nice custom home 15 years ago. If any of you guys that are sitting here, I guarantee were looking over my wall. I'm the closest one to it. My wall, I'm going to be at the apartment building. Uh when you put that picture up there on the wall of the of the location, my house was in it because I'm the closest one. And I don't think you guys would want to have that in your backyard either. Yeah, right there. That's my house right there. The big white spot in the middle.

That's me. I'm uh And pop hop over that purple line. You're in the apartment zone. So, I don't want to be looking at that. Uh I'm the closest one to it. I strongly strongly oppose this and I hope that you guys agree with that and help us out. Thank you, Mr. Pium. Jordan Sisson. Thank you for your comments. followed up by Aiden Marshall. Good afternoon, honorable planning commission. My name is Jordan Sison. I'm a land use environmental attorney here on behalf of local 11 and over 100 of its members who live and work in the city. First, I want to thank uh staff for confirming that uh and delivering the hard copies of our comment letter submitted in Friday. Very lengthy. Um at the threshold, um my client's asking you to deny the project approvals. However, if this body decides to move forward, uh you've got some approvals that are being for recommendation, others that could be approved. We would ask that if you want to move forward that all of the project approvals be merely a recommendation. These have to go to council anyways. This would make an appeal by any of the local residents unnecessary and probably really unnecessary since it has to go to council. In my remaining two minutes, I want to highlight three main points outlined in this very lengthy comment letter. First, as you heard, this project is urban sprawl. No matter how you want to cut or slice it or dice it, it's outside the urbanized boundary. Um, this is clearly inconsistent with multiple goals and policies under your general plan goals 18 and 19. Furthermore, it has zero affordable housing. This also seems inconsistent to us numerous housing policies under goals uh 1, two, and four again of the city's or of the city's housing element. Furthermore, this is inconsistent with numerous regional planning policies under SKAG's regional transportation plan, the 2024 plan, which is in effect. And moreover, this project has not even considered the numerous amount of transportation demand management

strategies and traffic mitigations that SCAG has profered and also CAPA. None of this has been studied. So, to the extent that there is lowhanging fruit um being left off the table, you bet there is. Second point, I want to highlight a couple of red flags from their VMT study and their Cali mod. It's their greenhouse gas emission study. These were outlined extensively in the comment letters. These seven red flags caught our eye. One, the qualifications of an architecture firm to do a Cali mod emissions is suspect given the red flags that we've seen elsewhere. Two, the construction phasing is completely inconsistent throughout the document. B, their construction emissions don't match what the worksheets say. Again, another red flag. Fourth, the Cali Mod emission study doesn't include all the uses. This is fundamental. Again, major red flag. Furthermore, if you look inside the worksheets, it discloses undisclosed warehouse uses and userdefined industrial. Why does this matter? because either it was an accident, which is understandable, or maybe it's from another project. Again, these are live questions that have yet to be answered. And furthermore, there is just incredible discrepancy between what the mission state that they're going to create versus what the workshops or the worksheet state. According to them, they're going to have less than 700 GH emissions. That is a third, if not roughly six times lower than similar hotel mixes projects that are much smaller. Thank you. Please review the letter United Project. Thank you so much. Aiden Marshall, followed up by Audi Grubble. Sorry. Uh good afternoon. My name is Aiden Marshall. I'm speaking on behalf of

Creed LA. Uh if you don't know already, Creed LA is an unincorporated association of labor organizations and individuals whose members live and work right here in Lancaster and city or LA County generally. Uh we submitted comments on the original mitigated negative declaration prepared for this project uh back in 2024 uh showing that it was totally incomplete and missing basic environmental studies that need to be required in really any SQA document. Uh we reviewed the revised M &D which uh mind you they should have prepared an EIR because we've submitted uh we uh evidence in support of a fair argument demonstrating the impacts would be significant and unmititigated. Uh but we reviewed the revised DI and it remains just as incomplete as the original one. Uh for example, the M andd is still missing a noise study. A noise study is supposed to measure existing noise levels. It's supposed to estimate the project's impacts on the folks living right across the fence and then identify mitigation. None of this was done in this uh M&D. Our own noise expert estimated the project's impacts and found that they had exceeded the city's quantitative thresholds requiring mitigation in an EIR. The M &D also is missing a health risk analysis. Uh our toxicologists estimated that the project's construction emissions which would be affecting folks again right across the fence would exceed 15 in one million which is above the 10 and 1 million significance threshold requiring mitigation. Uh this could include emission this is very common basic emission controls on the construction equipment. Uh this would protect public health. Uh regarding vehicle miles traveled, just the number of trips generated every day by the project. The mitigated declar uh negative declaration is saying that no mitigation is necessary for the apartments. Uh our transportation expert estimated the

trips that would be generated from the apartment buildings and found that they required mitigation. This would be in the form of fees paid to the city. Currently, the project's only supposed to be paying 27,000 or such uh fees. Our estimate, our expert estimates a much greater amount is required. Uh in some there's a fair argument of a uh a significant impact here that uh it just wasn't disclosed in the M&D. The legal standard requires an EI to be prepared in this exact instance. We're urging the city to continue this hearing and remand the project back to staff to prepare an IR. Thank you so much. Thank you. Audi Grubble followed up by Trista Bellers. You can you can pull that microphone down a little closer to your face. That way you don't have to stand on your tippy toes. It's Audi Grub. Uh I live at 1657 West L4. I've been a resident of Lancaster for 69 years and White Fence Farms for 57. Um when Lancaster incorporated they adopted the county's revised just revised general plan which had changed our designation from rural residential to a different I don't remember what it was but anyway we got all together and filed to change the general plan and it wasn't easy because Lancaster was so young at the time that they didn't even have rules for changing the general plan. So, they made it up as we went along and we were

able to jump all the hoops and we returned it back to rural residential and which it has been since. And at the invitation of the planning department, we also helped to form the rules and regulations and specifications and all you know like setbacks and things like that uh for the rural area and we maintained our watch over over zone changes that came before us and fought the zone changes quite a few. So, um, we're quite an iconic neighborhood, I feel, and have a good past. So, we have tried to help the city and we all of us cherish our rural living in the in White Fence Farms. And we request that you deny this zone change because it is not a project that is uh compatible with our lifestyle and we feel will be very detrimental. So, um, this density is going to be backed right up to the homeowners there. And one of the homes was built by Joe Walker, and he lived there until he died. The uh at the other end of L4 was the home of Hank Shoto, the chief test pilot for um Northrup. And on L8 lived Dick Thomas, who was uh

the pilot for the Tacit Blue, the forerunner for the stealth fighter, and Dick was uh president of our homeowners group at one time. But anyway, I feel that we deserve to be left alone. Please deny this. Thank you, Mr. Trista Bellers, followed up by Douglas Bistone. Good afternoon. My house was built in 1965, uh, 12 years before Lan the city of Lancaster was incorporated. I grew up I am probably one of the youngest or most recent um residents of Lancaster as I grew up in a small Sorry I hate talking. I grew up in a small farming community in the beautiful central coast with ideal climate, low crime and friendly people. My husband and I were watching an episode recently of Bosch last week where an as usual Lancaster was depicted as drug ridden and crimeinfested. We all know Hollywood exaggerates, but this depiction is not far from the truth. When my husband stated we were moving to the Analopee Valley, he promised it would only be for 5 years. We would do our nickel and get out. That is until we both began working in the aerospace industry. Two of our children have moved to the area. One also works in the industry. Five and five years have now turned to 12. A few years ago, we purchased our ideal home that we love in a small rural area in the middle of a big city with great neighbors and no crime. As someone who books travel for executives, VPs, and other distinguished

visitors, I would never choose this location. You can slap the name boutique all you want, but it is not an ideal location. Traffic is too congested for such a a small corner. You can put a small strip mall, but it would not be enough options to be considered centrally located. I also would not book based on personal opinion and experience from those visitors. For example, a visiting executive stayed at a newer hotel on 20th in J8 and was forced to switch hotels due to unsafe and noisy conditions. There were multiple people who were not guests of the hotel utilizing the parking lot as well as the lobby for their own personal use for the sale of narcotics. Another instance at a stay near the baseball field on Avenue I, an executive was entering the slide door where the with their niece when a homeless person attempted to distract the child in order to gain access into the hotel. And yet on another occasion, my husband had a client who was walking down the stairwell of the hotel and came across two homeless people naked and having intercourse. There were at least there are at least eight hotels within 2 miles from the area. Um, one of which was vacant and burned, I believe, by a homeless encampment. um in the and so again not an ideal vacation and I would never recommend to any of those executives um to stay in that location. Please don't take away the one piece of the city that has made me love being here. Uh make the city a proud area to live. Thank you. Thank you ma'am. Douglas Douglas Done followed by Bonnie Pium. Good afternoon.

To be honest with you, I honestly don't know why we're here because we are rural residential and um I moved here three years and eight months ago when I went to my real estate agent and told him I lived in Rancho Vista on the Rancho Vista golf course and a development came in. Our small little neighborhood Walmart with Jack in the Box came in and then various other other businesses came in there. Our culdesac was completely changed six months after the you the units were opened. It was not the same place anymore. Hence why I moved to White Fence Farms. And then I asked my real estate agent other than the Chevron on Ellen 20th, is there anything else that is going to be developed here? And they said, "No, it's rural residential 2.5." I said, "Okay, let me sign on the line." And we bought the home. I don't really understand um why this is going on. Uh number two, I started a chicken farm. I have over 250 chickens. Our neighbors are filled with livestock and crops and gardens and horses and bulls and cows and pigs and goats and sheep and dog kennels. I can go on and on and on. This is where we live. This is what's around us. This is our neighborhood. This is what we put in our backyards. So, you know, when I came here, I I I was so shocked. I'm like, why are we paying so much in property tax? I don't get it because we don't have paved streets at all. We have no sidewalks. We have no curbs. We have no street. We have no uh sewer systems. And we have no street

lights. And guess what? Everyone here absolutely loves it. You know, we do. So, I was very upset when just from my night gazing uh just past Rancho Vista, between Rancho Vista and Palmdale Boulevard, they put up um ne electric uh billboard. My stargazing has gone down by 50% because that lights up everything and they are four and a half miles away. I can I can't see what I used to see. So, I don't know what this is going to bring into the neighborhood, but it's massively changing. The other thing is is in White Fence Farms, it's the only place in Lancaster left that's rural residential. We still have Shadow Acres and we still have Beyond Estates in Palmdale, but in Lancaster, we're the last ones. There is nothing else. We want to keep our neighborhood this way. This is why I bought into this neighborhood. This is what my real estate agent told me would never change. Well, I guess maybe I have to sue them. I don't know. Thank you. [Applause] Bonnie Pium, followed up by Sharon Lee Hartwig. Hi, I'm Bonnie Pium and I live with my husband Tony. That's our little white dot there. Um, so I'm here today to ask you to reject the request to Joan zone change the corner of Avenue L and 15th Street from rural non-urban to mix use urban and commercial, which some of this I'm going to be toothful. I don't really know what all of this means, but I do know

that we shouldn't have businesses in our unurbanized area. Um, in the general plan 2030 for the city of Lancaster, it shows out of 94 square miles, there's 60 miles uh square miles of urbanized area. Within those 60 square miles, there's plenty of miles that are undeveloped. The general plan which was written with the 35 authors and many surveyors uh conducted to the public's opinion states on section one page 27 and I quote the new general plan land use category of mixuse allows for the consideration of other locations within within the urbanizing areas of the city, which that's not us, where opportunities may exist to take advantage of the smart growth development principles and practices." End quote. These authors found it necessary to state within the urbanized area. Quoting again from the same plan, section one, page 29 reads, and I quote, "The rural atmosphere present in some portions of Lancaster is one of the qualities that have attracted people to the area. The importance of preserving these areas has been frequently voiced by residents, particularly in Quartzill and Low Bakers and White Fence Farms. the city has acknowledged the importance of the rural lifestyle. End quote. We're not living in a time where expanding the urbanizing area is even close to necessary. I stand with the

authors of the general plan for Lancaster. When we look at Southern California cities, we find that some of the most desirable cities have those rural and non-urban areas for residential use. And I have I was born here. Um, I'm 60 years old and um I live in the rural area and I request today that the zone change be denied and that the project be built within the urbanizing area. Thank you. Thank you. Sharon Hartwig followed up by Philip Trillo. [Music] Good afternoon and thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. My name is Sharon Hartwig. I live on L4 and 15th, pretty close to Aubrey Audrey. We've all we both live there since the 1960s. And we she and I and all of our neighbors here have serious concerns about this proposed big development that's supposed to be right in our neighborhood. First and foremost, I would like to point out that the roads leading to our homes, as someone has has already said, are private. They are not maintained by the city. They are fully paid for, repaired, and cared for by the residents who live on these streets. We shoulder the cost of every crack, every pothole, and every inch of repairing, repaving, whatever we have to do. Allowing a new development, especially one that would bring a hotel and apartment traffic, to spill out on these roads is simply unfair and unsustainable. Hotels and apartment buildings bring heavy traffic, guests,

deliveries, staff, and often late night comingings and goings. That kind of flow was never intended for a quiet residential area like ours. It would severely impact our safety, increase wear and tear on our privately funded roads, and change the nature of our white fence farms development permanent permanently. As has stated in previous speakers, the Lancaster City general plan is very specific. Residential, rural, light agriculture, 2 and 1/2 acres, one house on two and a half acres. We are taxpayers, voters, business owners, hardworking citizens, some of whom are raising the fourth generation on our properties. My husband, oh, excuse me. I wanted to tell you this. My husband was on the planning commission during Mayor Jack Murphy's era. We experienced the thrill and the excitement when Lancaster became a city. We understand the need for growth, but please, we respectfully urge this commission to consider thoughtfully the concerns of this existing white fence farms community. Please take into consideration for infrastructure safety and for the people who are currently here, not those who might come. Thank you for this opportunity listening to me. Thank you, Mrs. Hartway. Philip Trill followed up by Ivan Trill. Good afternoon. I want to start off by saying thank you. Last October, you helped protect our community from being a lot reszoned for another gas station.

Thank you for giving us a fighting chance and voting against it. Today, many of us have taken the day off work, changed vacation plans, and cut holiday visits with families short to be here once again to ask your help protecting our community. I have read the city plan guide and must say, whoever is in charge of all this typing needs a raise. It is dense. But within the few first few pages, I found quote, "The general plan update indicates that there is enough vacant urban residential density land within the urbanizing area to accommodate the projected 2030 population growth without the need to convert additional rural residential land for urban use. The importance of preserving the urban rural interface has long been voiced by residents as a key issue of the general plan. The city has acknowledged the importance of maintaining rural lifestyle area. As you mentioned in October, you have no real control over what is proposed. You make sure the rule rules are followed and regulations are followed. The plan buildings still need to be resone need reszoning approval. The general plan says there is an importance to preserve rural zoning and that is what we are asking you to do today. We are asking you to preserve this chin tiny chunk of rural zone in the bottom center of Lancaster. There aren't plenty of places there are plenty of places commercial projects can go, but rural land isn't going to be reszoned. Once it is lost, Lancaster loses that part of their history. Several of my neighbors have been here for multiple generations. Families plan longterm here because they value the rural lifestyle and community. Zoning gives us a level of trust and peace of mind knowing our neighbors isn't going to be invaded by Starbucks. None of us expected a five-story hotel to potentially be our neighbor. Now we are uncertain if this reszone is approved. What is there going to do to our community? Now every time someone in our neighborhood sells, we wonder if

some LLC or Madison Capital Group will buy it and turn into a self-s storage restaurant or other hotel. Will the friction between rural and urban lead to zone rest restrictions? When a hotel keeps getting two star reviews because the neighborhood security donkeys and geese keep their guests up at night. Who is the city going to try and make happy? Will some city ordinance be passed chipping away at our rural lifestyle? One of the things that struck me from October was the lady fighting against the car wash being built next to her. The space had been zoned commercial. A commercial business applied to build. There wasn't much she could do. She knew some business could be built when she bought the house. We don't have that problem right now. We are still zoned rural residential. Westland Parker LLC knew when they bought the four parcels 20 years ago that it was zoned and set up for four houses. They tried then to reszone and took a gamble and lost. Instead of cutting their losses and building four homes or even subdividing and building eight houses and making a profit, they held on to the property. Now they are trying to make that gamble pay off yet again. As investors are so fond of telling us, investments are not guarantees. Our community doesn't owe them a payout on their gamble. They knew the risk when they bought the land not zoned and intended for their desires. One of our neighbors, Debbie Robinson, passed away Saturday, and I would like to dedicate the remainder of my time for a moment of silence for her. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Trillo. Von Trujillo, followed up by Stephanie Davis.

Hello. Um, sorry I don't do well talking in front of people. Um, I initially wanted to talk in case he wasn't able to finish his spiel. Uh, one of the things when I was listening to the developer that caught my attention was the fact that the apartments, the hotel are five stories tall. Do you know how tall five stories is? Do you want somebody on the fourth floor or the fifth floor looking down into your backyard? I don't care how far away it is. When I lived in Florida, there was a lot of one-story homes and I lived in a development and I knew that stuff would be developed, but they started putting up, you know, twotory houses and people were looking in your backyard. You have no privacy. We're a rural area. We go rural because we want some privacy. And just to think that there are going to be two huge apartment buildings that are five stories tall looking over everything and then having the hotel being five stories tall looking over everything. It just makes me very sad. Please vote against this. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Heel. Good afternoon, planning commissioners. I'm Stephanie Dennis at 1557 West Avenue, L12, and I have my home and my orchard, which survived the 12-year drought, only losing two of the 303 trees. I strongly object to this development on the grounds that it will result in a

significant detrimental impact upon my own residence and orchard as well as the same degree of detrimental effect upon the residences and residents agricultural enterprises which include both farms with animals and growing crops and we have several places of worship. These negative impacts impinge equitably upon all of mine and my neighbors properties all having physical, mental, emotional and some spiritual aspects. There are several issues which this development would cause but these three are paramount. One, loss of rural landscape and environment including vegetation as well as bird, animal and insect wildlife. Two, further strain on loss of supply and security of already strained supply of water. Three, burdensome, massive and sudden increase of population in our community, causing changes from quiet, safe to walk upon and drive along rural dirt roads into dangerously busy urban thoroughfares and noise, light and air pollutions leading to health problems for humans, farm animals and wildlife in our area. I along with many of my neighbors chose to live in White Fence Farms community because of the relative peace and quiet beautiful land and sky and remote location relative to urban sprawl in order to provide for my needs for health and peace of mind as well as to give me joy and aesthetic pleasure. This development would abolish our rural

residence 2.5 status in order to establish an unnecessary and unwanted commercial zone, thereby contravening the intent and policy goals of general plan, particularly stated on pages 24, 25, and 27. We do not want this development here. It belongs in an already existing commercial zone. Please provide preserve our rural residents 2.5 status and allow us to maintain our state of well-being in our wonderful white fence farms community. Thank you for listening and please accept my apology for all the typo arrows in my letter. Thank you ma'am. Shinino followed by Greg Lewis. Hello. We're right on the bottom left side of of the map on 15th Street West. Um, Mr. Vice Chairman and the members of the planning commission, good afternoon. My wife and I are retired couple living within 700 ft of this massive 10 acre project. We are strongly against changing the zoning to permit this mixeduse commercial development. Here are our specific concerns. The project will bring over a thousand additional vehicles concentrated on the proposed two driveways along 15th Street West. Even without the proposed increase, we're already dealing with problematic speeders tearing down the dirt road. These drivers have no idea that they have uh they're on private street and have no respect for the speed limit. These private streets are not equipped to handle any increase in

volume of traffic. We asked Matt Simmons to guide us on how to control uh speeders and increase public safety. He replied, "No other government agency has any jurisdictions to enforce the traffic laws on private property. 15 Street West Street maintenance is left to the private residents and traffic safety should be considered by the planning commission. This is a serious issue for us. To help ease the traffic congestion and reduce wear on the private section of 15th Street West, consider enforcing a right turn only exit for all traffic leaving the 10acre project. Our latest appraisal informed us that we are living in a FEMA designated flood zone. Living in a flood zone seems surreal here in the desert. And one might disregard these findings as we did uh as did comm uh communities in North Carolina for a false sense of security from flooding and have led to increased development of these areas stated in the insurance journal from January this year. The current flows from Avenue M and uh to Avenue L along 15th Street West. I've seen 15th Street West turn into a raging river as we did last year. February storm dropped 1.5 in in one day and February rainfall total reached 3.9 in through 11 rainy days. The flow carries soils, mud, and debris towards 15th Street West to L intersection creating a flood zone. This 10acre project currently relies solely on 15th Street West to for access for a development of this size. Shouldn't there be two access points, one from L and another from 15th Street West to ensure traffic flow and allow emergency vehicles to enter even during a 100year flood event. Perhaps this project is too ambitious, too large, too invasive for this rural community. Thank you for your

attention to this matter. We trust you will give our concern the serious consideration they deserve and we urge you to vote no to preserve the character and quality of life in our community. Thank you. Thank you Greg Lewis. Uh good afternoon commissioners. My name is Greg Lewis. I'm the business manager of Plumbers and Pipe Fitterers Local 761 representing the Analopee Valley. Uh when a development comes to Lancaster, it's an opportunity to benefit the members of the community, including the people that build the buildings. This development does not do that. This development has not agreed to use local skilled and trained workforce. That means that our members will be on the freeway driving to LA or further looking for work. um when a development comes to Lancaster, it should include uh the people that live here to build those buildings. And uh therefore, we oppose this project and urge you to vote no as well. Thank you, Chase. And I'm going to really mispronounce this last name, Priscio. Good afternoon. My name is Chase Presci from Lzo Jury LLP. I am speaking today on behalf of supporters alliance for environmental responsibility or safer safer respectfully request that the commission deny approval of the revised mitigated negative declaration or MMD for conditional use permit number 21-001 or West Hotel project and instead require preparation of an environmental impact report or EIR. An EIR is required because there is a fair argument that the project will have significant adverse environmental impacts. First, there is a fair argument that the

project may significantly affect biological resources. The M andd failed to account for the special status species on the project site insufficiently analyzed the project's adverse impacts on wildlife and provided mitigation measures that inadequately address the project's biological impacts. Second, there is a fair argument that the project may have significant valley fever impacts. To address these impacts, the M andd relied on deferred mitigation measures which are prohibited under the California Environmental Quality Act or SQA. Third, there is a fair argument that the project may significantly affect noise. The M &D admits that the project may produce noise levels exceeding adjacent residential standards. To address these impacts, the M andd proposed deferred mitigation, which is prohibited by SQA, and fail to address the effectiveness of such mitigation. Fourth, there is a fair argument that the project may adversely affect air quality because the project may have significant impacts related to criteria, air pollutants, and air pollutant health risks. There are also discrepancies in the M andD's air quality report. Furthermore, the project's construction will produce diesel particulate matter, a known carcinogen, creating grave cancer risk to nearby sensitive receptors. Fifth, there is a fair argument that the project may adversely impact indoor air quality. The project's long-term indoor emissions of remaldahhide, a known carcinogen, may expose its future residents and workers to significant health risks. The M &D did not assess this impact. Lastly, there is a fair argument that the project may have significant cumulative impacts. The city cannot assume that the cumulative impacts of several other projects proposed in the same area will be less than significant without any analysis or substantial evidence. For the reasons I have discussed here and in Safer's written comments, Safer again respectfully requests that the commission recommend preparation of an EIR instead of an MMD. Thank you. Thank you, Maria Elena Grado.

Thank you, Jocelyn, Miss Loa, Mr. Moore, Mr. Mr. Dairberry, Mr. Carillo, and Mr. Burden. You all know me. I'm Maria Elena Grado with the Lemon Leaf Cafe. I've been in business in the Analopee Valley for 18 years, and of course, um, I came back to Lancaster to reinvest into our community. And many of my neighbors have been business owners in the Analope Valley for 20, 30, 40, 50 years and contributed millions in jobs, tax dollars, and reinvested. And I'm getting ready to come back and reinvest in Lancaster again. As you know, there are multiple generational people that live in this neighborhood, including my neighbor who I grew up with, who moved back from Rhode Island to come back and reinvest into the Analopee Valley. We are not against proposed new development. We understand the city of Lancaster and the developer has spent a lot of money in preparing this proposal. But this is a general plan against the general plan and against community members that you all know, all work with, all work on different community events that they reinvest in our community. millions of dollars for years. So, what we're asking is we're not against, you know, a development like this, but not in our neighborhood. So, please consider everybody here, as you know, the people that we grew up with that had businesses. The Grubals had businesses, the Hartwigs had businesses. We know the people and we we continue giving back to this community. We're just asking, not in our neighborhood. Thank you. Lorraine Hardy.

Good afternoon and thank you. Um well, I in I'm in total agreement with all of my neighbors here. Um our background, my husband and I, we live on L12 and we also have horses and people go riding their horses all over there. We have, like they said, all kinds of animals and everything. But it's not just that. Um, we like our area. We don't want to be have a hotel or an apartment in our front yard or our backyard. We want to have the freedom to to take our children out, our grandchildren, and just, you know, visit our neighbors like we have done in the past. Um and but another concern that they touched upon slightly is yes the water you know we we pay our water bill but it's going to go up a lot and our electricity they're going they need electricity to do that. So um we are opposed to this bill. Now, I'm not I'm not opposed to these gentlemen doing their project because my husband and I went to the open house down at the hotel on uh um where some wherever it was on 20th and something and it's beautiful. It's very very nice, but not in our area. It's overkill. It's too much. We don't want to have these block walls and they talk about a gate. I don't want a gate. I don't want a clicker. I want to have the freedom to, hey, we're going to go out this way and we're going to go this way and just go down whichever way we want to go. So, we do oppose it and we ask that you also oppose it. That's all. Thank you, ma'am. Drew Mercy. Good afternoon. I'm Drew Mercy with the Analopee Valley Economic Development and

Growth Enterprise. Uh, happy to be here speaking with you as a former member. Um, uh, AV Edge has not taken a position on this specific project and wanted to just come in and talk about a few general broadstrokes about the needs of our community. Um, one of the things we hear repeatedly from our partners at Edwards Air Force Base and the aerospace community is the need for marketplace housing and to to in order to encourage more of the residents that are coming to work at those uh facilities and be able to uh to live here affordably in a good community. So we just ask as you appro as you consider this and any other uh project before you that you take that into account along with the many other valid concerns uh presented. Thank you very much. Thank you Carlos Santa Maria. Hello ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for allowing us to speak. Uh my wife wrote a big thing so I'm just going to speak out from the heart. Um we are my grandchildren are five generations on L4. We grew up you know I've been I lived in the Anal Valley Country Club Burbank and we love this neighborhood. We love having our livestock, our animals. We like riding our dirt bikes in our back. Um, and to build this huge conglomerate thing there is just so ridiculous. It's absurd. As a developer eloquently said, seamless. I'm sorry, sir, but fivetory unit apartment is not seamless. It's ridiculous. It's going to ruin our neighborhood and our way of life. And I really considered this uh

you guys uh that you would say no to this project. It is absolutely absurd. And I'm sorry if I'm getting passionate, but it's really frustrating to be here. Thank you for helping us with that gas station and we appreciate your help with any f future developments of commercial in this area. This place, this property is beautiful for adding four or five or six elegant homes there. Do that. Make the neighborhood happy and proud. Thank you for your time. Conrad Inglehart. Good afternoon. Thank you for this opportunity. Um, it's hard to follow all these people. It seems to me they've said a lot of things that I feel uh including living there. Uh my wife and I have lived there for 50 years and uh we really en enjoy the rural atmosphere. It's difficult to get get to the working part of Lancaster and you don't have to drive so far. So we appreciate that a lot and the acreage that people have uh is important to all of them. Uh a couple things I think are maybe worth repeating. One is I think your intersection there where the people are coming in particularly in a left turn isn't going to be pleasant. Already all the way through our Lancaster we have long lines trying to make left turns. A lot of a lot of that is prevented by the concrete we put in. So you pull up behind the cars that are going through. You can't get into the left turn. So you wait two signals. I do that all of the time. Five years ago, I didn't do that, but I do it now. So, the

traffic is is is is uh seems to be growing. So, uh pollution, I think, is a good thing, too. It's it's putting an awful lot. Most all of them are occupied. We have a few properties still that you can purchase in White Fence Farms, but they're few. Um and they get picked up solely year by year. So, at at any rate, uh I I I just assume maybe that all of those people had uh three automobiles. Some people have more, some people just have one or two, but hardly anybody drives, you know, all three uh cars, you know, to and from every day. So, anyway, I figured out there's probably very conservatively um uh 300 traffic out of the White Fence Farms area. And I figured in in uh the uh uh hotel and uh condo uh development uh is going to be about um maybe 350. Now that's awfully rough obviously because the people living in apartments, but the people living in apartments are going to go someplace every day. The people of the hotel are going to go someplace every day. And so that's kind of a figure. And uh uh it it it might be a lot more than that. I wasn't trying to overstate this, but by the same token, we have 80 acres in that plot that I described. They've got 10 acres. So, you're increasing the vehicle density in that in that whole area there 10 times. And to me, that's big. Traffic going down 20th Street now is is is a chore. Most of that's I think caused by the freeway. The people got tired of the freeway and now they're going down 20th Street. Thank you, sir. Your time's up

this afternoon. Most of the time when I see cars behind me, I just pull over to the side and let them go by because I have to uh you know, so traffic is a problem in this in in this area. So, I guess what I'd like to say is uh I really applaud the people that had excellent presentations and uh I I agree most with with most everything that was said and uh thank you for the opportunity and my vote is turn this down. Oh, one more little point. Sorry, your time's up, sir. I'm done. Okay. Thank you, Rick. Rick Norris. followed by Gary Johnson. I think my light went to sleep. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, good afternoon. As a as a sitting city councilman years ago and the head of the building industry association, I saw studies. I saw what was happening to the Analopee Valley and and contrary to to the belief of some of these people that wanted to remain rural and I respect that. I do respect that. But this is the San Fernando Valley of the 21st century. LA is built out. Orange County is built out. San Diego's built out. They're going to come north and that's what we're going to see and what we have to plan for. the areas that are designated commercial, you know, and and like I said, I respect the re the rural, but at the same time, this is a commercial corner. This is the on-ramp to the freeway. They talk about noise studies. My god, that is the noise. It's people accelerating on the on-ramp. I see that that uh 20 years of ownership of this property that they've sat there, paid taxes, been invested corporation. Excuse

me, sir. I didn't interrupt you. So, thank you. You'll be allowed more time. Okay. Thank you. Um you know, for 20 years, it's just they wanted him to build four houses on that 10 acres. It's not going to happen. It's kitty corner to Costco. It's it's there's a development at 20th and uh and uh Avenue L. That's commercial. That L was designed to be the commercial corridor for the city of Lancaster. 60th West was be the north and west corner. And because this is the San Frernando of the 21st century, we have to expect and the only way we're going to stop it is put up an electronic gate on the 14 freeway and not let anybody in. Other than that, we have to plan for what's good for the community. Um, let's see what else. Oh, housing. They talk about workforce housing. My god, Palmdale Regional, I've been a chairman for 30 years, has 50 residents that are going to be there for three years. Then we're going to uh let's see, 30, then 54, then 100. Those are doctors that we want to continue to live in this community and we have to provide them the housing in the state for them to be able to bring their families up here. That's what we need to plan for. I mean the Creed LA can talk about um it's not union. I I heard the MMN many many times but it's it's also that if the developer who hasn't even contracted out for the uh the building of the the center itself when it's approved. He can't commit them to paying union wages yet. That's the demand of the developer that you require it. Otherwise, we're going to talk about

SQA. So, it it's a chance for us to fix and they have done they have gone out of their way. We had 500 foot resident RA radius. We sent notices to then we sent a,000 foot notices to make sure that everybody got notices to come to the open house, see the plan and open and uh open the discussion. We did everything we could do. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Appreciate your comments. Gary Johnston, followed up by Barbara Kellogg. Thank you for the opportunity to talk to you today. I'm talking to you as perspective from a neighborhood watch standpoint. I just within the last couple years, there's been three neighborhood watches established within the White Fans Farm area for various reasons. I'm going to talk about that. So, we're against this uh development because of we're concerned that uh because we got a lot of horses and livestock on our private lots. Uh many residents maintain that. We're generally concerned that there's already been a lot of increase of traffic in the area, especially speeders. There's been speeders on our roads and there's been burglaries and trespassers in our neighborhood, especially within the last couple years. Therefore, we established three neighborhood watches. I'm one of the neighborhood watch captains. Sharon Hartworth is another one. And Zuma Galagos is one, too. And we signed a joint letter about this effect. You know, we had So, I give you a couple examples. We had a couple homes burglarized, vandalized in the neighborhood in the last two years. There have been many sightings of vehicle scoping our neighborhood. And we're continue to see vehicles traveling at excessive speed on our private roads causing extremely dangerous safety concerns, major dusty conditions, and extreme wear and tear on our roads, which are becoming harder and more

expensive to maintain for our neighborhood private use. You know, 15th Street West is already a very rough and bumpy road. We already talked about people already mentioned that it's a dirt road and between L&M it's owned by the neighbors in each side and required to be maintained by mutually by all the residents in our neighborhood. And we're concerned that unless 15th Street West south of the proposed development is blocked or somehow limited that it's going to get worse. And I just want to say one other thing they're very concerned is we have children in our neighborhood too. And these are unpaved roads that are private, no speed limits. We're concerned. There is traffic that goes on and we're very concerned about it. Just a couple t just a couple days ago, there was a big truck going down 15th Street West going over 40 miles per hour. We think it's actually probably closer to 50 miles per hour just down that road. Could you imagine if there's livestock out there or children out there unaware this is coming about? The truck didn't know about it. If people in the hotel development see that, they don't know about it either. So, we're very concerned about that. We also had easements trespass people on the easements. So we're very concerned about that. So we really want to avoid this. I know I had talked about with Mr. Torquin and with Miss Swain here about possibly mitigating it some and I appreciate their efforts to try to mitigate the concern about by putting up the the gate. But even that is just a bandaid to the real problem we have. We do not want to have this development because it's very much concerned. It can be a very concern from a neighborwide standpoint, crime and safety elements. So, I'm very, very concerned about that. I appreciate your consideration and voting this down. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. [Applause] Barbara Kellogg, followed up by Kyle Boyd. Good afternoon, planning commission. It's good to be here. Thank you for

listening to us. All my reference are going to come from the general plan and the traffic surveys. This should have never ever been considered on as on page 24 of the general plan. It states land surveys conducted for the general plan update indicate that there is enough vacant urban residential density land within the urbanizing area to accommodate the projected 2030 population growth without the need to convert additional rural residential land for urban use. It also states it will be important to ensure that the remaining vacant uncommitted land within the urban area is developed to its highest and best use. This does not include south of Avenue. On page 27, it states, "While new development is important to the future of Lancaster, it should not jeopardize natural open space and the environment. The general plan recommended that vacant infill property within the urbanizing area be developed rather than further outward expansion of the urbanizing area. On page 24, it states, "As the population in San Frernando Valley and the Los Angeles communities continue to grow, there will be fewer areas where the rural lifestyle can be realized. The rural lifestyle will continue to be a motivating factor for some to immigrate to the Anlo Valley. The city has acknowledged the importance of that rural lifestyle. Many people who have moved here came for that exact reason. On page 38, it states, "Land used incompat incompatibilities will arise if urban and rural uses are located adjacent to one another. There are plenty of spaces within the urbanizing area where this project could be completed and not have the drastic negative effects it will have on our area. It is not only the visual incompatibilities, but it's the lifestyle differences that must be considered. The traffic survey states on

page four that it will go from an LOS level A to levels C and D, making it become a very hazardous intersection with over 12,000 trips per day. There are plenty of other places where this project could be built without having that impact. For example, 20th West and Avenue H, both sides of the freeway. 20th West and Avenue I and Lancaster Boulevard, east side of the freeway. Lancaster Boulevard and Avenue I from 30th West to Valley Central Way, just to mention a few. I found over 12, 15 places that this could be built. We're not against the growth in Analopee Valley, just not in this area that's not included in the general plan. The code of ordinances 17.08.040 040 states that it shall determine whether it is permitted or not based on the finding that the proposed use would complement and be able to exist in harmony in the same zone. There isn't one thing in this project that would complement or be in harmony in our area. It will only bring more havoc for an area that should be preserved. I would hope you would seriously consider moving this project to the infill land and preserve our area and vote no on the pres proposal. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Kellogg. We have Kyle Boyd followed up by Kristen Boy. Thank you. Do you mind putting the bigger map up before we start my time that shows the actual There we go. Sure. If you have the even bigger one that shows the all of the open space in the city of Lancaster in the urbanized you did earlier. Part of the presentation. Not part of the presentation. Okay. I am against the project. I'm a public servant for the last 22 years. I chose to stay in Lancaster for all of my public service. I'm also a business order in the city of Lancaster. Uh I raised six kids in this neighborhood. Um

I am not paid by the corporation to be here. I'm not paid by a city or a uh really rich family multi-million dollar business to develop in Lancaster that has no connection to the community whatsoever. This is a commercial project in a residential area. We are putting a commercial development in a residential area. That's what this is. Let's not be cutting anything about it. It's a money-making project. We would not be here if these were multi-million dollar homes on 2 and a half acre lots. That would still make them a lot of money, just not as much as this. This is literally a outside company trying to make money off of our backs. We are taxpayers. We're here because we live here, because we're part of this community, and because we want to support Lancaster. We're from Lancaster. We are Lancaster. We are not a out of town developer trying to ruin a rural area. Does anybody here really want to be San Franando Valley? The planning commission in San Frernando Valley is the reason that San Franando Valley is such a mess. Nobody wants to live there because of what they've done to that area. And it's the planning commissions there that ruined San Frernando Valley. And the reason that nobody wants to live there, you have the opportunity not to make Lancaster San Fernando Valley. Thank you, Kristen Boyd, followed by Regina Bali. Hello. Good afternoon. Honorable members of the Lancaster City Planning Commission, uh my name is Kristen Boyd. I'm a dedicated lifelong resident of Lancaster. I'm here to strongly oppose the proposed resoning of properties at Avenue L and 15th Street West from rural residential 2.5 to commercial mixeduse.

This massive development, a towering five-story hotel, 181 apartments, restaurants, a drive-thru, a clubhouse, three pools, and 799 parking spaces, endangers the life of over a thousand residents and the surrounding neighborhood. It violates our general plan and undermines the trust we've placed in you, our appointed planners, to prioritize the well-being of Lancaster citizens over the profits of a single outside developer. Uh, first, this resoning directly contradicts the city of Lancaster's general plan 2030, which you are tasked with upholding. The general plan mandates prioritizing infill development in existing commercial zones before expanding into rural areas like Avenue L and 15th Street West. With over 50 vacant lots available in Lancaster's urban core, there is no need or justification for reszoning rural residential land. The general plan is our community's blueprint for a balanced growth designed to protect rural rural sorry neighborhoods like ours. Approving this resoning would defy that vision. Disregarding your responsibility to ensure development aligns with Lancaster's long-term goals. Second, let's consider the applicant, Mr. Torquin, a West Hollywood resident who leads a multi-billion dollar corporation. He purchased these properties fully aware they were zoned rural residential 2.5 expecting he could persuade you to change sorry to change the zoning for his personal personal financial gain. He would have purchased sorry he could have purchased property to develop in Lancaster that was already zoned commercial. Instead he wants to uproot a lovely serene area of Lancaster. He has no ties to Lancaster, no investment in our community's future, and no concern or respect for the 10,00 plus residents

whose lives that will be disrupted by this sprawling urban project. His claim that nobody wants to live by the freeway is baseless. Uh dozens of families live happily in homes along the freeway from Avenue L to Avenue P. This proposal isn't about enhancing Lancaster. It's about one man's profit at the cost of our neighborhood's peace and rural character. Finally, I appeal to your duty as our planning commission. Um, you were appointed to make recommendations that serve the best interest of Lancaster citizens, not a distant developer. Over 10,000 residents, families, business owners, doctors, physicians assistants, nurses, LA County firemen, LA County Sheriff's deputies, contractors, church leaders, and actively involved community members live in this area. and overwhelmingly oppose this project. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Board. Regina Bali, followed by Kevin Green. Hello ladies and gentlemen. Um my name is Regina Bal and I live here in the Analope Valley. I lived here for 10 years. Um when projects are being built in our area, I feel it's an opportunity to use local and skilled trained workforce. And since this will not be used towards this project, I oppose and I urge you to please vote no. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Kevin Green, followed by Brenda Compost. Hi guys, Kevin been here since 1969. My mother lives in White Fitz Farms. I have a project on the east side of the freeway that I went through a CUP and developed. I am a developer. I'm a

contractor. I'm a roofing contractor. I've been doing this for 45 years. I am 100% for development. I am not for this development. We as the people need to make decisions. You guys get to make these decisions. We put you there for that reason. The heart of this meeting is everybody doesn't want this. Now, here's a little twist. This 10 acres could be traded for property you have on 47th Street East. I mean, West. You guys got 22 acres out there that was designated for park. You could trade them 10. Put a park right there. Solve the whole problem. Think about it. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Green. Brenda Compost, followed by Juan Del Dora. Hello. Uh, good afternoon everybody. My name is Brenda and I'm here. I'm asking before why am I here? And I look in my kids and I said, "Nobody's talking about uh lowincome families, affordable uh units. It's a I hearund something uh units, but you guys don't talking about us. We working hard and we can affordable this uh rent. That's I think uh no local jobs to for people who can work uh development that break too. Uh it's sad you know because uh nobody talk about us. I really respect all these people and I'm in your side honestly because we need uh support and say no definitely no because it's nothing good for us. You know we have kids we have uh families who work really hard and don't have money to pay so high rents is many

traffic. There's a lot of stuff involved. I'm respect you too honestly because that's your job. But these people need to be happy too. You know we're not young girls. We really spend the whole life in this city and we need to help to to make these people happy. I can say in the last days you know but I make happy these people say no definin no I have my mother I have my sisters and everything living too. I have my daughter living here too and I need that very nice place for my kids. They deserve because they growing and please if you have something in mind think about that. Absolutely. Please we don't work for million dollars. We work like a low income families. And this time is really hard for us to ask everybody here to say no. But in my mind I heard a lot of stuff about these people and I said why why everybody here today for the same thing. We need to be on the same page and the same site. I really respect everybody in this room. Please help us to put in mind and say no definitely no it's not good. It's 180 uh units and nothing for us nothing for uh affordable rent. We don't like to move another place. We like to live here. We really like to grow the kids in this city. But if nobody help us, what can I do? You know, that's so sad. When I hear something like that is nobody think and poor people. That's why everybody get evictions. Everybody's in the street. A lot of homeless because we don't help. We just say, "Okay, if you have the money, do it." But it's not about money.

That's a bad uh feelings. Please say no. Thank you and have a nice day. Thank you. Delara followed by [Applause] Randy. Good afternoon. Um I'm Juan and I'm speaking uh this afternoon to uh because I oppose this project. Um when I first heard about this project, I was actually excited. I was like, "Okay, new building, new new housing develop." But then I started looking into it and honestly I feel this project is not a good one. Why wouldn't all these units being built be affordable? We need housing that our residents of Lancaster can afford. Let's build something affordable. You know, I'm with the rural living, but you know, eventually we're going to have to like update a little bit and and maybe some of us who who live in other areas want to come here, but we want to have like a a Costco, a Target, or this that or a little more, you know, but I I'm with the people that are with rural living, but eventually we're going to need some stores and different stuff. Anyways, but I strongly oppose this project and thank you so much for your time. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Randy Terrell and Luis Gomez is next. My name's Randy. I'm coming to you as a resident. I actually live on the north side of L uh just in the top left corner of that map. And uh looks like they didn't like show up today. So, coming to you uh representing all of the north of L non-farm residents. Um, and I guarantee you we are way more numerous than those on the other side. And um, first off, I want to say that um, the

folks uh, who are proposing this project done a great job, better than I've seen um, for a lot of other things uh, including the gas station in terms of tour up and houses, letters of the residents, trying to listen and um, trying to do what's good for the city of Lancaster. Um, one of the things uh that the reason I support this project um is that the commercial center on the left side, we've had I've only been here for 15 years. Uh for 14 of those years, we've had an empty Rouse uh in its blight and I'm fed up with it. And we need development in order to bring more development. I am tired of uh driving past that all the time. And so the fact that like we have something I love the like future commercial on the other side um I want to see it. I want to see it. I want to see it for all those people in our neighborhood. Um the other thing um is um there were a lot of special interest speakers uh up here today. Um they would have opposed this regardless of what was in it. affordable housing, the environmental stuff, they they would have been opposed to it. So, take that for what it is. And then lastly, um I heard urban sprawl. Um we're next to a freeway. This is next to a freeway. So, urban sprawl, ridiculous. Um give me a break. And then we're down the street from Costco. Now, Costco was already here when I got here 15 years ago, but I would bet money that a lot of these same people were out here opposing the Costco. So, just take that in mind. I encourage you to support this project. Uh, we need it. City needs it. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Luis Gomez.

Good afternoon everyone. My name is Jose Gomez, Jose Luis Gomez. Um, I wanted to speak up against this project and my concerns with it. Um, my biggest concern uh comes from not knowing if these units are going to be affordable and meant for lowincome families. Uh, we need affordable housing and it isn't clear if that will be the case. I think you should you shouldn't support this project until they make sure that this project is affordable for the families that live here in Lancaster. Thank you. Thank you, sir. [Applause] That's it, chairman. That's it. Yes. Great. Well, thank you all for your comments. Mr. Chairman, may I speak again? Mr. Tin, I think the Excuse me, Mr. Boyd. Yeah, we're going to give you an opportunity to speak. We do need to have some questions from the staff if you don't mind. Okay. Um, before I get started, does anyone on the commission have any questions staff specific the project? Oh, wait. I do. I have a bunch. So, I'll let I'll let Miss Low, Miss Underwood, Mr. Moore. Okay. Yeah. Go ahead. All right. Uh so so the first question I've got um I I'll ask questions from a few different perspectives. Um so I am an architect so a lot of my questions so initially be focused on that. So first question I have is when I see these trees what what kind of tree I mean was a 50% shading study conducted and is that going to be achieved with this? What shading study are you referring to? Uh just in general I mean I um so shading studies are not required as part of development. Got it. um that that isn't an issue and um it's not something we have required of developers to submit um in the past. Okay, understood. Um the second question I would have would have to do with drainage. Um I see

that the site is straighting to the north just based off these contours, but I am unclear where there is a uh like a drainage channel and where does the water lead? So, I'm going to give a quick answer and then I'm going to turn it over to um our engineering staff, but the project site itself is in the what's called Xshaded zone. So, it's not in a FEMA flood zone. It's in an area that could potentially flood at times depending on it, but it's not one that requires you to elevate construction out of a flood zone. Right. So, my question was more geared towards water retention. Correct. They are required to put in a master plan of drainage facility that in 15th along their project site and Stephen Couo and Nick Goden um are both here and can answer that more specifically, but there is no drainage basin being provided on the site. So all water would blow off site elsewhere. Is that correct? That's a that's an engineering question. The project does is showing a um underground storage um to to retain their their drainage. Not so there's not a uh a basin, but their plans show a a underground storage to mitigate their drainage portions of the drainage will go into the existing they're proposing to to go into the existing channel by the on-ramp, the southbound on-ramp there. And but they all are also required to do a uh 42 inch 42inch storm drain in 15th Street West also as part of their drainage improvements. Okay, thank you. I I see that on here now. Underground uh water QMP basin. This is just a little crowded. Um is there any uh uh public transportation associated with this? uh any planned like bus routes or anything

like that that would be serving 180 units. There are bus routes in the area but ABCA did not request a bus stop in front of it. It is within half a mile of highquality transit or the transit center at city park. Um the state recently just changed the definition of highquality transit to be um 20-minut headway or less. Um so any bus stops that are in the vicinity of the projects that qualify But there's not going to be a new bus stop at this location. Okay. Okay. I have a a few questions. I think um really probably more so in relation to the um the mitigating negative declaration, some of the comments that were made by council today. Um, so I'll go through what what what's our comment or response with respect to the um the allegations that there's going to be a noise issue that we didn't didn't dive deep enough on the noise issue. So there is a mitigation measure to ensure that noise at the property line is within the noise parameters but they are correct. There was no noise study done. Now looking at some of the comments about the intersection at 15th and L. So for traffic, there's no access to the facility off of L itself. Correct. Everything is entirely off of 15 Tree West. That is correct. And we have Does it look am I seeing this correctly that maybe that there's exits out of the apartment buildings to exit straight onto 15th or am I incorrect? You are incorrect. Okay. There are two driveways

off of from the project site onto 15th. There's one in the center um that and then there's one on the southern end of the property. Entry into the parking garages for the the residential buildings are interior to the site. They will not be entering or exiting directly on the 15th. Are there any modifications expected on Avenue L at 15th? Um coming I guess west like from over the freeway on that uh turn lane there to turn left into the proposed project. I will defer to the traffic engineer. Yes. As part of the uh traffic study that was conducted for this project, we uh determined that there would be the need for a second westbound left turn. So, the project would be required as a mitigation measure to install a second westbound left turn lane at 15th and L. Also to extend the um left turn pocket so that um the queuing does not um come out of the pocket and end up into uh through traffic. the travel wins. Okay, I think that's most of my notes. Any other commissioners have any comments or questions for staff? Mr. Torquin, do you have any response for the public? Yes, I do. Actually, before he chimes in, there's a couple of things that I want to point out that were raised just for clarification. Perfect. Um, the first thing I wanted to point out is the city does not have a minimum percentage of affordable housing required for any housing development. We do have affordable housing numbers that we have to meet associated with Reena. Um, our Reena numbers through 2029 are 9,023. Um, and we have certain percentages of that total number is

required to be affordable. Um, last year alone we signed off CFOs on 464 affordable housing units. Um, and in addition to I think 700ish regular affordable housing units and we have several other affordable housing units currently under construction. Um, specifically 499 on Sierra Highway. Um, another housing track off of 30th and K. and we had a new apartment complex which is 100% affordable filed two weeks ago. Um so there are affordable projects coming but there's not a specific number that every housing developer is required to meet. Um and then with respect to VMT we do have an adopted VMT mitigation program. Um any VMT studies that are prepared are reviewed by our traffic engineer and approved. um they utilize SCAg methodology for the preparation of those studies and comply with our VMT um policies and adopted adopted thresholds. Um this particular project screens out for the commercial um and it was determined that the apartment complexes wouldn't generate a BMT impact. Their BMT numbers would be at least 15% below the threshold. So only the hotel is required to pay and mitigate. So thank you Miss Swain. Any questions Miss Wayne on that? Really quickly there were several comments made about the environmental impact report. Is are we going to speak to that at all? Just because I know many people raised questions about that. So SQL allows you to do three different levels of environmental review.

Exemption being the the smallest lowest level initial study mitigated NEG deck being the next level. EIR um typically I think most people have seen those for really big projects. Um staff feels that this qualifies for mitigated NEG deck. Um it does have mitigation measures. mitigation measures for things like biological resources um have the specific language requested by CDFW. Um we have the the requested language from the air district um included in the document. Um a health risk assessment is not required. It's not one of four categories. It's not a dry cleaner. It's not a gas station. It's not a distribution facility. And it's not a highway project. Um, so it does not need a health risk assessment. Um, beyond that, staff doesn't believe that it needs an ER. Thank you. And if you and for th those of us in the audience that have attended these meetings before, the city of Lancaster didn't pick this project. This the applicant picked the project for the site. Our job and the staff's job and this commission's job is to analyze it pursuant to what's put before us in the city code. We've got to act in this dis as emotionless. We've got to make sure that we have an ability to determine what the code says. We do understand that your prop this property is rule residential, but the code also provides an opportunity for any of you and this applicant to to make a request for a zone change that is going to go after today's meeting before the city council. if it is approved. So again, this is not a project that the city chose. So it's not something that the commission chose. This is what the applicant chose and presented to the city has worked for years to try to present this tonight before all of us. So you know, with that

said, I'll give Mr. Torquin time to respond if he if he wants the opportunity to. He's not he's not obliged. If I may, please. Thank you. Uh I've made notes of the uh concerns of the residents and I'd like to comment on them. First of all, a couple of the last uh speakers had concerns about affordability of units and also jobs. Our project will create a lot of jobs. Whether it's working at the hotel, whether it's working in the apartment buildings or at the restaurants, we're going to be creating jobs. Number one. Number two, in terms of affordability, we're more than happy to have discussions with the city to allocate a certain number of the apartment units for affordable. We never said no to that. It wasn't required, but we're 100% open to discussion to provide affordable housing for some of the residents. Number three, the discussion of using local contractors, subcontractors, and labor. We're nowhere close to construction drawings. So, we are not in a position right now to commit to using local labor. We have no opposition to it. Why would we not want to have that money invested within the community? So, anyone who has those concerns, feel free to contact me when our plans are done ready for pooling permit and getting ready for construction financing. The next topic I'd like to touch on is uh usage of power. All of our facilities whether the hotel, the apartment buildings or any restaurants which may be built on the side will have solar panels to reduce the usage of electricity as much as possible.

Um, some of the residents expressed their concerns about issues that are happening in the neighborhood. As a developer, we're not responsible for what is happening in the neighborhood. Now, Mr. Gary Johnson in a letter that he wrote, and I discussed it with him last Thursday, he wrote his opposition after numerous discussions that we'd had, same with Mr. Piston and and Mr. Shin and so forth. In the beginning, they were very happy with the mitigation u proposals that we had put up a gate to not allow people to travel through fence off the uh easement for the utilities and so forth. At the second open house that we had, one of the attendees expressed concern that people come off Avenue M to travel north on 15th Street. They are doing that now. But what I suggested to them was that if we're willing to spend money to put up a gate and you know what, we're open to maintaining it. That was another subject that came up. We have no problem maintaining that gate. I suggested that the residents each put up a couple hundred dollar each and put up a gate by Avenue M and says, you know, private uh traffic only for residents only. They were open to that. Mr. Piston at our last open house very much liked that idea but yet today uh he's opposed to what we're discussing. The other thing is noise factor. The way our buildings are going to be built, we're going to reduce the sound and the noise that comes from the freeway. Our buildings are going to block that noise and our buildings are going to block any dirt coming up. Right now it's a 10acre uh dirt lot, but when we have uh asphalt and a paved road uh uh over there, they're not going to have that air pollution issue from dirt coming from the freeway and same with

the noise. Okay. Another objection they had was apartments overlooking the neighborhood. The apartment buildings are going to face east west. There are no homes to the east. It's only the freeway. And to the uh west is currently vacant land and and then further down some commercial properties. Okay. Uh in terms of reports, biological reports, traffic studies, VMT, uh and all of the reports that were required, we provided the city planning department with all of those supports and all of those reports and all of them have been satisfactory. Okay. Um, oh, in terms of traffic, our traffic study showed that there's going to be minimum effect on the increase of traffic on Avenue L. And as Mr. Simons pointed out, we're going to have a second left turn lane so that traffic westbound on on uh uh L does not back up going towards 10th Street. Let's see. Oh, in terms of drainage, it was already addressed. Uh, our engineer, Ryan Duke, who's here, he's provided drainage that I think is going to improve the drainage of the flood problems that they have uh discussed with us. The the folks at the White Fence Farms discussed with us the drainage problem when there is u heavy rains or floods. Our drainage uh plants are going to improve that system so they won't be uh experiencing the same issues. Um, that's it. I pretty much uh Oh, and one last thing. There's discussion about crime. Professionals that will be

staying at the hotel are not going to bring uh crime to the neighborhood. If there is a criminal effect right now, it's not going to be exaserated by a project. The hotel residents or occupants are mainly engineers that are here for four days, sometimes five days a week. They go to work, they come back and the people that are going to live at the apartment buildings, they're going to be local employees of all kind with all kinds of occupations and their families. So I do not understand their concern about crime. They had expressed to us concern about crime with the Maverick station coming in. They felt that uh teenagers trying to buy liquor at a convenience store and homeless and drug trafficking and so forth. Our project has none of that. Our project is going to enhance this neighborhood. And lastly, the assertion that I'm some billionaire from the west side, you know, trying to build this project here is so far from the truth. I wish I was a billionaire so I wouldn't have to be standing here to try to convince them that I'm trying to do something nice for the neighborhood. Thank you very much again for your time. Mr. Torin, yes. You said your family's own this property for a number of years. Is that true? 20 years. If you want to know exactly who is involved, my wife and I, my two sisters and their spouses, one of them is here. My 82year-old uncle and three of my very close friends, one of them who is sitting over here. We we're not this big-time developers from the west side trying to take over Lancaster. This is a 20-year project, you know, owned by you this group of people. And none of us are billionaires. None of us are even multi-millionaires. At at any point over the your ownership period, were you ever approached by anybody to develop this for uh for residential use? Absolutely not. That's what I mentioned in my letter. Not one. No residential

developer is going to build homes sitting on the freeway. And I'd be surprised if planning or city council would like to see homes sitting on the freeway. Anyone else have any questions for Mr. Torquin? Uh yeah, just one. Um the resident that mentioned the you know the five stories and looking over into their yards and things. Um from what I heard she was referencing the hotel. So, I just want to clarify. You mentioned the apartments, but is the hotel? Oh, but they mentioned both. Yeah. Is it possible to bring the aerial photo so I can just point out something? Okay. Thank you very much. Yes. Yes. This is perfect. So, we're not discussing anything to the west or the north or the east. So, to the south there are, from what I see on this uh photo, there are three homes. Okay? And the homes are a good distance away from where the setback of the hotel building will be on the north side over there. And when we met with the captains of White Fence Farm, one of their concerns was evening lights. So we discussed with the architect that all lighting will have to be face down facing down not up. So that would only uh illuminate the back side of the hotel building. So, how many homes are occupants of the hotels going to be looking at during the day? They're going to be at their jobs and during the evening, they're going to be too tired to stare out into the darkness. So, I if there were a lot of homes over there, I would completely understand their position. But those are temporary weekly people. And when they come back to their hotel room, they want to eat dinner and go to sleep and go to work the next day. And it it concerns

three homes to the south. Thank you. With a with a good distance away from those homes, Commissioner Burton, the hotel is set back 42 feet from the property line. Um, and I believe when I was measuring on an aerial from the hotel to the nearest occupied building was about 300 feet. Thank you. Any other comments or questions for the applicant, commissioners? Anything? No. Mr. Torquin, thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Okay, with no other speakers, uh, without objection, we'll close the public hearing. Yeah. So, anyone have any other comments or questions? Okay. So, we'll entertain a motion if it's available. Have we already closed the public hearing, ma'am? So again, commissioners, anyone have an opportunity or want to present a motion? Make the recommendation that we are we reading this the whole thing. All right. to adopt resolution number 25-04 recommending approval to the city council for general plan amendment GPA

number 21-001 to change the general plan designation to MU and zone change number 21-001 to change the zoning to MU approving the tenative track map number 24-001 subdividing the subject property into six lots approving conditional use permit number 21-00001 for the construction and operation/ occupancy of a mixeduse development consisting of 181 multifamily residential units, a 235 room hotel, 12800 12,800 square ft of retail restaurant space and a 3,800 square foot clubhouse located on approximately 10 gross acres at the southeast corner of Avenue L and 15th Street West. APN's 3109-026- 032 and 040- 042-044 adopting the initial studies mitigated negative declaration SC number 2024 080570 approving the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and authorizing staff to execute and file the notice Ive determination approval of the tenative track map and a conditional use permit will not become effective until approval of the general plan amendment and zone change. Okay. A motion by commissioner Loa. Do I have a second? I'll second. Second by Commissioner Curio. Okay. Let's vote.

Okay, motion carries 42. Okay, we'll go ahead and open up public hearing item number four. This is a 2025 zone tax amendment to titles 28,15 16 and 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code and general plan amendment to the safety element of the general plan. Thanks for nothing. This uh is going to be presented tonight by Miss Brackie. Thank you members of the planning commission. The final item before you today is the 2025 zone text and general plan amendments. This proposal includes amendments to titles. Miss Brekie. Yeah, we can wait a minute. Let's wait a minute. Okay. How you doing?

I think most of the peanut galleries left. We can continue. Yes, sir. Uh the final item before you today is the 2025 zone text and general plan amendments. This proposal includes amendments to titles 2, 8, 15, 16, and 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code, as well as a minor update to the safety element of the general plan. Each of these changes are intended to provide clarification, consistency, and compliance with city policies and state requirements. I want to highlight that these items are only text amendments. They do not include any changes to the zoning map or densities, and they involve no construction or development. These items also will require city council approval following planning commission recommendation. The zone text amendments summarized in the staff report and provided as both red lines and clean edits are broken out into four categories. Administrative corrections primarily consist of further implementation of the 2023 housing element updates. These are several clerical corrections that are needed to effectuate those changes. Code clarifications include reorganizations, uh the removal of outdated references, and the correction of typos and grammar in the code. New proposals consist of a policy concept or land use category which is new to the code. And policy implementations include the codification of several existing city policies and state mandates which may already be in effect. I'll providing I'll be providing just one or two examples of each category for reference. As I said, administrative corrections are prim primarily items which are needed to further clarify the 2023 housing element updates. For example, removing several definitions and terms which conflict with the new um adopted ADU standards. Examples of code clarifications include updating the order of succession for city council and planning commission in the event of a local state of emergency to match current titles and processes and clarifying language on which a technicality was prohibiting legitimate

massage businesses in the city. Also included in this category is the new permitted use charts. Previously the code provided use categories and required entitlements in the list format shown on the left. This has been updated to a table to be more user friendly and to match the permitted use chart in the residential zone section. In terms of new proposals, this includes the establishment of required entitlements for tobacco establishments, gun stores, animal shelters, and private car washes to name a few examples. Previously, these uses were not adequately accounted for by our code. So, these may be uses that are not new to the city but are new to our uh municipal code. Uh, another example is the establishment of an adjustment entitlement which would allow for more flexibility in development essentially serving as a smaller variance. In terms of policy implementation, this category includes things like requiring impact fee payments at occupancy rather than at permit issuance for certain projects in compliance with state law and implementing the established requirement for hydrogen fueling at gas stations. Finally, one change is proposed to the general plan. This includes the replacement of a few sentences in the safety element to reflect the updated local hazard mitigation plan which was just adopted by city council. In conclusion, staff recommend that the planning commission adopt resolution 2550 recommending approval to the city council for the 2025 zone text amendments and 2025 general plan amendment. I'm available if you have any questions. Wonderful. Thanks, Miss Breie. Anyone have any questions on these changes or amendments to the code? So again, we're not our this body is not making the changes ourselves. This change is going to be is merely a recommendation so the city council can approve it. So with that in mind, I'll entertain a motion. Someone's I'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion.

I'd like to put forth the motion for the planning commission to adopt resolution 25-05 recommending approval to the city council for zone text amendment number 25-001 for the two 2025 zone text amendment to titles 28 15 16 and 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code and general plan amendment number 25-001 for the update to the safety element of the general plan to provide clarification consistency and compliance with city policies and state requirements. Okay. Do I have a second? I second. I think Miss Underwood got that one. So, we got a second by Miss Underwood. Yes. All right. Let's vote. Okay. The motion carries 6 with one absent. Okay. So, we've got our next up is our community development director announcements. What do we have, Miss Garay? I will keep it short and sweet. Just want to give you a quick preview of uh we're looking what we are looking for the next uh May PC agenda. Uh we have a couple items. It's going to be a we think a pretty busy meeting. Um one is a westside annexation. So, we're actually going to be taking comments on the EIR for that project. Um you guys got a preview at the last meeting, but this is just specifically to talk about the EIR. Um, we also have a an industrial project. It's the Avenue M industrial project which uh Mrs. Brekie has been working on. We have the Kingbar review. We passed the resolution tonight. So, that'll come back at the next meeting and we'll discuss in more detail. And that'll be your opportunity to either uh revoke or not um the the current cup that they have. Um we also have an amendment to a cup uh 2217. This was for a car wash that was approved a couple years ago. I think it was last year. Um, so there's an amendment to that and then the last one will be a recuperative care facility um on Elm Avenue. So those are

some of the items that we're looking forward um to in May. And then another announcement, we actually um just hired an assistant director. His name is Carlos Yato and he will start next Monday. So he may he'll probably participate in the next meeting as well. All right, good news. Okay, last up I think most everyone spoke already but is uh public business from the floor. Uh this is the portion of the agenda that allows an individual the opportunity to address the commission on any subject regarding city business under state legislation. No action can be taken on non-aggenda items. Members of the public should be aware that of when addressing this planning commission regarding items not specifically referenced in the agenda. Please complete a speaker card for the recording secretary. Speaker cards are available at the rear of the council chambers. Individual speakers are limited to three minutes each. Do we have any speakers on public business? No speaker cards. Okay, I guess we uh we stand adjourned. Okay, thanks staff. Yeah, it was. Yeah. Well, we're out here serving the community, giving out some school supplies, and just just, you know, watching our community expand and grow and serve together. [Music] This is fantastic. I mean, I don't know how this can't be your favorite event of the year. There are literally thousands of people, kids, adults, you name