Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

uh community members and those who are watching at home, will the secretary please take roll call? Commissioner Vanderm here. Commissioner Murphy here. Commissioner Edel here. Vice Chair Davidson here. Chair Leone here. And we'll now stand for the pledge of allegiance. Please, Commissioner Murphy will lead us. Yes. Could everyone please rise and face the flag. Ready? Begin to the flag of the United States of America to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. And uh now we have uh the our consent calendar. This consists of the minutes for the meeting of November 4th. Is there a motion to approve the consent calendar? I move to approve. Second it. Okay. Please call for a vote. Commissioner Vanderm. Yes. Commissioner Murphy. Yes. Commissioner Edel. Yes. Vice Chair Davidson. Yes. Chair Leon. Yes.

Okay. The next item is um public comment for items that are not listed on tonight's agenda. Are there any members of the public that would like to speak on an item that is uh not on our agenda? Okay. Seeing none, I will close public comment. The public hearing is now open. We have three items for consideration on tonight's agenda. The first item is a conditional use permit 443 uh for YAC cheerleading and tumbling program with a staff recommendation to find that the CUP is exempt from SQA review and to adopt a resolution for approval. Please proceed with your report.

Well, Madam Chair, excuse me, I have to recuse myself on this one because I own property within the 500 foot radius of this property. Thank you, Commissioner Zel. Chair Lemon, I'll I'll have to recuse myself for the same reason. My business is within 500 ft of the application. Thank you, Commissioner Murphy. This item is going to be presented by our assistant planner, Sean Kunau. Good evening, Chair Leone and commissioners.

Good evening. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the use of a cheerleading and tumbling facility inside of a 4,11qt unit within an existing multi-industrial building. The subject units located at 4023 Commamino Rancherro within a multi-tenant industrial complex consisting of nine units. Directly west of the site is 411 Commamino Rancherro which also contains nine units. Both buildings are situated within the Cameo Ranch Business Center. Other multi-tenant industrial buildings are located to the north, south, and west of the property and Kais Creek in the bike trail to the east. The subject of property has a land use designation of industrial and the property zone M1 light manufacturing. The applicant proposes no physical changes to the site. Pursuant to the Cam Camaro soul code that is referenced above, the proposed indoor cheerleading and tumbling facility requires a total of 18 parking spaces. The industrial complex currently provides 103 on-site parking spaces. Based on the required parking ratio for industrial and office use, the two buildings to together totals 42,98 ft requires 78 spaces. This results in a surplus of 28 parking spaces ensuring adequate parking availability to accommodate the proposed use. The proposed floor plan includes a 20 foot tumble track shown in blue right there and a 12-oot landing mat shown in green right there. These features will be surrounded by wall-to-wall carpet bonded mats highlighted in light orange covering approximately 3,400 ft. During operating hours, four coaches will be on site to supervise up to 40 child participants. The business proposes to operate primarily Monday through Friday from 3

p.m. to 8:30 p.m. aligning with after school hours with occasional weekend practices. The facility will be used strictly for practice purposes and there will be no competitions taking place at this location. Here you'll find sample photos illustrating the carpeted gym maps along with images of the 20ft tumble track and the 12oot landing mat. CUP 443 is exempt from SQA. Staff recommends the plan commission find C 443 categorically exempt from the provisions of SQA and adopting a resolution approving the project subject to the recommended conditions of approval. This concludes my presentation.

Thank you. Do any of the commissioners have questions from staff? No, just one. Didn't we approve a um a golf facility very close to this? Right. Right next door. Right next door. Perfect. Correct. That was unit A. This is unit I. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Any other any other questions? No. Okay. Okay. Um public comment is now open. We have two public comment cards from the applicants, Danielle Davis and Adam Valencia. Will you please approach the podium and state your full name for the record? You have up to three minutes to speak.

Hello, my name is Danielle Davidson, the cheer director for YAK, which is Young Athletes for Christ. I'm here with our program director, Adam Valencia. Um, we just want to say first just say thank you to the city, to the staff for helping us, guiding us through this process, um, and for your time tonight. Um, we agree to all the conditions. Um we are just excited to be able to have this program in our community that provides a safe and structured environment for our youth and our families in our community.

Yeah, I want to say thank you and good evening to all of you. Uh I want to just commend your leadership. They were amazing with us and helping us through the whole entire process. And again, I want to thank all of you for that. Thank you. I don't have any questions. it seemed like a good place to have this and um I don't think we've got anything else similar to that in the city. So at least I hadn't heard of any didn't find any so I think it's going to serve a good purpose. Yeah. Any other question? I don't have any questions. Thank you guys very much.

I do have just just one question. Um I assume but just want to confirm that it is open to the general public. It is. We um primarily um have team practices. So most of the kids that come to our facility are part of our team. Um we do have a handful of um outside youth that come in just for classes, but yes, it is it could potentially be open to for our classes for anybody. Yes. And we welcome that. Actually, we welcome that. So definitely. Great. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other members of the public who wish to speak on this item? Okay. And do staff have any final comments? Okay. I close a public hearing. Uh any discussion? Seems like great idea and something very good, very good and well needed in the community. Great. Right. I call for a resolution.

Resolution number PC 2025-12. A resolution recommending approval of the planning commission of the city of Camaro approving a request from Danielle Davis YC cheerleading and tumbling program for a conditional use permit to establish an indoor cheerleading and tumbling practice facility inside of an existing 4,01qt unit located in a multi-tenant industrial building at 4023 Camino Rancherero unit I in the light manufacturing zone. further described as CUP 443. Thank you. I'll wave further reading and move to voting

and I'll second. Okay. Can you please call for a vote? Commissioner Vanderm, yes. Commissioner Murphy. Oh, correct. Is recused? Yes. Vice Chair Davidson? Yes. Chair Leone? Yes. Okay. The item is approved. The next item on the agenda is conditional use permit for 40 Hanks Barber mixed use. Again, with the staff recommendation to find that the CUP is exempt from seek review and to adopt a resolution for approval. Please proceed with the staff report. And this item is going to be presented by associate planner Serena Gonzalez.

Oh yeah. Good evening, planning commission and members of the public. Uh, tonight I will be presenting, as mentioned, on Hank's Barber mixeduse project. The request is for an approval of a conditional use permit to convert two existing commercial suites totaling 1,32 ft into two new residential units. Uh the project location is in Oldtown. Um it is at 2260 East Ventura Boulevard. The property has a general plan designation of commercial and is zoned Camrial Oldtown. Uh directly adj Oh, sorry, wrong button. Directly adjacent to the site, we have a retail use. Across the street is another retail use. And then on the left side in this project here is the Channel Islands Art Center I believe it's called. Um so here I apologize it's a little cramped but um here is the floor plan showing the second floor units. So currently unit C and D are um vacant commercial suites um and they will be turned into two residential um units. The first one being unit C is 740 square ft. It is two bedrooms and one bathroom. And the second unit, unit D over here is one bedroom, one bath, coming in at approximately 592 ft. Uh the units are on the second floor and will be accessed via the lobby. um that

can be it. You can access both the commercial and residential um through there and that staircase in the back here will take you upstairs to the two units. Uh pursuant to AB 2097, residential projects within 1 half mile of a major transit stop are exempt from additional parking requirements. Additionally, when the building was um initially developed, the property owner paid in fees and provided additional parking for public use. So, there's um sufficient parking surrounding the building. CUP 440 is exempt from secret review and staff recommends that the planning commission find that the project is exempt from SQA and that they approve the project. That concludes my presentation.

Thank you. Do any of the commissioners have questions for the staff? I do. Is there anything else on the second floor besides those two units? I I take it not. No, it would just be those two units. Thank you. Commissioner Edel, any questions at this time? Commissioner Murphy. Yes. Um, are the lobby and the stairs proposed the same as the existing? There's no reconfiguration of those? Nope. The only changes to the building would be converting it from commercial to residential. No other changes are proposed. Okay. Doesn't sound like a lot of

construction, but um I was wondering if in the conditions of approval if there are limited hours of construction or would that be in the Camry Old Town zoning? The hours would be our standard hours that we have for all construction. I believe that's 7 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. per the code. Okay. Thank you, [clears throat] Commissioner Vanderlin. I don't have questions. Okay, great. I'll open it up for public comment. We have uh one comment card from the applicant, Hank Robas. Please state your name for the record and you have three minutes.

My name is Hank Robas. Good to see everybody here. Last time I was standing here, I was building the building. Well, I wasn't building, but I was having it built. Um I recognize Dave over here. Um, but uh the city's been real good to me and I hope this project gets approved. I hope uh it helps our city. Um, I mean, you guys have been great to me and the Oldtown's been a great place for business. I've been in business here a long time. Um, but the city and the folks have been really good to me. I mean, [snorts] I don't know what else to tell you guys. I hope you guys approve it. You know, I'm uh excited and nervous all at the same time.

Yeah. But uh I appreciate you guys, all of you. You know, I have nothing but but help from everybody. So, perfect. Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? No. No. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thank you. Thank you. Any other member of the public who would like to speak on this item? Okay, we'll close public comment and it's uh now open for the commission's discussion. Yeah. Yeah, I think it's a great project and it's going to provide additional housing and in Oldtown which our city needs. Uh are we going to be able to count this for housing element or any for having Yes. Yes. more available rental units?

Yes, we will.

Okay. Yeah, I think it's it's good and it's in a commercial area. Even the construction concerns Tom had, I don't think there's residential close enough to be an issue with that, but uh I think it'll be a nice nice addition. And they have their business downstairs. So, um I think it'll, you know, it'll be it'll be nice. So, I'm in favor of the project. Yeah, it's it's uh nice to see a business person who has stuck with Oldtown for so many years um continue to push the push the ball forward and try to improve um what uh what downtown or Oldtown Camo has to offer. And uh so it's uh it's comforting to me to know that that property is in good hands, a good steward who's taking care of it and is going to turn it over to the next generation in even better shape than than what I remember the old Hanks and and then the bill and then you built. So um it's uh it's really nice to see the care that you're uh putting into the community. So thank you. Oh, I just want to say that I like the idea that you're using the usable space and it's not really changing the exterior look of the area at all and it's going to be a great addition, I think, to down Oldtown area, you know, with the livable units. I do want to note though that I think the closest residential would be across the parking lot to the end units of the town homes would be the closest to any of the noise and stuff that would be affected by that. So, but if you're keeping to the regular hours, that shouldn't be a problem.

Yeah, I think it's a great great [clears throat] location. I like adding the the two units to our housing element. Um Hank has been around for a long time and um uh I think it will be a well conceived project. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Yeah, I agree with all the comments and also I'm in support. Um, is would somebody like to call for resolution or is there a motion? Yes, call for resolution.

A resolution or resolution number PC 2025-13. a resolution recommending or or a resolution approving a request from Hank Robas for a conditional use permit to convert two secondf flooror commercial suites into two residential units in Camaro Oldtown zone located at 2260 East Ventura Boulevard Camaro 93010 in the Camaro Oldtown zone further described as CUP 440. Um, I I would make a note that the resolution um has a has a slight edit that needs to be made because the planning commission would be actually approving this item, not making the recommendation to the council.

Okay. Thank you for that. At that change, I would call for or move to wave further reading and vote for adoption. I'll second. Please call for a vote. Commissioner Vanderm. Yes. Commissioner Murphy, yes. Commissioner Edso, yes. Vice Chair Davidson, yes. Chair Lemoon, yes.

Okay. And the last item on tonight's agenda is a proposed zoning ordinance amendment to certain sections of title 19 of the municipal code concerning zoning requirements, development standards, and development review for commercial and industrial zoning districts. The staff's recommendation is to find uh the proposed ordinance exempt from see review and to adopt a resolution recommending the city council approve of the amendments. Please proceed with the staff report. Good evening planning commissioners. Um staff are very excited about this proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance. The purpose of this amendment is to clarify zoning requirements, streamline the development review process, provide consistency across zoning districts, reorganize land uses to be more userfriendly, and create more flexibility in the application of development standards. Um, these changes are intended to make the development review process more efficient and businessfriendly. And we also want to provide staff with additional tools to administer the code. Currently, permitted uses for the seven commercial and three industrial zones are listed separately within each zoning chapter. This requires users to flip back and forth between multiple chapters to compare the requirements for each use in each zone. We wanted to create a more userfriendly format. So, we are proposing to replace the use list in each chapter with a land use matrix. This allows easy comparison of the uses and requirements across all commercial and industrial zones. We are also recommending a few use related changes. We are proposing to regulate ancillary uses by the amount of square footage that they occupy rather than by percentage of sales. Uh percentage of sales is very difficult to

verify and enforce. We are also proposing to allow laundry and dry cleaning facilities in the village commercial mixeduse zone where they are currently not permitted to encourage mixeduse developments and localize this service type use. And we are proposing to allow restaurants by right within the professional office limited manufacturing and light manufacturing zones. Restaurants are currently a conditionally permitted use in the LM and M1 zones and not a permitted use in the PO zone. This is intended to streamline the permitting process for new restaurants and provide convenient dining options for employees working in these areas. We are also proposing to allow museums as a permitted use in the M1 zone where they are currently not permitted to encourage adaptive reuse of vacant industrial buildings. The next category of changes that we are recommending this evening are intended to improve current review processes. So right now plan development permits and appeals process requirements are strewn all across the zoning um chapters. So we have created a new standalone plan development permit chapter and appeals chapter to improve consistency. We have also created a new permit application withdrawal process that would apply for cups and PDPs at the discretion of the director if an applicant does not complete their application within 180 days after we notify them that their application is incomplete. This is intended to motivate applicants to move applications forward and make our records clearer regarding active projects. We are also proposing to increase permit terms from 12 months to 24 months and allow the director to grant time extensions and elevate time extension requests to the planning commission for their approval. This will avoid the need for applicants to reapply

for permits if the project has not changed. Currently, the code requires similar use determinations to be made by the planning commission. We are proposing to modify this to allow these determinations to be made by the director and appealed to the planning commission. It would also allow the director to refer them to the planning commission and appeal the planning commission's decision to the city council. This will allow straightforward use determination requests to be handled quickly at the staff level, but keeps the discretionary process for more complex requests. We are also proposing to remove the director level conditional use permit process. It only applies to alcohol manufacturing facilities and short-term daycare nurseries with more than six children. We are proposing to allow manu alcohol beverage alcohol beverage manufacturing facilities with a cup and nurseries by right. The DCUP process has not been used often and we have found that it doesn't offer a benefit to applicants. The procedural and noticing requirements made the DCUP process take the same amount of time as the regular CUP process. Staff have found that alcohol uh beverage manufacturing facilities have the potential to create adverse impacts without the enforcibility of conditions of approval and short-term daycare nurseries are regulated by the state and will remain subject to the provisions of the zoning code. We are proposing to streamline the process for concurrent permit applications um to allow staff to bring these to the planning commission and the city council at the same time. Um, an example of this would be a commercial development permit and an associated amendment to a specific plan. They would be allowed to be packaged together and move through the process once with this amendment effort. We also wanted to make development standards

more flexible to support economic development. We are proposing to remove the requirement for drive-throughs to provide separate window areas for payment and pickup um and the limitation on only one drive-thru lane to allow more modern techniques to manage lines and queuing. We [snorts] are also proposing to make some changes to off- streetet parking and loading requirements. We would like to remove the distance requirement for off- streetet parking to be located so many feet from the use it serves. Instead, we are proposing to allow the director to determine if parking can be provided in a safe and convenient manner. We also want to change the loading space requirements so that the director can grant relief from the requirements if larger loading spaces are not needed by the operation of the business. In addition, we are proposing to allow the planning commission and city council to reduce off- streetet parking requirements for new development if a parking study demonstrates that the required number of spaces exceeds the anticipated parking demand. We also want to allow some flexibility to lot size and setback requirements that apply to commercial zones as appropriate through the permit process. This will give smaller lots in the commercial zones more development options. This flexibility is intended to ensure that requirements align with the needs of each development. Um, when appropriate, this can encourage more efficient land use, reduce development costs, support economic activity, improve design, accommodate changing freight needs, and encourage adaptive reuse and infill development. Staff have brought this item forward to support economic development goals, but we will also be completing a broader, more comprehensive review of the zoning code for consistency with the general plan update. As part of the update effort, the Economic Development and Land use committee reviewed the proposed zoning

ordinance amendment during its regular meeting on August 28th, 2025 and expressed their support for the proposed amendment and suggested no changes. Staff have not made any substantive changes since this meeting. Um, Commissioner Vanderm has reached out to staff and identified a few additional clarifications that should be made. I'd like to walk you through those in the landscaping provisions that apply to parking lots. Um, and this is in several of the zones. So, this would be in the RC, CCM, professional office, CPD, SC, LM, CMU, CN, and CO2, COT zones, and the byite residential overlay. We recommend replacing row with space um as it pertains to um the amount of trees required per parking spaces. So the intent of this change would be to clarify that the number of trees required is based on the number of parking spaces provided. Um I think it was an inadvertent error having row um used there instead of space. So we would like to clean that up. Uh we are also recommending the addition of a note to chapter 19.44 44 are off- street parking standards to clarify that the term enclosed as it pertains to parking means garage. We recommend the replacement of the word ingredients um in section 19.32.120b uh with the word measures. Um this relates to how potential nuisances are res are would be um resolved. It's just an improved word choice. ingredients is um a touch odd. So, I think that's just clear. We are also recommending updating the proposed zoning ordinance to replace all references to junior high with middle school. Um and that would be in

chapter 19.44, again, the off- streetet parking standards and the residential zones. Um these references have already been removed from the commercial and industrial uh zones and the terminology is updated in the proposed new land use matrix. And um the last [clears throat] of these changes we recommend replacing serve with overlap with in section 19.44.105A4 and this is just for improved clarity. Um this is these are provisions that relate to um the drivethru area cannot overlap with parking spaces. So the the clarification I think just um is it it improves the reading of of those provisions. [snorts] We have received two public comment letters on this item. We received one letter in support of support for the proposed zoning ordinance amendment from Dennis Hargrave that requests allowing churches in the LM zone uh pursuant to the approval of a cup. Um and he notes that this would either he requests this change through either this proposed zoning ordinance amendment or future amendments. We intend to analyze uh land uses within the LM zone as part of a more comprehensive zoning ordinance amendment that will follow the general plan update. Um we have also received one letter of opposition from uh Mike Brown. So I'm going to take you through a few of the points made in that letter. So the letter states that the proposed zoning ordinance amendment conflates beverage manufacturing with industrial alcohol manufacturing. The um letter disagrees with limiting tasting as an ancillary use. Um and the

current code allows um we there's a current a use in the um M2 zone under the current code that states that um amusement activities other than arcades, carnivals, circuses, skating rinks, theaters, outdoor and accessory uses um are allowed in the M2 zone. Um, and so in creating the land use matrix, um, we wanted to clarify what these meant. So those individual uses were incorporated into the land use matrix. Um, the letter catches an inadvertent error referring to Los Angeles County instead of Ventura County in section 19.67.060, uh, discussing noticing requirements for plan development permits. And we would like to correct that error. [clears throat] And lastly, the letter requests placing a time limit for the city to act on a conditional use permit request such that failure to move a permit forward would result in an automatic approval of the conditional use permit request. Um, and staff would note that this is already covered by the permit streamlining act um, which holds cities to certain timelines for processing permit requests. The recommendations for this item are listed on this slide. We would also like to include the additional recommended edits that I outlined this evening. This concludes my presentation on the proposed zoning ordinance amendment and I am happy to answer any questions that you have.

Thank you for that detailed presentation. Commissioner Edel. Yeah, it seemed like a lot of work went into this and uh kind of impressive. Was this all done internally by staff or did you guys work with a consultant? Um we we prepared it at the staff level.

Yeah. I want a compliment. It seemed like a lot of work went into it and it makes sense when you're amending things sometimes it it helps to kind of gather it you know things lose lose some of its meaning in the process of just amending it. So I I think this was a great project and streamline a lot of operations but make the code read easier and more to understand. So thank you for your work on that. It was a pleasure. Commissioner Davidson. Yeah. Can you go back a couple slides? Um, I can't remember what the title was, so I'll just have to say stop when I see it. Okay.

Uh, keep going. Here we go. Can you, um, the fourth bullet, allow the director to make similar use determinations. Can you give me some very general, and I understand you can't give me specific examples, but a couple general examples of what what is being referred to there? I

absolutely. Um, so happy to clarify that. So when someone calls us and they have a use that is similar but not expressly called, you know, useless can't capture every conceivable land use. Um so a lot of times these are kind of common sense, you know, determinations. Um planners are generally equipped, you know, with the support of of management to make these kind of decisions. Um, you know, so I think with this change, you know, if we we got a kind of an an obvious, you know, kind of common sense request where we felt like it really fit within the land uses but wasn't expressly called out,

then at the staff level, we could, you know, move that request forward without having to, you know, the formality of coming before the planning commission. But where we felt that, you know, we weren't really comfortable, we weren't sure that it fit, um, and we wanted to refer the matter to you, um, for consideration, then we would we would be able to do that. Okay. Could could you conceive of any um situation in which a large project was an adjacent use? In other words, it wasn't quite spelled out and and staff might make the determination, but the just the scope and size of the project is such that it would be desirous from a, you know, from a planning commissioner's standpoint to have that still come even though it's a a slight, you know, are you following what I'm saying? I'd be concerned that a large thing that might have an impact on the community that a decision might be made and without guard rails about scope u we could end up with something that maybe we should have had some input on.

Absolutely. I think the intent would be anything that would be could be construed in any sense as complex would be brought before you. Okay. This would be stuff that's like you know very obvious with no um no concern for impacts would be determined at the staff level. Sure. Sure. Okay. And then can you go forward one more towards the end now? Absolutely.

Thank you. Um okay. The loading space requirement I I bring this up only because we went through a um a very lengthy conversation about loading zones when it came to a a restaurant in town. Um, again, can you walk me through is that allowed the flexibility to um for the director or staff to to make changes to whether a loading dock is required or not or is that simply giving them a little flexibility in what it would look like and what it would be.

It would be flexibility for loading. So they would still be provi required to provide a like a minimum size space, but it would allow us to reduce the requirement for the space to be 50 ft deep in certain situations where it just doesn't meet the operational needs of the development. Perfect. You said something similar to that before and those extra words made it crystal clear in my mind. So thank you. And that was it. I have no further questions. Appreciate it, Commissioner Murphy.

Yes. Um, thank you again for um all the work that went went into this. There's a lot of streamlining and and effort that went into to make the document um easier to use and easier to understand. Uh, Commissioner Vanderm, I appreciate [laughter] all of those um amendments. It it does make it more clear on the similar use. It it seems as though there we we had already approved of a similar use similar use determination being made at the director level uh uh several years back but but maybe I'm thinking of something else. I mean it seems like that's the first determination that's made and it's made at the director level but and not planning commission. So the code does require these requests to it still requires these requests to be brought forward to the planning commission. So this would kind of soften that requirement so that we could you know deal with kind of straightforward requests at at the director level and then more complex requests would be brought forward to you.

All right. Well, that makes sense to me because I I don't recall being asked to to make a similar use determination in in past applications. Um on [clears throat] the Mike Brown letter, it seems like there's a few different areas where um he's takes issue with the general term alcohol manufacturing facilities. I'm wondering if in all such locations if if that could be changed to alcohol beverage manufacturing facilities.

Yes, sir. That is what we would like to do there. So, um to improve clarity, we can change the um title of the header in the land use matrix from food and alcohol to food and alcoholic beverages and change the specific land use within the matrix to alcohol beverage manufacturing. And then we also have a provision in the conditional use permit chapter which is chapter 19.62 um that discusses these types of facilities. So, we would also want to make the language consistent in that section. It's section 19.62.230.

Okay, that's great. It sounds like it would um take care of some of the concerns of Mr. Brown. Anyway, thank you,

Commissioner Vandermillan. Um first, I want to thank you for uh considering the changes I was concerned about. great changes and also after reading through this it was quite an education but I appreciate all the work and time that staff went into doing this. Um, one of the things I noticed a lot that kept popping up was the um all the word shall that were changed to um may or must or shall or will to clarify and make that really understandable as to what they can and can't do or what they have to do and don't you know or just maybe and that was a lot going through there. Um I have a question on when you said that where you extended the permit process from 12 months to 24 months. How often do they need to report into you in that time or when do they need to request like go past the 12 months into the 24 or what type of time frame is there?

So we have you know pretty consistent communications with applicants about how it's going. we, you know, we kind of track. Um I think that logistically, um getting construction loans and just and getting through the building permit process, um it's really tight in a 12-month um time period. I think we want to, you know, minimize the times that we have to do these time extensions. Um so the thought there is just to kind of give them a little more breathing room. Um and we don't feel as staff that, you know, anything's really lost by that change. we would continue to communicate with them and track their progress. Um, that's something that we do on all of our projects.

Yeah. I just wondered how it would be like if they just didn't report in or anything for like 15 or 18 months. We I I we all typically reach out to our applicants. We, you know, we check in with them a lot. How's it going? You know, because we want to anticipate the need if there is going to need to be an extension. We want to kind of understand if like the developments become infeasible for some reason, if they've run into a complication so we can, you know, hopefully help them work through it. So there's, you know, there's pretty good dialogue back and forth um to make sure that they stay on track. And you know, the last thing we want to do is have something expire and then have everybody go back through all of that work that we've already completed. No, I think it was I think it's a good change. I just want to know what the process was in between. Yeah. Just so the communication is

Yeah, we we we check in with all of our applicants um regularly. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Any other questions or comments? Do I have one more? Sorry, Commissioner Davidson. The the comment that was made about um tasting and that tasting is not a light use. I do want to um without admitting guilt, I am familiar with wine tasting rooms and and establishments of of that uh type and uh where they where they actually make it and taste it. And it is a pretty significant impact to have tasting um have tastings go on there. So, I'm wondering are there guardrails? I mean are what what is in place that would allow us to have some control over that because it is it can be very impactful.

Absolutely. Um so there's the cup process. Um these these types of facilities have to go through the CUP process and we we put guard rails through conditions of approval. Um kind of more broadly the tasting is we classify that as a use that's ancillary to these types of facilities. So we um reworked the definition of ancillary use to be no more than 49% of the gross floor floor area. We found the um the gross sales is just really difficult to to um to regulate and and and to calculate and I think this will be a much cleaner um you know um way to regulate this type of use.

Okay. And so and an so staff is comfortable saying that 49% so just shy of a half of the entire footprint for an ancillary use is acceptable. I mean that that does kind of beg the question that you have you know a 10,000 foot wine making facility and 5,000 square feet as an ancillary use. Is that I'm not and I'm not questioning staff. I'm just like I want to I'm trying to hear the I appreciate that. We spent a lot of time that went on.

Yeah. We spent a lot of time debating this. Um it is difficult to set a limit. That's why this remains a conditionally permitted use. So we can you know kind of do it like on a project by project sight specific kind of analysis. Um so you know I think it we probably don't want you know giant tasting areas that overwhelm um the the primary use. So but the intent with the definition is just to make sure that it always stays less than less than half of the primary use. Perfect. You said all the things I was hoping you would. Thank you. [laughter] Any other questions or comments?

I also want to thank the staff for all of your work to update the municipal code this section. I understand that these sorts of updates can be tedious, but they're valuable to ensure that they reflect current conditions and needs. Um, and it will surely be uh helpful to the public to applicants to navigate uh the code and uh you know it provides much needed clarity and removing obsolete language and um removes burdens as well. Uh so hopefully we'll encourage smart development and I appreciate that it will also be much more efficient for the staff um freeing up your capacity and also uh make enforcement um much uh much more efficient as well. Um I I had a similar question as to Commissioner Davidson about the similar uses about that language and the parameters around it. Um and particularly uh you know and of course staff should I I agree with the discretion um particularly those are you know straightforward answers but in terms of the the scope and impact um and you provided you know your response of those things that are sort of like self-evident you know and can readily be addressed um but there's discretion into what what then comes to the public uh to the planning commission. Um, does that include the does the discretion include any similar uses that would require exemptions from SQA? Um, that's a great question. Let me think about that for a second. Um, so I think anything that would require SQL review would would be required to come before you. Um, do you have a

um so so if I'm understanding your question are you asking if a ancillary use is it an ancillary use that would um be subject to SQA if that would come before the planning commission. Not sure if I any of the discretionary decisions that the director is now would now be authorized to make for similar uses.

So I think that with the similar use determination, you're just kind of fitting it to see what category it goes to. Like is it not allowed at all on the site? Is it a does it fit within the list of permitted uses that are kind of by right? Um and then or does it is it a use that is elevated to require the approval of a conditional use permit. So it's kind of like figuring out whether the use is allowed or not and if it is kind of where it falls within those um with within those use lists that we have that are now in our matrix. Um, so I think you know we it wouldn't be weighing in on the project itself but the use

to move forward like if a use is not permitted then we wouldn't you know we would let them know that that's not allowed on the site. So it would be those types of decisions. I see. Typically when we do get a request for a similar use determination it's in conjunction with somebody that actually wants to establish that use somewhere in the city. So if that use that wanted to come into the city was subject to SQA then um uh say if it was a discretionary approval like a conditional use permit then that would go before you but if it was a ministerial type of um approval then that that would not go to the planning commission.

Yeah. Thank you. That's helpful. Okay. Anything else? Okay. Now I'll open it up for public comment. We do have one uh Minister Mike Brown submitted a public comment card. Please submit your or state your name for the record and you have three minutes for your comment. I'm Mike Brown. I'm the only uh winery brewery distillery in the town is I think it's their mic there.

See if this [clears throat] one's on. So um I appreciate the comments from staff and the questions that were asked that clarified a few points. Um I reviewed the entire document. I've been involved with the with the development department four years on issues with our facility that seem that some of our questions that we've had with staff or staff has had with us are going to be answered by some of the changes here. I'm puzzled and troubled by the word ancel ancillary and the constraint or concern about square footage. Um, I don't see that in any other form of business in this town, but it's placed specifically on our industry. And I'm not sure why. In all my we've been in town for 20 years, [cough] served [clears throat] the community for a very, very long time. And again, I'm puzzled by this targeting is what it seems. Um, and I would have appreciated a dialogue with staff prior to as this was coming up because we have had an open issue for four years through multiple changes of staff. We have stood steady, staff has flipped, new people, new ideas, new whatever. But our issue has still remained. And I have spent tens of thousands of dollars on lawyers trying to get answers. Some of this is addressed [snorts] and I would appreciate an answer on why is ancillary uses such a concern in our industry. I'll yield my rest of my time for any questions if you have them for what I submitted. I do support all the work

that was put on. I do agree that it's a much cleaner document. I would have appreciated much more public notice of it because I've talked with 15 20 different businesses over the last three days and they're like going, "What? What is going on?" So, um, with that, no one has any questions. Thank you. Any other um questions for the staff? No. Would the staff like to address? We have one more public comment from Dennis Hargrave. Please state your name for the record.

Good evening, Chair Leone and um planning commissioners. My name is Dennis Hardgrave. Um longtime land use practitioner in the city. I've been doing this for over 30 years and dozens of entitlements from CUPs to general plan amendments and I have to say this is one of the uh best and most forwardthinking changes that's occurred over that entire period. A number of these issues I could point to again probably over a dozen cases where this would have saved more than a year

in multiple projects. And so what staff is recommending and what your professionally uh competent staff has come up with on this uh is a great approach. So I'm fully supportive of everything that's recommended. This afternoon I did submit a comment letter and I hope that you got the attachment the PDF that was with it. This is a really significant issue and I'm just want to take if you'll grant me a minute to talk about this. It's significant to the fabric of our community. Um there is a church separation of church and state. However, there is a built-in Yes. I'm sorry. This is a a comment on an item that's not before us.

No, it is before you. It's part of the It's part of this it's part of this zone change. I'm sorry. Yeah. Should have clarified. It is related to another ancillary use or another use that should be considered I strongly feel in the LM zone. And I'm want to give you a little rationale. I give you written rationale extracts from the zoning ordinance. But the issue is this. Ironically, the only place where churches are allowed under a conditional use permit in industrial zones in the city is in M1. On the hierarchy of industrial uses, you have M2 is heavy. M1 includes noise, vibration, dust, disturbance, etc. [snorts] LM is all professional and indoors and contained. Churches are allowed in M1, but not in LM. It's the oddest twist and no other community but Camaro has this. Most cities don't even have LM anymore. So my concern is this is that it seems irrational to me that we do not allow a conditional use permit process for churches and places of worship in the LM zone since we do in a heavier more intensive zone. [snorts] So that's the framework for what I want to mention briefly. I'm going to give you a contextual discussion of it. Now, 15 years ago, Crossroads Church, of which I'm a part, uh came to the city and the city said, "Well, we want to put you in the building in the outlets between the star and the back portion of the art out outlets, which is where the crossroads has been, but it was zoned LM. They reszone that building to M1. I think Commissioner Murphy probably remembers that. It was a spot zoning issue. The church has successfully been there. We've outgrown the site. More than a

thousand people consider Crossroads their home. Your three minutes are up. Okay. May I have a another moment? Thank you. As a result, there are no M1 parcels for this church to buy. There are no CPD parcels available to buy. And the amount of LM land which is at a lower intensity which could be processed under a CUP whether it fits or not could be determined in this cup I firmly believe is an equity issue in terms of the religious issues for the church and as far as common sense.

So with that I would just strongly urge you to consider recommending that addition. we will appear both as a church and I will as a practitioner at the city council on this topic and I just think it's common sense to at least consider and not wait. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public who would like to speak on this item? Okay, I I'll close public comment. Would the staff like to address any of the comments?

Yes, please. Um, so in regards to the first public comment, um, I want to make it clear that we're not picking on alcohol u beverage manufacturing facilities, the ancillary use is is a broad term that's any use that's on a site that's um less than the primary use. Uh, we really spend a lot of time thinking about um how to regulate ancillary uses in an equitable way. There are in the existing code what we are proposing to remove is a limitation on tasting areas of only 30% of the gross floor area. So we felt with the recommended changes that we are proposing tonight that this actually allows them you know um through the cup process to be considered for up to 49% of the gross floor area and is more flexible than the current standards. Um, in regards to um, uh, the second public comment, we do just want to look at impacts. The land use changes that we've proposed um, are kind of within the scope of this amendment and they were they were um, kind of minor land use changes that we felt didn't have the potential for adverse impacts. Um, so we just want to look at things like parking impacts and and what have you as we go through a broader effort to look at our land uses citywide with the general plan update. Thank you. Any questions?

Yes. Is that to say that the use of a church in that lower LM is is on the table and is being evaluated or or is that we intend to evaluate that as part of the general plan update process. We're going to open up the land use element and we're going to consider look at, you know, what's working, what's not, um, and if we need to make any adjustments to our zones. That'll all that's like part of the very thorough analysis that will happen with the general plan update. And then we will um following that effort come back with a very comprehensive zoning ordinance amendment to um ensure that there's consistency between the zoning ordinance and our um hopefully updated general plan.

Okay. Thank you. Because on its face it does not seem to jive but I appreciate the desire to look at impacts and I and I can appreciate tempering the desire to move quickly with the desire to get it right. So, I appreciate that and I'm sure that the speaker having had decades in this area understands that sometimes slow is fast. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? No, I think mine just got answered. [laughter] Thank you. And um for I I do have a couple questions for the general planning process. Will the there be an opportunity for the public to engage provide?

Absolutely. Um we are going to have robust community engagement. Um that will be we've already started with some engagement but we're going the popup like go to them outreach events we're going to be targeting in December and January. We're going to go to various events around town and connect with people. There will be community workshops. Um we have we're pretty much going to be um promoting the general plan update and and trying to interact and engage with the public through multiple social media channels. Um we have a project like a standalone project website just for the general plan update that'll have interactive um components and it will also allow us to um be very transparent throughout the process. Uh we're also forming a general plan advisory committee um that's made up of um people citywide. um it'll be 15 members and they will we will meet with them regularly and um obtain their input on draft documents and they will be kind of our some of our ambassadors in the community um to engage further with the public. So we have put together a a suite of of um ways in which we can engage throughout the process and it won't just be in the beginning it's it's you know scheduled to be throughout the process at every stage.

Wonderful. Thank you. And um

as to the the comment of the ancillary use, you described that this the update provides greater flexibility. Um so I hear that there's a concern about the impact. So can you say a little bit more about you know what what the impact is, what the change of the impact is based on this greater flexibility. So, um, with the change, um, through the conditional use permit process, an applicant could request a larger tasting area than would be currently allowed, um, by the current code. Um, so through that process, staff and, um, you know, decision makers would be able to analyze whether that is appropriate um, based on the location and whether they can accommodate parking. and um we would be allowed through the conditional use permit process to put conditions um particularly if they propose to have um events or other things like that. So the cup process would be used to um ensure that we avoid any adverse impacts in these types of facilities.

And with the CUP if uh an application for a CUP came um before us uh would it be per event or it could be for sort of an a schedule of events? So I think the intent would be to understand the needs of the business and then to have the conditions be very specific to put guard rails on what would be allowed. Great. Thank you Commissioner Murphy. Yes. On the general plan update where the churches [snorts] in LM could be considered. What is the expected timeline for um bringing that before?

We are um council. We have a very um ambitious plan to be concluding with the general plan update. It's by the fall of [snorts] it's basically going to be a two and a half year process and we are we are trying very hard to keep that on track and a comprehensive zoning ordinance amendment would follow that process. [snorts] Okay. All right. more. Sorry, I keep circling back to me.

Um, in the context of of the first speaker, we were talking about ancillary uses being tasting. Are there other ancillary uses that that we that can be listed off that that would help to alleviate the the concern of um I appreciate that he feels that it's a targeted thing and I and I can being a business owner, I'm sure that's how it feels. Um, but are there other ancillary uses for other businesses? perhaps a I don't know a Christmas tree farm that also sells um bathtubs. I don't I don't know. But you know

Yeah. So we see that all the time. Um so the ancillary use is is is a definition within our code. And so that is just anything that is um kind of subservient to that primary use. Um the way that it was called out in the um in the provisions in the conditional to use permit section as it pertains to alcohol beverage manufacturing facilities is just to clarify that um tasting areas is an ancillary use which is was also previously in in our code. So it's just clarifying that that is an ancillary use. The event um kind of portion is separate from that and we wanted to make that distinction very clear. Uh I would just also add that our industrial zones currently have a provision for ancillary uses to not exceed 30% of the uh gross retail sales and we don't have an easy way to to to monitor that. Um we can't um we have a difficult time getting the gross receipts that demonstrate whether or not they're in compliance with with this provision. So moving from uh gross receipts to floor area makes it more clearer and easier for us to um ensure that there's compliance with the code.

Very good. Okay. So this so the reason that it came up under the topic of alcohol was because that you were already you were already fiddling under the hood with that and took the opportunity to clarify it. But ancillary could refer to any host of other operations or businesses within the community that also have a sub, as you said, a subservient use. It just happened to be that you were doing this and so it was appropriate to call it out at that time to add clarification. Absolutely. Okay. I I'm comfortable with that. I just wanted to make sure because I I I I did hear his words and um just wanted to make sure um that we were there. Thank you.

I'm okay. Any other questions or comments? Okay, I'll close up public hearing. Any additional discussion by the commissioners? Okay, I call for a resolution. Resolution number PC 2025-14, a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Camaro recommending approval to the city council of Camaro. Municipal code amendments concerning zoning requirements, development standards, and development review for commercial and industrial zoning districts. I move to wave further re rating and um bring it to a vote.

Second that. We call for a vote. Commissioner Vanderm, yes. Commissioner Murphy, yes. Commissioner Edsil, yes. Vice Chair Davidson, yes. Chair Leone, yes. The motion passes.

Okay. Now, moving on to our next item, which is the director's report. Thank you, Chair Leone. So, this is the last meeting of the year, and I just wanted to take a moment to thank the planning commission for your continued dedication and hard work. Um, some of the notable accomplishments this year included approving five conditional use permits, uh, public art, uh, a subdivision, as well as reviewing code updates, the climate action plan, safety element, and the first landmarking of the Sholley House. Uh, we have, as Megan has indicated, we've kicked off the general plan update. uh that's marking a significant milestone for the city and as we move into next year this process will become a central focus of our work plan. Um our next meeting will be on January 6 and we have a couple items that are tracking for that meeting and that that concludes my report.

Great. Thank you. Now um commission comments so no thank you. It's been a it's been a great year and uh we have accomplished a lot and it's been a a pleasure to be a part of that. Well, for me, I guess it's been a great year. Interesting. It's always interesting,

but I always want to thank the staff all year long for all the work that you put into this so that it's easy for us to understand. And I know for me it's like I always say I start writing down my questions and then I'll go a couple pages later and I'll get my answer most of the time. So, I greatly appreciate you all that you've been doing all year for us. Thank you.

Yeah, I'll second both of those comments and just say that I very much um appreciate working with this panel of of individuals. We we do our best to evaluate the applications as as they come along. Um but the um what we do is far less effort than what the staff puts out to to put these all before us in organized form and and well thought through. So thank you. I also want to uh express my gratitude to the staff to all of you um for your commitment and your diligence and professionalism um and including through turnover which can be challenging for everyone else to you know really maintain uh maintain all of the work and ensure that it's moving forward. So everyone who like organizes us to those who do the analysis and provide the presentations um it's very much appreciated and I appreciate my fellow commissioners um it's been such a pleasure serving with all of you and thank you for for all of your work. Um okay and with that we will adjourn.