Okay, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to our January 28th, 2026 planning commission meeting. Okay. I call this meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Madame Clerk, can you please call roll? Commissioner Nighton here. Commissioner Ramirez here. Commissioner Thomas here. Vice Chair Holler here. Chair Madrid here. Um, well, Cass, you only won the audience, so can you lead us in the uh pledge of allegiance, please? Stand if you're able and place your right hand over your heart and repeat after me.

37:24 – 38:47•0

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Okay, that brings us to uh presentations. Um legislation 4.1, legislation update. Uh the assistant city attorney, please present. Thank you, chair. So, we've done this a few years in a row now. Um it will you please bring up the presentation? So, this presentation is meant to be a brief overview of some of the new housing laws that we will have to implement between staff and the um planning commission and city council. Um fair warning with a lot of these, we're still all trying to figure out how to implement them. [laughter] Um as you know, whenever the state passes housing legislation and whatnot, um there's always more ambiguity than they anticipated. Um, and of course with uh our city working with a lot of uh developers and whatnot, um, we're here to facilitate all of that as well as comply with any state laws that we are mandated to comply with.

38:45 – 39:12•0

So, may I tell those watching what you're saying is we don't necessarily agree with what we're mandated to do. I am not a policy maker. That's not the that's not the subject. I want to hear Yes. Um, you know, we're here to just review the law, implement it, um, and do what we're supposed to do while ensuring that we comply with the city's general plan and the city council's policy directions. Thank you.

39:13 – 41:12•0

All right. So, there are a few slides. I will go through them pretty quickly just so that you have a general understanding. And of course as projects that come before the planning commission uh you may hear actually some of these bills are already kind of uh we have projects in the pipeline related to some of these bills already. Um the first is AB130 uh which exempts certain housing development projects from SQA. And so first of all, what you've noticed in the past few years is more and more projects, housing development projects are being carved out from SQA requirements because they're being um considered for administrative approval or affordable housing or something like that. So rather than overhauling SQA, the state legislature is just kind of poking holes in it. Um and so this is one of those. And here it requires the residential project uh to have well the project has to be at least 2/3 residential. So it could be mix it could be mixed use no more than 20 acres on a site that was previously developed with an urban use. So this kind of fits in more with um kind of a general idea of infill. Now the definition of urban might not align with what a typical person might consider urban. If you recall some of the state laws um defining urban areas also includes the city of Meny. It I think it really only excludes some of the very very remote towns in you know out in the far desert and whatnot. So um for purposes of these housing uh projects or housing laws, we are considered urban. Um it has to be surrounded by urban uses. It has to be consistent with the general plan zoning and specific plans. At least 15 units per acre, so pretty medium density. Um, medium to high density, so no, you're really not going to get single family housing. Um, no environmentally sensitive or hazardous sites, no demolition of historic

41:10 – 43:08•0

structures, and nothing for transient lodging, so no hotels or motel. Right? This is very directed toward um kind of housing. And of course, there still has to be requirements to consult with Native American tribes, which we have uh several around here. And meeting prevailing wage or skilled and trained workforce requirements depending on the project. And those provisions are similar to what we've had in the past with AB 2011 allowing affordable housing in commercial and um retail zones. and I believe it was s I can't remember what Senate bill it was but similarly um you're also getting a lot of these streamlined projects or residential projects have these prevailing wage or skilled and trained workforce requirements too. So you'll see a a trend there. Next is uh SB131 SQA near miss and this essentially allows residential projects that are not exempt under SQA to qualify for an exemption if the reason why they didn't initially qualify was because of just one factor. So SQL has a variety of exemptions and you you know you have to meet a list of requirements and sometimes somebody's just again there's a near miss because they don't meet one particular requirement. Uh this bill allows them to only analyze that portion right under the EI under squa so that they can qualify for the exemption. So that again making it easier for residential developments in um in the city. Okay. SB79 uh streamline developments. Again development projects for residential are uh the state is creating a lot of mandates to make it as easy as possible

43:07 – 44:32•0

for a lot of developers to come in and build residential housing uh residential developments. This bill is not effective in July until July 1st and this is for transit oriented housing developments. Uh there are certain requirements. It depends on which parts of the city and that could change over time depending on you know which areas of Manify have um more transit. And so as you can see here there's a lot of requirements for what is um you know how close they are to a transit stop. uh what was in that location before. There's I guess what I'm trying to say is that similar to other housing development bills, they're trying to make it easier faster um easier and faster for developers to build near areas that are already high trafficked, right? High h high traffic zones, a lot of um these big corridors. And that's typically where you're going to get, you know, public transit, buses, light rail, etc. Okay. Um, this is just additional requirements for that. And, um, as I mentioned, there are some exemptions for SQA that a project under SB79 can qualify for depending on, you know, what kind of affordable units they have.

44:29 – 44:51•0

Ty, quick question on that. Is there any parcels in Meny that are considered transitoriented? Maybe just downtown if there's a bus I Does a bus stop cons is that considered transit oriented? I don't think so. No, we really don't have we really don't have a transitoriented

44:48 – 45:29•0

Yeah, we don't not yet. And I think that that is where um like this will apply more I think in a lot of places like LA or like in Riverside where you have like if you have the rail line um but if you know cuz the city of Meny doesn't run our own bus lines right so whoever the entity is that does that they're going to be able to make those decisions. Um well they don't make the decisions but what their decisions are will impact the developments in our city. In other words, if the Paris line that's the only thing that could happen around here

45:27 – 45:45•0

if I can add actually the the specific plan manifi stop there once that uh line gets extended. So that could potentially will be a a site.

45:48 – 47:31•0

It will you please bring back the slide. Thank you. So AB893. So updating the definition of property or site. So this is one of those cleanup bills. Um so as a state passes these housing bills, you know, they use words pretty loosey goosey and then developers or interested parties will or cities will define things uh maybe differently in a way that is most beneficial to whatever their position is. And in in this case um the bill defines a site to be the area that's quote physically disturbed by construction um for the project. And so because of the way that it's defined, excuse me, including with that definition is also elimination of certain setback requirements for uh first floor properties or the first floor of certain properties as well as for parking. Um there's going to be I think as we pass or as the state passes more and more bills, there are these fights. HCD gets you know complaints. they issue some type of um response or guidance letter and then the state goes and tries to do a cleanup. That's kind of the cycle that we've been in in the last I think 10 plus years. Um and we're going to continue to see that because uh recently Governor Nuome uh for the 2026 cycle has made it very clear that housing is top priority for him. So, what does it mean here when it says buildings must abut within 10 ft of the street, not the rightway?

47:29•0

Yeah, I don't know yet. [laughter] I'm so sorry. It is.

47:39 – 49:30•0

Yeah, we also, if you recall, um, you know, we had to face this, we faced a lot of these issues with the ADU laws. I think there was probably like every year for like three or four years back to back we had new ADU laws just trying to clean up what they were trying to tell us. Uh and in some cases it was the difference between you know a semicolon or a period or a comma because that did affect how you know we were interpreting those laws. All right. uh SB 489 um just online list of requirements for project streamlining. Currently, cities are already um we have a list of what uh developers need to submit in order to uh submit a project or get a project approved. This just requires that we put it online and this is about m again making the process easier, clearer, more upfront so you don't have uh multiple I guess more delays, right? or saying, "Hey, now we need X and then we need Z and then we need one, two, three." Um, it's just trying to put it all up front so that everybody knows what playing field they're on. This one was pretty interesting. I'm curious how our planning and building will feel about this, but AB253 allows for thirdparty license building plan checkers uh for homeowners and developers if they believe that the city will take longer than 30 days to conduct that review. Uh um so um they would have to have a professional do that and uh the city would have to prepare uh resident permit fee schedules and post those schedules. I I don't know how this this would impact the city.

49:27 – 50:14•0

Well, ob obviously our uh turnaround times are within the 30 days. So, we don't have this issue. I think this issue probably applies more to counties that uh are having difficulties meeting the turnaround within the 30 days. So, I don't anticipate this being an issue with us. Yeah, this was just a really interesting workaround that, you know, I I just thought it was really curious. I I feel like it creates a uh an incentive [laughter] for certain uh plan checkers to to approve items and just be known throughout the community for being very uh lenient, I guess. So, um S, excuse me, AB7. Yes. So,

50:14 – 50:33•0

so then does that mean the city wouldn't have to go and check? That's correct. They're basically saying, "City, you're too slow. So, I'm going to hire this third party, this qualified professional to do the check and then they'll have to submit to the city somehow."

50:31 – 51:08•0

If if I can add, we we actually do provide that service already. So, we do have consultants that help us do plan checking because we're overwhelmed with plan check submitts. So, but we manage that consultant and and those plans get filtered through us. So, that already exists to some extent, but this is something different when someone can just go out on their own and and and and hire someone to plan check their own plan or the plans. Yeah. Hey, Ty. Yes. Um AB 253, is that due to the Palisades fire?

51:06 – 51:49•0

You know, I don't know. I don't know. I have to look into it. I can see how that's possible. Although it seems very Yeah, I guess I don't know that that could be a reason. Although, if that's the case, it seems like they could have limited to areas that had emergencies or, you know, or whatnot. But the idea that it's applying to the entire state seems quite broad. Ty, you don't That's what they do. True. So, Ty, you don't show the author of these bills. Would you like me? I can also add that. See the authors? Okay. probably got like five of them. He did. Uh Wix also has a few of them. Um I can update the PowerPoint. We can update that. Thank you. Update that.

51:50 – 53:49•0

Okay. AB712 attorneys fees for housing reform laws. I'm sure the California Bar Association lobbyed for this. Um, essentially if a party is suing a city for failing to comply with housing reform laws under certain definitions that would include something like, you know, SB330, AB 2011, all of these laws that were made to that were passed to make housing development easier. Now they can get attorneys fees for it in, you know, in addition to any type of fines and fees that HCD or the state may be able to impose on a city. So we might see more litigation coming is what we're thinking. Okay. AB 1007 reduce timeline for approval of projects under permit streamlining. So here again making things faster making it easier for developments. Um reducing the approval denial period from 90 days to 45 days. Uh that is I would say a pretty quick especially because a lot of the laws require us to be um extremely comprehensive. We have to raise issues in total um within that time period and anything that we forget or miss or don't you know require of the developer after that time period we cannot bring up again. So this does in my opinion really raise a lot of burden or increase a lot of work for city staff because it is a quick time you know turnaround. Oh and by the way I just want to state it doesn't clarify whether it's a calendar days or work days. So it's going to be calendar days. Okay. AB 1021 accepts housing from local educational agencies from SQA. I wasn't sure about adding this, but I do know we have the community college in town. And

53:47 – 55:45•0

so there have been a slew of laws that make it easier for non, excuse me, religious institutions as well as educational institutions to build housing on their properties. And so this is one of them to exempt those housing developments from SQA and also qualify for density bonus. Okay. SP92 density bonus law updates. Um so density bonus law as you know already allows for if a developer builds a certain number or percentage of affordable housing they can receive waiverss um consent incentives and concessions in order to facilitate that affordable housing development. And so here I think the interesting provision is it states that a concession or incentive shall not result in a proposed project with a commercial floor area ratio that is greater than 2.5 times the premises current allowed uh base zone commercial floor area ratio. So I think what they're trying to get at is they really want it to be a residential housing development um but still allow for commercial. I don't I think it's just to clarify for um some of our development projects because we don't want to get rid of all of the commercial floor area. Um so I think that'll be interesting. I think also what you're seeing is a lot of these housing development uh legislation are going toward mixed use. Um, you do have 100% residential usually for affordable housing, but I think more and more cities are pushing for mixed use, and that's what you're seeing them try to accommodate in the state. Okay. All right. Okay. Updates to Reena. Just a couple things here. Um, so when updating a new

55:43 – 56:40•0

housing adopting a new house housing element, cities must include information regarding potential constraints and limitations that we can anticipate adopting in the first three years after the housing element cycle. So this will be interesting because now in addition to actually doing the housing element itself, we have to have a a section or something like that talking about well these are some policies or ideas that we might want to look into in the next 3 years. That will require a lot of long-term planning. Um, but I think that is again trying to put information upfront for developers so they can see what to anticipate, what to expect. Uh, and then SB507 that might be more applicable to our city because it would allow tribal nations to count new tribal housing developments toward a city's arena.

56:38 – 57:22•0

Okay. I I I don't really understand how that works. So that means if Panga built something, we could count it towards our arena numbers. If it's within the city boundaries, but they're dependent sovereign nations. So I don't know how they could be within city boundaries. And by the way, you can handle dependent sovereign, not me. [laughter] Yeah. So um I do not deal with tribal law. Uh but this is just the way that the law is allowing us to count toward the arena number and I think I'm sure somebody in the state was fighting for it. We we do have property that it's owned by Pachanga within the city limits.

57:20 – 57:32•0

So I I I don't know if if you said we do. Yeah. So but it's not in trust. I would assume it's not in trust.

57:30 – 58:15•0

No. Oh, so what just within the the boundaries of the city and I think that's where they're going to the state is saying, "Hey, if it's within the boundaries of the city, you can count it if you want if you enter into an agreement." I can imagine like Tmacula they have um Pchanga has a lot of land over in Tmacula although most of it is um lodging for um like hotel use but that could be it obviously um I think in some you know whether it's by the hotels and things like that if they build any housing that's where those cities would benefit. Didn't all that new housing that's against the hill and I think that was owned by Penga wasn't it? I don't know. No. Okay.

58:12 – 59:47•0

I don't know. Updates to ADUs. Uh, no parking standards allowed for ADUs of 500 square ft or less. Um, eliminates occupancy requirements for J8US. If the JADU has sanitation facilities separate from the primary dwelling unit. So if you recall, one of the updates to a to ADUs and JADUs was that ADUs no longer require owner occupancy, but JADUs do. This changes that if there is separate sanitation facilities. Um but JDUs still must be rented longer than 30 days. And then a clarification for ADUs and JDUs that um requiring JDUs not to be more than 500 ft of interior living space. And then AB1050, something we are already dealing with, um is a property purchaser. Let's say they own a property or they buy a property that has CCNRs that limits the property's use for affordable housing um or residential development in general, they can by following a process with the county remove that restriction from the CCNR. So, for example, if you know, if you own a property that has only retail allowed, you might be able to, if you go through the county through a process with the county as outlined in the legislation, remove that limitation in order to build residential,

59:47•0

the CCNR, that portion of the CCNR,

59:51 – 1:01:49•0

override the city. Well, the CCNRs are well, yes, that would override this in some ways. We don't the city does not enforce the CCNRs. Um, but if there were some limitations, well, if this area is zoned for both commercial and residential and the CCNRs limits and does not allow residential, then this would allow the developer to get around that. Um, it doesn't speak to the zoning of whatever is allowed. But then as you know with other laws AB201 or any of these other laws, they can still build residential in areas that are not zoned for residential if it's zone for retail or commercial or offices. And that is it. That is it. Uh basically the the outline every year is always uh there are more laws mandates from the state that the city and city staff are looking to apply. Um a lot of these work in conjunction with each other. A lot of these are you know you're not you're not in the days of using one bill to get the project done. It's really a combination of a variety of them to to pick a parcel that you know they like or they own and finding all these different puzzle pieces putting them together to get a project that fits. Um and this is something that I know for example the League of California Cities obviously will often lobby against some of these because of issues of local control. Um, but these are the mandates we have from the state and a lot of it we won't know the full impact until it is being implemented in different cities. There have been bills in the past where we thought would be a big issue that haven't really been an issue and others that kind of sneak in and then suddenly everybody's doing it. Um, and that's

1:01:47•0

kind of the forecast we have going forward.

1:01:54 – 1:02:39•0

I would like just to make maybe a couple comments. One is, you know, uh, Ty gave you just a taste of what these bills are, uh, in five, six weeks, uh, when we go to the planning commission, the committee. I'm sure they're probably going to go over those again, and they're going to give us a a more detailed explanation of those, uh, bills. And, and just as an FYI, there we're already talking to developers to to take advantage of AB130 and SB131, which is the SQA exemptions on on some of those properties that do meet those requirements. So there there's interest and and obviously there's value in these bills because there it's making the process go a little bit faster because of the squa component.

1:02:36 – 1:03:19•0

Thank you Ty. Thank you. Okay let's move on to item number five agenda approval or modifications. Are there any modifications to the agenda? There are none. Okay. Can I ask the planning commission for an all in favor to approve the agenda? I [clears throat] I I hearing none opposed. The agenda is approved. Moving on to number six. Madame clerk, are there any requests to speak on non-aggenda items? No requests to speak.

1:03:18 – 1:03:44•0

Great. I have to read the next paragraph then. Okay, let's move on to uh number seven. Uh there is one set of minutes for the planning commission's approval. Does the planning commission have any modifications? Okay. Could I ask the planning commission for an all in favor to approve the November 12, 2025 minutes? I I

1:03:42 – 1:04:17•0

hearing none opposed. The minutes are approved. Okay. Moving now to number eight. There are no consent calendars items. Number there number nine. There are no public hearing items. Okay. And let's go to number 10. Discussion items. 10.1. Planning commission 2026 meeting schedule. This is item 10.1. Madame clerk. Could you please introduce this item?

1:04:15 – 1:04:49•0

Good evening, chair, commissioners, and staff. Um, as you all know, the planning commission meetings take place on the second and fourth Wednesday of every month. However, uh, later in the year, there are some, um, schedule conflicts with the holidays. So, staff is recommending we cancel the November 11th, 2026, November 25th, 2026, and December 23rd, 2026 planning commission meetings. Great. Okay,

1:04:47 – 1:05:11•0

chair, if I can if I can add one more thing and I apologize um uh Rachel for not bringing this up earlier. We do have the planning commission's academy where actually falls in the planning commission date as well, which is uh March 11th. So, I would recommend that we add the March 11th meeting as well.

1:05:07 – 1:05:52•0

Good call, Orlando. Thank you. Commissioners, any questions for staff. No. Okay. All right. Okay. Um Okay. So, let's move on. So, what's that? We need a motion. We need a motion. Yeah, we can um we can do an electronic vote on that. Okay. Well, I hadn't gotten there yet. So, clerk, are there any public comments? You say no.

1:05:50 – 1:06:34•0

Uh, commissioners have no have comment or or discussion. So, can I get a motion and a second to approve this item? I move. And then Yeah. Okay. Okay, that passes. Okay, so now we're just move on to 10.2, selection of chair and vice chair. This is item 10.2. Madame clerk, could you please introduce this item?

1:06:31 – 1:07:16•0

Yes. So, um, per our municipal code, the planning commission is required to nominate, um, a chair and vice chair every calendar year. Um, so with that, tonight we are selecting the chair and vice chair for 2026. Very good. Commissioners, any questions for staff? Okay. If there's no there's no public comments commission, is there any discussion for nomination of chair? I have a nomination. Sorry, didn't mean to be dramatic there. Um, it was

1:07:12 – 1:07:52•0

I I like to nominate Ivan as the commissioner. I mean, as the chair of the commission. I second that. And then um are we doing the co-chair already or no? Do we have Well, let's um I'm sorry. Let's say let's let's get a motion and a second to nominate the chair. So that was um for Commissioner Holler to be chair. Correct. Okay. I mean Oh, there we got We're going to do this. Okay. Congratulations.

1:07:57 – 1:08:42•0

Thank you, Chair Holler. Does that mean you does that introduce you? Does that mean you introduce the next item? Going into effect the next meeting. [laughter] Okay. Okay, guys. I want to ask for a motion and a second to uh to nominate the vice chair. I make a motion to nominate Michael as the vice chair. Okay. Second. Okay. Yay. As exciting as the Republic or Democratic National Convention, right? Yeah. We don't have the signs out here.

1:08:41 – 1:09:23•0

That passes unanimously. So, congratulations. Thank you, Vice Chair. Thank you. Okay. Okay. As as uh this chair was so comfortable. Yeah, I know. As um clerk said, chair and vice chair will be effective next meeting. Okay, let's move on to item number 11, the community development director comments. One of my favorites. community development director, do you have any updates or comments?

1:09:19 – 1:10:04•0

Uh just just one comment. I know that um you know at the end of last year we u ended the year with maybe not too busy agendas. Uh the projects are coming and uh the next few meetings uh will be a little bit more busy. So we'll make sure that you guys are uh busy with reading material. So just wanted to uh pass that along. Thank Thank you, director. Um, Michael, you have any reports on committee activities? I didn't bring them. Any any others, Chris? Ivan? Tammy? Okay. Too many to tell.

1:10:03 – 1:11:03•0

I have one. I guess it could be after this. It's kind of a affect cities. Um, I don't know if anyone saw, but some the staff probably knows about it, but out they're get collecting signatures right now for the uh constitutional amendment in California about passing taxes now has to have a twothirds vote. They tried it last time, it didn't pass. They're doing it again now. And the reason it has an effect is it says if the existing assessment districts that are they're they're usually passed with a 50% vote aren't updated within two years they become null and void. So this is going to change how we as property owners are assessments maybe. So just something interesting to think about. I don't know if staff has any comment on that. And I I think it'll pass, but it's it's an interesting financial analys shaking her head. No. So,

1:11:01 – 1:11:45•0

um it's not agendaized. Oh, okay. But uh I there's nothing to discuss right now. that there are I have done presentations on the last uh ballot initiative and it would have extremely detrimental effects on not just cities and um counties but also all public agencies including water districts, special districts, sanitation districts because it requires a very detailed analysis uh pass through of direct costs and um the definition of what that means is extremely stringent and could greatly affect public services. So keep an eye out for the news. That's all I have to say. Thank you for that.

1:11:43 – 1:13:40•0

Okay, now we're moving on to the all important number 13, future agenda requests from planning commissioners. I I'd like to ask the planning commissioners before I ask for a future agenda. [clears throat] I'm noticing in public comments every time they come like you saw in the benefit 247 the comments people says. Yeah, planning commission's making a mess out of approving anything commercial warehouse or whatnot. And um every time it's brought up, people are always naysayers for So what I'd like to do is two things I'm thinking. Remember when Commissioner David Brown, remember he came up or black came up white, excuse me, white? Yeah. He came up with why are the gas stations uh why are there that's another item. Why are there so many gas stations? Why are there so many car washes? And you came out Orlando with a great a great explanation and a table showing could could you bring that up again and reintroduce that to that's been about three years because people are still asking that question. Do we need another car wash? Well, yeah, we do because people are using them. So, anyway, I'd like to get that explanation out and then also maybe maybe talk about the benefits uh from the city's standpoint, not the planning commission standpoint, but the city's standpoint and why we make the decisions we make. What do we base the our decisions on? All the SQA uh your comments They're everything that they that they question is in our packet. So that's that's so basically what I'm asking is do do I do we want to

1:13:39 – 1:13:54•0

ask for a future agenda item for warehouses and uh commercial and uh gas stations and car washes about kind of a PR type of a discussion

1:13:52 – 1:14:45•0

a factual because because if you remember when Orlando brought up when when David White said how come there's so many gas stations and then Orlando came up with a table and it showed that it's it's because of where we're at in development. It's lopsided it seems because certain right Orlando Orlando certain areas weren't developed yet. So, so I just like people to if they listen or somehow see the reasoning behind that's what I'm that's not to talk them into it. Let them make their own of course you make your own decision but that's it's bothersome to me when I see Yeah. I saw it today if you look on uh 247 you see the comments. Yeah. Oh yeah, planning commission's messing everything up. Well, that means you're messing everything up because we're going by the facts that you gave us. We don't

1:14:42 – 1:15:26•0

if I go that far. We're pretty people. Well, but we're not we're not subjective. We we we don't do what we want or we think. Perhaps perhaps you could come up with a these is this is these are the city's positions on warehousing gas in this is our general plan statement and this is why we have taken this position a PR communication unless unless we want to all discuss it I think you could probably handle that in another presentation section y and put everything up there so that would be my suggestion do the same thing but just have him do it in presentation

1:15:22 – 1:16:07•0

yeah it I mean, it's not fair. It's not fair to the They don't even know why a builder comes here or a developer. They don't even know why they have the amenities they have or we have. So, anyway, it's I just Yeah, that'd be great. Do a presentation. What do you think, Orlando? And we can bring back uh something as a presentation at a future meeting. Is that a future agenda or just a presentation? Well, same thing, isn't it? it wouldn't it be on the agenda? Well, it's it's on the agenda as a presentation, but it's not an agenda item. In other words, we're not taking any action, right? It's a Yeah. Yeah. He's going to come in and make a presentation. Got you. We're not going to

1:16:06•0

Not that you don't have enough to do, but you know. Well, it's I think it'd be good for everyone. Yeah.

1:16:13 – 1:16:53•0

What What do there There's fallacies. What How do um warehouses ruin the environment? How do how do 18-wheelers tear up streets? How they don't tear up the freeway? How how do 18 I mean, you've put that thought into before you got it on your P. You've already thought about that. So, we're just they don't people need to see that the these items have been addressed and are being addressed. So, that's that's that's that. No, I think that'd be a good idea.

1:16:51 – 1:17:34•0

Right. Alberto, is you have a you have a different street section for for warehouse uh access? We have streets, right? So, you have what's your what's the width of the section for 18-wheeler? is depending on the traffic index depending on the but so so residential is like two over six two inches of pavement over yeah and so the p the section for the

1:17:32 – 1:17:59•0

chair that that will be some information that we can add as part of the presentation as well. Okay. Okay. Well all right Yeah. Right. Okay, guys. So, that's it. Adjourn this meeting at 6:41. You're trying to logically with the public

1:18:16 – 1:18:44•0

[music] [music] [music]

This transcript was automatically generated from the official public meeting video and is presented unedited. It reflects remarks made on the public record by elected officials, staff, and public commenters. Transcript accuracy may vary; view the original recording for reference.