Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay. It's 04:00. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the Redlands Planning Commission meeting for 12/09/2025. We do have a quorum present. Are there any public comments on matters not on today's agenda? Seeing none, we move on to item number two, presentations. We have none. Item number three is the consent calendar a, meeting minutes of 10/14/2025 B final map for parcel map number 20256 C final map for parcel map number 20696 and D extension of time for CUP number 1191 are there any questions about the consent calendar seeing none is there a motion to approve the consent calendar

I motion we approve the consent calendar second

all in favor

aye any

opposed motion Thank you. Moving item two on to number four old business we have none. I am missing item number five. I think it's just wrong numbered wrong. Okay. Number five, new business, number six a. Is that correct? Does that match the agenda? Six a or five a?

Six a.

Okay. Do you have a five?

It's old business.

Perfect. Okay. Item 6a is a request for final approval of conditional use permit number 1215 to establish and operate a canine day care and overnight boarding facility inside a commercial building located at 1448 Industrial Park Avenue, and I will now open the public hearing for this item. Has any commissioner had any ex parte communications with the applicant on this item? Seeing none, staff presentation by Rose Marie Montoya miss Montoya

thank you chair and members of the commission I'm just having a little bit of trouble with the slides here

Your technology is like my numbers.

Thank you chair and members of the commission. This is conditional use permit number 1215. The applicant requests to establish and operate an indoor canine daycare and overnight boarding facility within an existing 6,125 square foot commercial suite located at 1448 Industrial Park Avenue within the Tri City Shopping Center. The highlighted area in yellow is the location of the tenant space in which the proposed use is to take place. The subject site has a general plan land use designation of Transit Village where a complimentary mix of commercial uses including animal services, neighborhood serving stores, and regional shopping centers are encouraged.

The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the designation and with the surrounding uses. The project site is located within the village general district of the Transit Village's specific plan where pet boarding and kennels and pet day care facilities are allowed subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The scope of work for the proposed tenant improvement is contained entirely within the interior of the suite. The floor plan for phase one on the right side of the screen, includes designated indoor play rooms, individual kennels for overnight boarding and ancillary spaces such as a reception area, a lobby, office, storage room, and restrooms. And phase two on the left includes an increase in the amenities available such as the number of kennels and play areas and additional rooms for storage, grooming, and laundry.

The facility will operate Monday through Friday from 6AM to 7PM and Saturday through Sunday from 8AM to 5PM with the maximum number of employees present not to exceed five, and the services to be provided include overnight boarding and daycare available daily with private kennels, supervised play areas, and general grooming services. For off street parking, the shopping center was originally developed under the East Valley corridor specific plan with a parking ratio of one space per 250 square feet of gross floor area. However, under the transit villages specific plan, the required ratio is one space per 300 square feet. Therefore, the project suite requires 21 spaces and 25 are provided. So thus thus the site will continue to exceed the minimum parking requirements.

Here we have the south elevation where the front entrance of the suite is located and no exterior changes are proposed with this tenant improvement. These photos of the parking area were taken during a site visit on a weekday afternoon to assess the actual use of the parking on-site. It was found that the existing adjacent businesses generally operate daily and hours of operation range from the earliest at 8AM to the latest at 11PM. And based on staff site visit, parking demand within the sender is observed not to reach capacity and adequate parking available throughout the day. Findings for a conditional use permit are generally related to site suitability for the proposed use regarding zoning, general plan designation, and the surrounding area.

And the project was determined to meet each of these findings, and the justification for each is contained within the resolution. The project qualifies for an exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines pursuant to section one five three zero one for existing facilities, which applies to the operation repair permitting or minor alterations of existing facilities. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt resolution number one seven two seven and approve the conditional use permit number 1215 based on the analysis and findings in the staff report and subject to the attached conditions of approval. If deemed appropriate, the recommended motion is available on screen. Staff is available for any questions and so is the applicant. Thank you.

Does anyone have any questions for staff at this time? Yep, Commissioner Elliott.

Thank you.

What is the animal capacity of the facility? How many pets would be on-site?

The conditions don't provide a restriction for that so I'll defer to the applicant for their operational.

Right, last questions of the applicant in a moment. I noticed on parking it said not to exceed five or sorry maybe not necessarily parking but not to exceed five staff at any one time. Is there a concern about the number of staff? Like why not exceed five?

That was the the number of stuff that the applicant provided because the parking exceeds the requirement, suppose that we could remove that.

There's no condition saying they couldn't have more than five No. Employees. And then overnight operations, will there be an on-site caretaker?

I'll defer to the applicant for that.

Okay, could the applicant join us please? Any other questions for staff? Welcome, hi, if you could please introduce yourself.

I'm Ruby Owayo and I'm owner or part owner of the DOT Camp.

And I'm Ali Ropesa, part owner

of the doc camp. Welcome.

Commissioner Elliott. Thank you and thank

you for bringing this proposal to the city. I think it's an exciting use. I just had a couple of questions. The language not to exceed five employees. We don't want to limit your business. Is there any reason that it's capped at five or is that just a turn of phrase?

It would be for shift, right? So we wouldn't need more than five people to operate the building or the dog camp.

We will have multiple shifts. So we will need more than five eventually.

And then how many pets do you anticipate accommodating on-site at any one time?

It very much varies on the time of year. We're going to have daycare but like during busy seasons it will definitely be higher during like holidays, weekends. So it could range anywhere from like 30 to sixty, sixty five.

And then what would overnight capacity be?

We are going to have I believe at the end of phase two, forty five kennels and then there's families have two pets, three pets so that number can also fluctuate. Fluctuate.

And then then how are the animals monitored overnight?

So we are debating whether we're going to have overnight staff or if we are just going to have cameras and motion detectors, fire alarms and all of the above. In past facilities that I've worked at, that has been the model that they've used. It's very effective. I've found that when you do have a staff overnight, it disturbs the peace of the facility with having dogs walking around, people walking all night, therefore making the dogs a little cranky the next day. So we are still in the process of the debate of whether we're gonna have some overnight or not.

Is there like a standard emergency operations plan that these types of facilities use or that you'll be adopting? I think my line of questioning is just coming at health and welfare side of our conditions findings and that in the event of a flood or fire that animals would be able to be evacuated quickly. Yes,

we're working on procedures right now at the moment to have everything in place when we do open the building and it's not set in stone but there is going to be something by the time we open. Absolutely.

Okay. So

Commissioner Stanson, I will go last.

So you're going to have 45 kennels. Mhmm. But you can have up to 60 dogs.

Yes, depending. Some families sometimes have two or three dogs and they're used to boarding or being together. So it could be that one kennel has two dogs. Of course, depends on the size of the kennel.

Are the kennels different sizes?

Yes. We're going have three different sizes.

Okay. And it's just dogs?

Yes. Just dogs.

Commissioner Gonzalez. Okay. So thank you for the outline on the phases. Do you know what the timeframe is between phase one and phase two?

It would definitely be depending on business and how it's going, but

we're

hoping that it's within the first six months of opening.

Got

it. Play areas, I guess there's not anything outside designated for

Correct. Yeah. Everything will be indoors, and it will be weather controlled.

Nothing like the rails where you're gonna get a bus and take the dogs.

Oh, no. No. No.

They Party bus. Yeah. They always seem to have fun, all the dogs.

Yeah. We we actually are part of our business is we do take dogs hiking. So we actually are trying to get a bus Yeah. I should say. Since we don't have an outside, we want to continue to be able to offer that service as part of our like our whole theme is like, you know, outdoors and the inside of our building is gonna look like it's outside. So I I do want to eventually get a bus to be able to take multiple.

Have

fun. Yeah. Currently, have to cap at like five or six dogs that we take. So we do want to offer kind of a unique service than any other facility that I'm aware of.

So I do have a question. If they are alone at night, and I know just because I have dogs, they need medication. Is there someone who would be able to do that during the night?

Absolutely.

Yeah. Yes. Okay. Alright. Thank you.

Okay. My questions are is there anything in our code or anything that we can look back on for similar facilities as far as evacuation plans and number of dogs because both of those things do concern me. I understand you guys are working on it, but it does feel a little I'm not comfortable with not having the amount in the conditions. We could end up with hundreds of dogs in there. And I'm definitely concerned about a fire or a flood or medication or different things. So do we have anything in the code?

So not as far as the the zoning code provides. There is a condition for the number of people people allowed in the building that's subject to the building code. But we can certainly consider and discuss that now and add that as a condition. I'm just not sure what metric we would use.

So I would be open to suggestions, but normally, what we've done in the past is is put a condition in there that they're to work with staff to come up with those parameters as far as an emergency plan and number of animals. And outside of this project, it looks like maybe it's something we should probably look into developing because we do have a lot of different animal care facilities like that. Would you be amenable to a condition that says that you will work with staff to get an approved either overnight staff plan or emergency evacuation plan and come up with a number that both sides are comfortable with as far as the maximum?

Yes, of course. I think it would be very helpful for us to have as well.

Director Dasagnac, are you comfortable with those that condition? Commissioner Elliott, if have

The first one, definitely I'm not sure how we would come up with a number and I'm not real comfortable putting that off because that should really be a condition of specified condition on the CUP. So unless there's a compelling reason or maybe there's some metric like per square feet that we can come up with here and I just don't not comfortable deferring that.

Just feel a little bit unless someone else does a little bit unqualified to do so. And I wouldn't want to put a condition on the applicant that we just kind of came up with on a whim. Does anyone I'm sorry, Vice Chair Inslee.

Yeah. I was just wondering, Commissioner Stanson pointed out, there was a certain number of kennels. Think because there isn't something in the specific code maybe we can come up with a ratio per kennel if it's up to 60 or we can simply say anywhere max 90 I mean two per kennel. I would go with something to that effect because of what the plans are stating. That way, we're not trying to interpret anything else.

Now my question with that is, it's per kennel. However, we are going to be offering daycare. So there will be dogs that come and that are there for the day. So will the condition just be for overnight use or is it overall daycare and overnight?

Do the dogs that are on daycare stay in kennels where they're they roam free or what?

They roam free for most of the time. However, they do take breaks. So when they do take breaks breaks, we're going to have, you know, your traditional kennels, wire kennels where they go in because they're only there for short periods of time for a break or to eat lunch for those dogs that eat.

Is that different than the than the 45 kennels for the overnight dogs? Yes.

Commissioner Elliott. Maybe

I would make a suggestion of setting that cap for overnight pets and then it might be more appropriate to tie number of daytime pets to the number of staff. It seems reasonable that a person can reasonably handle so many pets. So if there's five staff and each staff is reasonably capable of handling 10 pets then maybe there could be 50 pets. You know something to that effect that we have an objective measurement.

When do you plan on opening?

We're hoping spring May, June.

Okay. For me personally, and this is just me, I don't feel qualified to make that determination. I find it a little odd that there's not a formula out there, like we should probably have one. If staff isn't comfortable coming up with those numbers, would it be appropriate to continue it until we get those answers? Because I'm equally concerned about the overnight. You know, if you guys live twenty minutes away and there's a fire or you're on vacation, like, how are these these animals getting safely cared for?

So one of the things that we are looking for is when we're hiring our staff, we do wanna hire somebody that is local in case of an emergency and overnight somebody that can get there within, you know

Be on call.

A few minutes on call. So that's definitely something that we're looking for when hiring our staff. And also for the staff, it's going to be five people minimum. But if we're busy and we have, you know, a lot more dogs depending on business goes, then we're going to expand and we're going to have more staff.

And I totally respect that. However, for our side of it, it's got to match up into the conditions. Vice Chair Inslee, are you you have another? Right.

The last thing I was going to say is for potential condition on the emergency plan emergency operations plan is that maybe it's developed in conjunction with the fire marshal on what a reasonable plan is and what kind of I'm assuming there's fire sprinklers, but are there other improvements that would be necessary for that type of use that's obviously a little bit different than a traditional retail use?

Mr. Ansley?

Yeah, actually I think that might be a good idea. Although I think if the director and staff were comfortable in coming up with that plan, I think we could condition that that they'll work with them and that's a good suggestion. I think part of me doesn't want to continue because I feel like there's enough smart people in the room. We could figure this out. But at the same time, I agree.

I don't know if we're qualified. I think that like the suggestion was made a certain number per kennel for overnight that we have to look at the square footages of of available space within the within the facility to then also determine a ratio to that. So certain number of during the day additional relative to the available square footage plus the ratios of kennels. But yeah, I think we I don't know. I think we're gonna need to unless someone has a good suggestion, I would want to continue it too.

I don't know if we should continue it. I think yeah. 45 kennels. I don't think you can fit more than so many dogs per kennel, and I think we can maximize it at at that at 60 or at 90 or or whatever we feel are based on or based on the number of kennels you can have so many dogs.

But I think that that was their point that they're gonna have available daycare.

I think the daycare is a whole separate component. I think what we're more worried about is the nighttime component more so than the daytime component. Because the daytime dogs, it sounds like, are gonna be out and running around all day and then go in maybe for a short nap at in different kennels are gonna be separate from the over the long stay. Is that correct?

Correct.

So I think the long stay kennels is that what we're all concerned about more so than the day than the daytime.

So for me, I'm concerned about the maximum amount of pets allowed at the facility at any one time.

Now it sounds like 60 is about the most you could fit comfortably, safely if a family brought more than one dog.

Correct. And then how many during the day?

It can fluctuate anywhere from 20 to 40.

On top of the 60 or including the 60?

Including the 60.

Okay.

Because we are dogs that are boarding can also participate in the daycare. So will be a mixture of daycare dogs and boarded dogs that will be in those yards.

So you as the applicant are comfortable with capping your animal capacity at 60?

At any given time, 60 dogs is the most.

Is it something that we can maybe circle back on or does the decision need to be done now?

Well, we circle back on it, then we're going to have to continue it and come back in first the year and give you an answer then. If we can come to a conclusion that you're you're comfortable with.

Yeah. Because what I'm afraid of is what if business picks up and there is more

I I don't think we should be capping daytime.

Allow, you know, to make more revenue and Yeah. We're capped 60.

Thing is with us is when we're slow, we're gonna kinda depend on day care to kinda hold us over. And I would hate to, like, turn potential clients away and be like, I'm sorry. We're at our cap for the day. You know, come back tomorrow.

So would you be I mean, there needs to be a cap so we know how many animals are going to be in the building. Would you be more comfortable with us continuing it until January when you can come up with numbers?

I think I would rather go that route.

Okay. I think so. And then work with staff on the emergency plan. I don't know your business model. In my head, I don't see how it's like, on surface level, I don't see how it's safe overnight without a person there that can evacuate the pets. But again, it's not my business model, so maybe you can work with staff and we can hear about how other facilities operate safely. I would be comfortable with that.

Madam chair, what if we come back and have them work with staff on both issues on to bring back to us on on a total number of daytime dogs, a total number of nighttime dogs, and and bet and a plan.

Yes. Perfect.

Sure.

Yes oh sorry commissioner was I was just

gonna recommend that in that interim before January I think that there are animal hospitals that board overnight without staff present it might be worth reaching out to them to see what they have done. Yes. I think when I afforded my my cats, I think that they work on their own.

Yeah. And one of the thing is that the kennels that we have, they are professionally made specifically for dogs not to escape, not to they're definitely not fire talent. I'm pretty sure. But they are indestructible kennels. So if there's no staff out there, there's no we're going or we're leaving the facility knowing that the dogs are gonna be safe. You know, there's not gonna be a dog bite in the middle of the night. You know, one dog gets out and texts another one, they are gonna be contained and they're gonna be

Unless there's an emergency. Right. Director Dysatnik, are you comfortable with that given that the applicant is comfortable with that?

Continuing in. Yes, that's fine. Would recommend well, we have either the thirteenth or the twenty seventh. I would probably recommend the twenty seventh because the thirteenth agenda is going to come during the holidays.

Getting a decision on January 7 is twenty seventh is not going to get in the middle of your plans for permits and remodeling

it won't or

no I'm asking you

oh it will delay definitely

okay but but director you're not thinking that the thirteenth is giving enough I

mean I hate to delay them. So can we

I'm okay with the applicant working with staff but you didn't seem to be comfortable.

Well, just don't you know, I'm just not comfortable with the maximum number. Could I'm certainly comfortable with the plan part of it. Why don't we can just come up with a number? Now we have how many kennels did you say you have?

45.

45 and do you sometimes keep more than one dog in a kennel overnight? So any more than two or just maximum of

In families we'll have three dogs and we will have larger rooms.

Could keep in 45 kennels. Comfortably safe.

We don't want to delay you if we don't have to but we do have to get these things right.

Yes, I understand. And I mean I can if you guys give me a few minutes I can look at our projections on our drive to see what we have it at for our high months. Because what I'm worried about is our high months, summer, Christmas time when people need more boarding. So we have it on our projections on what the capacity is. If can give me a few seconds.

So

if we're completely full, like completely, completely full, there's two dogs per family. That's 90 dogs just in that alone. That's not even accounting if they have three dogs. So let's just say on average, it's like another 25 dogs, so it's like a 115. If it's like max max capacity of every single room has three dogs, then that's more like one thirty five. That would be the A lot of families don't have three dogs, but you know.

Yeah. I definitely wouldn't max it out. Like, per. Share.

I might suggest something to the effect of in order to keep the applicant moving. If we director, would you be more comfortable with something like conditioning a certain maximum unless staff upon further evaluation in, you know, in the emergency plan process determines a number lower than that is appropriate. So we we can condition a absolute maximum here today that then allows you with staff to work on making sure and validating that number. But if it's we say a 120 is the max, but then staff determines during this emergency plan that maybe it's more like a 100 is the max, which again sounds like a lot just round numbers, then we would lower it to that level. Would that

be a good comment?

I think that's workable. Mean the likelihood of having three in every kennel at one time seems very unlikely. So in fact even two. So my guess is a 100 in the kennels is probably sufficient and then in the daytime maybe add another 40 for the daytime.

I don't think we should condition the daytime. I mean that's their bread and butter and that's they don't stay, they go home, they're picked up by their owners every day. So I think that's a different that's a different criteria than the nighttime stuff is.

Yeah.

Believe that was noted. I think the idea is no matter what I think and I certainly feel that this way, think other commissioners do that we need to come up with some sort of a full number so that it is there's not a there's not a challenge to it later, right? And so I think if we come up with a theoretical max for both, I mean, at any one time, right? Just full occupancy, whether it's overnight or daytime combined. And I would say we choose an upper limit that gives enough room for the analysis to take place.

So we're not shorting, we're not creating too low of a number for the applicant. But the staff might come back and say, hey, we've reviewed this emergency plan and we think that at any one time overnight or otherwise, this is the maximum it should be.

Let me ask you a question. Obviously, you can always hire more staff. I get that. Given the space that you have, how many dogs I mean, obviously, yes, you want to be busy, but your goal is to keep these animals safe and happy, right? How many dogs can you physically handle during the day combined with doggy daycare and the kennels at one time?

So I've been in this industry for about sixteen years now. I personally can take care of like 30 dogs in one play area Mhmm. Comfortably. Obviously, a lot of experience, we will make sure that all of our staff is highly experienced by the time we open. I'm not going to put them in a room with 30 dogs if they're not comfortable. So a lot of it is how that person is comfortable with how many dogs.

Right. That's why I was asking in regards to space. Right. So in regards to space, how many dogs could you handle at one time? So for us, we need to have a number, but we're trying to work with you to make sure that you're also comfortable with that number, and then we're going to allow staff to validate that number when it comes to an emergency plan.

Right. As right now, I I don't know the answer to that. I feel like I would need to visualize the square footage of every yard to kind of have a visual.

How many rooms do you have?

Well, guess that question is a little split into two, right? Because it would be how many are in the kennel a time and how many are in the play yard. You're not handling all the dogs at the same time. So in the play yard, it could be one person per, like, about 20 dogs. And we're going to have the total of four yards. However, some yards are smaller than the others. The bigger yard will probably have about eight or nine per. But on the higher seasons, can be heavy. However, there's also the dogs that are in the kennels that are not being handled.

So you're saying like 80 dogs in the in the daycare and Yes. 45 to 60 dogs in the kennel.

I would I would say an average of yeah. 80 to 98, think, would be a more accurate.

Total? Yes. Okay. So if we catch you at a 100 animals at any one time, are you comfortable with that?

Yes. We will have the staff available to handle that.

Okay. Both that's both day and I mean, kennel and daycare? Yes. 100 total?

Yes. Because we're not going to exceed there's not enough room in the facility to have 100 kennels. So the max, I believe, that we did that we could have kennels, it's about 55 depending on the sizing. So we're still trying to figure out if, you know, in Redlands, the city of Redlands, is there more big dogs, small dogs and depending on it's going to be the size of the kennels. So the max that we could have with a good mixture of different sizes is going to be about 50 to 55 kennels.

Okay. So if you're comfortable, we'll put a condition in there that says no more than 100 dogs at any point at one time. And then you are to work with staff for an emergency evacuation plan, whatever it looks like for that industry to keep the pets safe, and then staff will have the authority to approve that work with you and approve that emergency plan. Are you comfortable that?

Yes.

Director, are you comfortable with that?

Yes. That sounds good. Yes.

Any other comments or questions from the commission? Could you bring the motion back up on the screen? Oh, yes. Yes. I'm so sorry. I got sidetracked. Thank you very much. Go ahead and sit down. We're gonna go ahead and take public comment now. Sorry about that, Mr. Hoder. Please join us. I will now open it up for public comment.

Story of my life, I always come in late. I do have a form, but I wasn't sure to whom I should hand this. So I know you like to keep track of who the speakers are. Would that be okay. Let me do that real quick. Our official. There

we go.

Look, Andy Holder and I think most of you know who I am. Looking at the plat map, I'm very familiar with the general location there and if I'm correct, the unit in which they want to do this activity used to be lumber liquidators and it's right next to a restaurant. And I don't know if this question came up before I walked in, but what do you do with pet waste for a 100 dogs? I would think that would be a condition to consider. I know our own animal shelter run by the city of Redlands has a full time paid staff that that's part of their job is clean all the kennels out with a hose and the kennels are designed with a trough for that waste to run off to a certain location.

So there's a sanitation issue there and even if they're only there for the day, pets being what they are inevitably will have to cope with pet waste and the larger the number of pets, the more waste you have to get rid of and where shall it go when you're right next to a restaurant? That was my question. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers from the audience on this matter? Do we have any on Zoom? Did we receive any There's one more. Oh, yes. Please join us.

Hi, my name is Pablo Velasco from Nexus Real Estate. I'm the broker for the landlord at that center and we support the use obviously. We're trying to get them to move forward with their with their use. As you guys know the center has struggled over the years and this is a really good use for the center. It'll bring a lot of local residents and you know to the center to you know support the restaurant, other potential tenants that we want to get in there you know coffee shops and things like that.

We want to try to revive the center so it's important that we bring uses that are actually useful and that the community wants. And so I was doing a little bit of research while you guys were talking about the maximum numbers. I saw that there were some numbers out there that that maximize the square footage at approximately 30 square feet per per pet. So the space is 6,620 square feet. So I think that puts, like I think it was approximately 220 pets per per for that space.

So if you guys wanted, like, a maximum number, that's, you know, some research that I was doing while you guys were talking anyway. So that's what I have to say. Thank you.

Thank you. Did we receive any written comments? No. No

written comments were received.

Okay, perfect. I think Mr. Hoder brought up a really good point that I would like to discuss. What is the is there a condition in regards to pet waste or what is the plan there?

No condition was added, but the proposal and the project was forwarded to the appropriate department in our utilities and waste services. And they discussed with their they told me they discussed with the applicant that they would just be able to use their regular services and the applicant can probably elaborate more on what that would look like for them specifically.

Okay and is is it next to a restaurant?

Yes, there is a restaurant to the west.

Okay. And what department clears that as far as safety and sanitation and such like that is concerned?

If the discharge is as was described at the city's facility and it was hosed, it would go through the sewer system, and they would work with our industrial waste to verify that everything is okay as far as the discharge that way. If the site if it's going to be solid waste, that would be through FCS, and they would have appropriate permitting through that.

Okay. So considering that their project passed all of those processes, we don't feel like we shouldn't feel like we need to condition that, and if there's a problem, then appropriate departments will handle it, correct?

My opinion is your statement is correct.

Perfect. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. And I will call one more time. Anyone here for public comment? Seeing none, I will now close the public hearing for this item and turn it over to the commissioners for deliberation and findings. If you could please bring the motion back up on the screen. And if whoever makes it could please include the 100 pet maximum and to work with staff on the emergency overnight plan. Commissioners?

I mean, I think we flushed it out pretty well.

Yeah, think we have too.

I can make the motion. Okay.

Commissioner Elliott.

All right. I move that the Planning Commission adopt resolution number 17 approve conditional use permit number 1215 based on the findings contained in the staff report and subject to the attached conditions of approval with the inclusion of an additional condition limiting the maximum number of pets within facility to 100 and the development of an emergency evacuation plan with staff and if the plan determines that a lower number of pets is necessary to implement the plan then staff has that authority to reduce the total occupancy.

Okay, do I have a second?

Second.

It has moved been by commissioner Elliott and seconded by commissioner Stanson to approve conditional use permit number 1215. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? I should have said this before I called for the vote but I just want you to know I'm really excited about your project. It's a great one, and it's definitely something our city needs. And thank you for working with us because we just have some things that we need to wrap up on our end. Okay. Good luck. Okay. Moving on to item number six b. Item six b is an ordinance text amendment number three seventy one for a proposed code amendment to permit the keeping of chickens hens only in additional single family residential districts within the city limits. I will now open the public hearing for this item.

Has any commissioner had any ex parte communications with the public regarding this item? Seeing none staff presentation by Jasmine Serrato miss Serrato

thank you chair and members of the commission

some

background the keeping and raising of hands has become increasingly popular and city staff have received several inquiries on whether this is permitted in residential zones. Most of the time we turn various people away at the counter letting them know that it is not permitted in most residential zones. So due to the increased interest, staff received direction from city council on November 4 to prepare an ordinance to amend the city's zoning regulations to allow for the keeping of hens on lots in single family residential zones and districts. Through research, we found that many jurisdictions have expanded the scope of their residential districts to permit chicken keeping, specifically hens. And then based on lot size and such jurisdictions include Riverside and San Marino County.

Some benefits, allowing hens and additional residential zones can support sustainability goals, promote local food production and align city regulations with evolving community preferences. It provides an educational and community building opportunity to city residents while having a minimal infrastructure impact when regulated with setbacks and best practices Hens are currently allowed in two residential zoning districts, the Rural Residential Animals District and the Rural Estate Animals District. The zoning regulations currently limit the number of allowed chickens based on the lot size as noted in a table in section 18.29 and has a setback requirement for enclosures to be 25 feet away from all dwellings. So that's specifically referring to coops. Here is a visual of the existing residential zones that permit chicken keeping in blue and green.

As seen, these zones are generally located in the Southeast Quadrant of the city. The proposed ordinance would amend eight single family residential zones within title eighteen and nine specific plans that contain single family residential districts within them to allow the keeping of hands as an accessory use when associated with the primary single family dwelling on the subject property and would still have to comply with the provisions of RMC section 18.29 as amended. Here is a map of all the single family residential districts within the city which would be permitted to keep pens as an accessory use. And I just want to note that currently a one does allow for a CUP, a conditional use permit for the keeping of poultry, but not necessarily backyard chicken keeping. The proposed regulations will amend the table in RMC section 18.29 to increase the number of hence allowable by one additional chicken in most typical single family residential lots and require a minimum outdoor open yard area of 200 square feet.

So previously there wasn't a minimum yard area and the smallest yard that could have a chicken was 7,200 and so now that ranges from 4,000 to 7,200. The increase from a minimum of two to three was to promote the well-being and stability of the flock. With a minimum of two chickens, they are likely to experience pecking behavior and that may lead to stress and bullying of one over the other. Therefore, the minimum was proposed at three for balance. The amendment would also require any proposed keeping structures such as coops to maintain a clearance of five feet from the side and rear property lines and 10 feet from the main dwelling, 15 feet from any street side right of way for those corner lots.

There are also some proposed changes to title six. The Title VI amendments would clarify the no permit from the Animal Services Division is required, permit the sale of eggs by right and prevent the slaughtering of chickens on residential property. Title VI will continue to enforce regulations to prevent excessively noisy animals, the burial of dead animals and rodent infestations. I do want to point out that the Facilities and Community Services is also proposing amendments to Title VI, but this is specifically for the noisy animals provisions to city council on December 16. It's essentially to strengthen their enforcement mechanisms by outlining both administrative and civil remedies.

So it'll only strengthen it. The proposed amendment may be exempt from our environmental review pursuant to section 15,061 b three also known as the general rule exemption and section 15,378 b five for organizational administrative activities of governments. The proposal will not seven result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. If staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt resolution number seventeen seventeen twenty eight and make a recommendation to city council to adopt ordinance ordinance text amendment three seven one. If deemed appropriate, we also provided alternatives to either direct staff for additional information and make revisions or request additional details.

If deemed appropriate, staff has provided the following motion on screen. That concludes staff presentation if you have any questions we are available.

Thank you does anyone have any questions for staff at this time? I just have one as clarification I you probably already answered it it's it's going to make it to where any single family residence that meets those lot requirements with the backyard with those specifications can have the chickens correct

correct yeah so there are still parameters that they need to meet but the idea is that in most single family residential zones they have an option

perfect thank you okay seeing no questions for staff at this time I will open it up for public comment mr. Hoder

Good afternoon again. I want to preface this by recalling an item that came before the city council several months ago on the subject of chickens. There was somebody in a residential neighborhood pretty much here in the center of town who had a chicken in their backyard, and the neighbors were complaining that it was a code violation. And as I say, was a very heated exchange between those neighbors and the person who owned the chicken who described it as a pet. According to the references that are in various documents, a chicken is not a pet, it's a farm animal.

You can perceive that however you want, but in a city of 73,000 residents, I'm not sure how many people are coming forward and saying we want more chickens so we can have fresh eggs every morning. I'm not sure how many eggs they would actually eat, but there's a vague reference here to being able to sell the eggs. And I kind of see where this could go in the extreme. I think this is an ordinance that at some point could come back to bite you or if I can use a play on words come back to peck you. It's only for hens and not for roosters, but either way, it's a it's a type of fowl that will be in people's yards and I I could foresee some issues with this.

I don't think that'll deter your vote, but I did want to give you that perspective is there is the potential there for conflicts with other people in the neighborhood. The folks with the chickens, of course, will point to you guys, and we were told we could have chickens and we thought it was five, but we didn't measure our lot and maybe it actually is seven, but okay, etcetera etcetera. There's a lot of subject to interpretation until you as they say get down to the devil is in the details. And I don't know how many people wanna take the time to get to the details. But having said that, and pointing out a detail that actually was part of my motivation for coming here to speak on this in the first place is under item two in agenda item six b, which is called development standards.

And if you will look at the the second sentence in that paragraph, it says, the more recent consensus, and I kind of object to the word consensus. I'm not sure what that's based on, but that's not my objection. The consensus among checking keepers, I think you meant to say chicken keepers, so it's a typo. But, hey, I love the details, and I love the opportunity to bring them up. So that's my comment. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Seeing no one else in the audience, do we have any comments on Zoom? Did we receive any written comments? Miss Serrato?

Sorry, we did not receive any written comments.

In that case I will close the public hearing for this item and turn it over to the commissioners for deliberations and finding commissioners. Vice Translee.

I know this topic came up a couple different ways even within the Planning Commission over the years. Think I'm not mistaken we had some level of conversation about this about a year or so ago about a zoning change for some of the residential areas on the Eastern Side, Northeastern side of the city limits, where we had people present saying we've been keeping well, think it was not just chickens, but goats and other things for a long period of time. And so there was a lot of debate that came up in that. And I think in that time, it started making me think, okay, what is this actual use throughout the city? And there are people clearly who have these.

And I'm sure most that do would never have thought that this is not allowed by right. I think that personally I have no problem with any of it. I don't think it's for everyone and I don't think it's all of a sudden going to create a situation where most people are going to get those and I think that the the lot size ratios that are being presented are adequate for maintaining I think you know you know, kind of courtesy across neighborhoods. But but I I just find myself curious on more of the logistics for kind of later in life. Hens.

I mean, presumably, are either keeping these as pets. And if they want them as pets, great. They them as a pet. But some people are clearly gonna use them for eggs and they stop producing at some point. And so I'm you know, there's, you know, obviously no slaughter allowed on in backyards of chickens, but I just I'm just find it maybe it's more curiosity of what do they think is gonna happen later when when that happens. But nonetheless, I have no issue with the with the ordinances presented. I think it's it's just another way of giving residents here an opportunity to to use their their property in a way they see fit.

I would assume, correct me if I'm wrong, it would just be like any other animal that was aging, right? Take it to a vet or you call someone to your house?

That's a good honestly I'm not an expert in this in this field but I would imagine I don't know what the lifespan of a hen is but I'm not

So the city of San Diego actually had something within a handout stating that they could go to their local agricultural poultry farms and then give away their chickens and then they also recommended their own animal keeping areas, their animal shelters.

Any other comments? Oh, yes. I'm sorry. Commissioner Wilson.

Yes. Similar to Commissioner Ensley or Vice Chair Ensley, excuse me. It did remind me of that other zone change case we had a few months back. So I thought, you know, this is just another solution to that issue allowing those chickens and war zones solves that issue. And I agree that the development standards will keep down any issues with neighbors. Chickens are quite quiet especially compared to dogs which we allow. So I'm very much in support of this and I like

to see it move forward.

Commissioner Elliott.

Thanks. I also just want to I guess lend my support to the ordinance. Really don't have any issues. I've lived in two places in Redlands and in both cases, I've had neighbors with illegal chickens. And in some ways, it's enhanced to that sense of community when I can exchange citrus or eggs or get to know my neighbors a little bit better.

Also, I currently live in a HOA and I for sure know chickens aren't allowed there but they're also not a nuisance and everyone just kind of gets along. To mister Hoeder's point, whenever we make a change there is always potential for unintended consequences but we also have the ability to bring the item back before us and address those consequences if we feel like we're, you know, they're not tenable for us. So with that said, I just want to appreciate staff's research. It was obvious that they did look into best practices for animal husbandry, but then also for just public nuisance issues. And with that, I'm happy to vote in favor of this ordinance.

This item. I do have a question. So I know it's limited to the hands. Let's say that roosters start showing up as well. Is there who who would, I guess is there

a code?

So I wanted to bring up title six, the noisy ordinance, specifically for that reason, because it does address specific volumes and roosters definitely exceed those decibels. And like I mentioned, it is going to city council soon and it'll be more strengthened to code in terms of what is considered noisy. And there's now going to be a set process on how to handle that both civilly and through an administrative process.

Thank you. I appreciate that. And I do want to share, I just noticed in my neighborhood, there is a rooster that wakes up really late. At 09:00, he starts

Sleeping in a rooster. Yeah. Commissioner Istanza.

I'm too in support of it. You know, had my other house. I had a a chickens living back behind us. I could hear them. I always thought they were cute, know. They never really bothered me much. I have five birds that are not chickens, and they make way more noise than the chickens do. So and I have no I don't have any problem with with with chickens.

Nope. Okay. If someone would like to make the commissioner Wills.

I will move that the planning commission adopt for is this the right one? Yeah. Planning commission. I move that okay. I move that the Planning Commission adopt resolution number one seven two eight recommending that the city council adopt ordinance text amendment number three seven one.

I second. Okay.

It's been moved by commissioner Wells and seconded by commissioner Gonzales to recommend city council for ordinance text amendment number three seventy one all in favor aye any opposed motion carries thank you number six announcements and commissioner comments I do want to say, that Commissioner Wells and Commissioner Gonzales, are retiring from the commission today. I'm really sad about that. I did want to just thank you both for your service and give you the opportunity to talk, and then I have a little card for you.

Thank you. It was definitely a great experience. I do wanna thank staff for all the work that you have done. I've learned a lot. I've learned nothing is black and white, but it's been a a great opportunity for me and also my fellow commissioners. I've learned a lot. Thank you so much. It was an honor.

Commissioner Moff.

Yeah. I also wanna say thank you to all my fellow commissioners and all our wonderful staff and our very engaged community members. We really do live in a special city that these chambers fill as often as they do. So it's been an honor. I'm gonna focus on family and work for a while, but I hope to see everybody out and around town. So thanks.

Thank you. Would anyone else like to say anything? Vice translator.

We're gonna miss you guys.

Thank you.

Yeah. Was gonna say, think, actually, we both, all three of us came on to the commission relatively soon after one another. And I know it's conversations that that we were having that, you know, encouraging you to apply. That was really exciting. And so it's change is always hard, but I'm excited for what the future brings and just hope you both have a great wonderful path in front of you for other engaging community opportunities.

Thank you. Thank you.

With that said,

I think one more.

What? Oh, I'm sorry. Miss Shirley?

Add to all the kudos, but I want to say I've also had the opportunity to present to both of you, but then also sit up here alongside you and just want to echo all of that sentiment and that you've it's been very obvious that you give careful consideration to the decisions that you've made and you've done everything with thoughtfulness and that's just everything that this community deserves and want to thank you for that.

So on top of that, Mr. Dasatnik is also retiring. Yes. So I just wanted to take a minute and then also give the commissioners the opportunity to thank you. I have learned so much from you over the years. It's been great working with you. I always make it a thing to try to make you laugh, and I've done it a few times. I even made him over there smile once. No. Yes. One time. We're gonna miss you. We we are. I've really enjoyed getting to know you. It's it's it's gonna be different. So I just want to say thank you and I want to give all the other commissioners if you have anything to say to mister and stay afterwards because there we're having a little reception for him.

Congratulations. Commissioner Stanson.

Brian, we've worked together for a lot of years in a lot of different capacities and I've enjoyed working with you and I'm really sorry to see you go.

Since joining, guess it's been about five years I've been on the commission and so going from a place where you have a general idea of what the commission's responsibilities are and how all this works to a immediately into an understanding like, wow, there's a lot I need to learn. Always having a really solid anchor with you, Brian, here to know that you're going to have a really good idea of what the answer is if not the answer. And it was always very comforting to know that your support was there. And it's been very it's been a lot of fun having you around for that very reason. It's just it's going be hard again change.

Lots of change at the commission here, but I hope you have a lot of great plans for retirement.

Commissioner Elliott.

Director, was thinking today about your accomplishments at the city and I want to just call attention, I want say to a few of them and the list is significant. When you came on the city was wrapping up its general plan update and you saw that through the finish line along with the climate action plan. The housing element in the sixth cycle was very challenging and you provided leadership through that process and then continued that leadership on the housing front with the inclusionary housing ordinance. Really don't don't know who else would have carried that through had it not been for you. You've just you've had the opportunity and the leadership to oversee some really transformational change with our city particularly with the downtown.

So I just want to thank you for your pragmatism and decisiveness and leadership and bringing us to where we are today. I think you've made a really big impact for Redlands and we just want to thank you.

Okay, would you like to say something Mr. Zasane?

Sure. I really appreciate all those comments. It is going to be really difficult to leave this position and this community as you probably know I don't reside here. Although it does feel like a second home to me at this point, I've been here eight and a half years and longer than I had anticipated. But I could have imagined being here a bit longer too, but at some point, I just had to make that decision what was the right time for me and family.

But it's been great, and I really appreciate all the work all of you have done. I agree with all the comments and the thoughtfulness at which you take your role and that you've put into your decisions. It's been and that you've worked together. That's really I think unusual. I've seen a lot of cities where there's a lot more divisiveness and there's not an effort to come to consensus and decisions and you all do that and that the city really benefits from that.

So, yeah, I'm just I'll miss everybody, and I will watching from a few miles further away and I'm sure I'll be walking these streets not that infrequently to keep up on what's going on.

Okay. Well, thank you very much. With that said, do you have an update or was that your update?

There are a few council meetings to report on. It's been like three or four meetings since we met last, but really all the items are from the November 18 meeting. The eight unit residential development on Cajon was approved by the city council. The ADU ordinance was reviewed. It was continued actually next week to make a one change and you might be interested in that change.

They recommended that we allow two story ADUs in the rear yard of residential properties as long as they are at least 10 feet away from the side property line. There was a long discussion of Pioneer Street redesign, which I know was discussed among with one of the development projects that we had. And there was strong community support for preserving the trees that would have to be moved if they were to accept an alternative design and the council respected that and ultimately decided to not to alter their decision that was made about ten years ago to when they do construct that street to do it with a median that would preserve the trees. And lastly, the warehouse ordinance that you all spent so much time on and gave so much thought to the council ultimately agreed and directed staff to prepare an ordinance to implement the recommendations of the Planning Commission. So that will be coming in the next few months to City Council.

Thank you very much. If that is all, we will adjourn to the next regular meeting date of 12/23/2025, which I expect to be not happening. Alright. Thank you, guys.