Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

May I have your attention, please? Out of respect for the proceedings and in consideration of others in the audience, please turn off or silence any sound-emitting devices. If you wish to speak on an item or register your opinion for an item on today's agenda, speaker slips are available in the rear of the chambers and must be turned in prior to the item being called on the agenda to the Commission Secretary in the front of the room. Complete the green slip if you are in support of an item. Complete the pink slip if you are in opposition of an item. Complete the white slip if you are neutral on an item. If you have questions about today's hearing process or need assistance with speaker slips, staff is available to assist you. These hearings are recorded, so when your name is called, please approach the lectern and give your full name. Each speaker will have three minutes unless otherwise approved by the chair. Information on how to appeal any decision can be found on the last page of today's agenda and we will begin shortly.

Thank you, Madam Secretary. Good morning and welcome to the County of San Diego Planning Commission hearing of May 8th, 2026. Madam Secretary, will you please call the roll?

Commissioners, please answer for the record when your name is called. Commissioner Ashman?

Here.

Commissioner Calvo?

Here.

Chair Edwards? Commissioner Pallinger?

Here.

Commissioner Weber? Commissioner Sudbury?

Here. Here.

And Commissioner Sibelico.

Here.

Please note for the record that five commissioners are present and two are absent.

Public communication provides an opportunity for members of the public to speak to the commission on any subject matter within the commission's jurisdiction, but not on today's agenda. No specific action will be taken on any comments or queries that come from public communication. However, this could result in a referral to staff. Madam Secretary, are there any members of the public wishing to discuss a topic not listed on today's agenda?

Sean, do we have any callers on hold for Item D?

We have two callers. I'll be joining now. Thank you. With the caller ending in the last 4 digits of 4, 5, 9, 2, please press star 6 to unmute your mic. And please state your name for the record before you begin speaking.

Good morning, Board. My name is... I've got an echo here. Is this your... I wanted to speak about the ongoing of the county's social equity ordinance. One of the things that is very, very troubling is we live in an era of mass extinction, the sixth in history of the planet and the first to be induced by human activity. Policies intended to preserve biodiversity diversity existing in countries all over the world, from the U.S. Endangered Species Act to India's Wildlife Protection Act. The U.S. has led the way, typically, in environmental protection. That has changed dramatically with the massive exemptions of CEQA. The County Board of Supervisors seems to not want to listen to any of the advice, research, or or voices that counter the narratives that they want to pursue because of this marijuana industry. The only people that they seem to listen to are the equity licensees that have an economic profit of interest motivation. I also would like to thank very much the county's mining commissioners for trying to take a closer look understanding what the sensitive uses should be prioritized in that ordinance and doing your best to push back a little on it. And the county planning groups certainly appreciate it. We know that there is an ongoing ignorance of not only the human side of the marijuana ordinance and promoting these vices, that the county seems driven to do for some reason, but also the species that they do not understand. They don't know anything about keystone species, for instance. They don't know that the projects that they are putting in are affecting dramatically the most important keystone species that we have, whether it's the Anza Borrego Desert or unincorporated communities all over the county. but they need to be considered. This county board of supervisors has no right to destroy in perpetuity for a temporary gain in supporting an industry that they've decided they're going to partner with. They don't have a right to do that. And the unincorporated people who live out in these communities that value these lands really should be listened to. Just one example of many is they did a study on the crops of the vulture population in India. Please summarize your comments. It may not seem important. However, all vultures belong to the same species. Thank you for your comments. Your time is up. Thank you for letting me speak. Thank you.

With the caller ending the last four digits of 7613, please press star six to unmute your mic, and please state your name for the record before you begin speaking.

Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Becky Rapp. And today I'm here asking you to reconsider the socially equitable cannabis program. The evidence shows these uses bring significant community impacts that cannot be regulated away. Your responsibility is not to normalize an industry because the state allows it. Your responsibility is to protect public health, safety, neighborhoods, infrastructure, and quality of life in unincorporated communities. The county's own environmental report acknowledges significant and unavoidable impacts involving odor, grass noise, water demand, and wildfire concerns. Community planning groups across the county have already warned that these impacts fall disproportionately on residential and rural communities. Yet the discussion continues to focus almost entirely on equity and market access, while avoiding the growing body of evidence linking high-potency marijuana use to psychosis, depression, and suicidality, impaired driving, and youth mental health harm, and increased emergency room visits. Why are we ignoring the proven data? If the goal is equity, There are countless other industries we could support that do not carry these documented public health consequences. Please prioritize residents, families, rural communities, and long-term public health over the marijuana industry. Land use decisions should be made based on community benefit and not politics. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. We have one additional caller that I'll be admitting right now. Caller in the last four digits of 6598, you are muted and you just joined the call. Please state your name for the record before you begin speaking.

Thank you.

You are muted. Go for it. Caller in the last four digits of 6598, can you hear us? You are unmuted and we heard you when you said that you will go forward.

I thought you were going to give me further warning.

No, you're unmuted. Feel free to begin your comment.

Yes, thank you. This is Anne Riddle. Thank you for this opportunity to call in from my workplace. I too wanted to address the consideration of the board of supervisors regarding the social equity cannabis program, something that is bothersome to many of us out here in the unincorporated area. is that the purported reason to do this, to bring more pot shocks into our area and marijuana grows, by the way, we have five pot shocks and we have a very lively delivery and social media presence already. So it's not like we don't have it, is that they want to give those people who are incarcerated, primarily black people, as you'll remember from the meeting, the opportunity to receive reparations and the reparations the board of supervisors is considering is to give them the opportunity to have a pot shop. This seems very flawed. If reparations is what the Board of Supervisors wants to provide for those who are incarcerated, then I suggest they come up with something far more meaningful, far more wise, and far more kind to everyone considered. It also seems to be that this is not equitable. One, it's promoting one business type over another, and two, it's very divisive. in that it's making this opportunity available only to a certain group of people and I have to admit that it seems a little like what has been described as soft racism it's kind of like is this the only thing we can do from the county to help people who need help just to have them run a pot shop, clearly you're better than us. This is flawed from the inside out. Thank you for letting me share some thoughts that our planning group has talked about. And I would like to remind us that the county just told us the average life expectancy here in the county is 81 years old. For black people, it's 75. And I'd like to suggest that vaping and smoking does nothing to improve life expectancy for anyone. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. We have no additional callers for public communication.

Thank you. We'll close public testimony on items not on today's agenda. Just before we get started, I just want to note that Commissioner Sudbury doesn't have his jacket and tie on today. It's not out of any disrespect to the public, but he has a club hand. We're just happy he was able to get his shirt on. Thank you for clarifying that. Documents to be considered as evidence shall be filed with the Secretary of the Planning Commission not later than 4 o'clock p.m. on Wednesday, May 6th. The Planning Commission may, however, receive into evidence for good cause shown or impose reasonable conditions on late filed documents. Please note that this does not apply to materials presented at the meeting as part of a visual presentation. A staff presentation for today's items was posted online for the public to view on Tuesday, May 4th. more than 24 hours in advance of the hearing, and the public was able to provide comments by submitting e-comments prior to the hearing. Madam Secretary, are there any handouts or e-comments related to today's agenda items?

Vice Chair Pallinger, 14 correspondences have been received. All items were submitted to the Commission through email or hard copy. They have been made available to the public on the Planning Commission website and at the rear of the chambers.

Thank you. Mr. Director, are there any requests for continuances from staff?

There are no requests for continuance. Thank you.

We will now form the consent calendar. These are items to which no opposition has been expressed or received. Madam Secretary, are there any items for consent on today's agenda?

Chair Pallinger, one item is available for the consent calendar. Item number one, the Quail Ridge condominiums.

Commissioners? Any motion for consent?

I would move that we approve item one consistent with the staff recommendations.

Thank you, Commissioner Ashman. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner Sudbury. Madam Secretary, you want to call the roll, please?

Please wait until your name is called to vote. Commissioner Ashman?

Yes.

Commissioner Calvo? Yes. Commissioner Pallinger?

Yes.

Commissioner Sudbury.

Yes.

And Commissioner Sabalico.

Yes.

Please note for the record that this item passes with a vote of five in favor and two absent.

Thank you, Madam Secretary. We'll now begin with item, oops, let me jump down to item number two. The York Drive Senior Living. AT THIS POINT, ARE THERE ANY SPONSOR OR PLANNING GROUPS THAT ARE WISHING TO SPEAK, MADAM SECRETARY? DON'T WE NEED A STAFF PRESENTATION FIRST? THERE WE GO. EXCUSE ME. THERE WE GO. AT THIS POINT, WE'LL HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION ON ITEM NO. 2, THE YORK DRIVE SENIOR LIVING. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1, PLEASE Call in on 619-343-2539. The conference ID is 884-514-16. The conference ID is 884-514-16. We will begin with staff's presentation.

Good morning, Chair Edwards and Commissioners. I'm Sean Oberbauer with Planning and Development Services. Today I'll be presenting on item number two, which is the York Tribe Senior Living Project. The department is before you today recommending approval of the project.

Let's start that again identified by the red.

Morning chair Edwards and commissioners I'm Sean over Bauer with planning and development services today I'll be presenting on item number two, which is the York tribe senior living project, the department is before you today recommending approval of the project. Project site identified by the red star is located within the North county metropolitan regional planning area on an approximately 4.27 acre property. The project site is located in a portion of the unincorporated county that is surrounded by incorporated cities and in a transit priority area. The City of Vista municipal boundaries are approximately 1,000 feet southwest of the project site. The Buena Creek Sprinter Station is located approximately 1,300 feet southeast of the project site, and State Route 78 is located approximately half a mile southwest of the project site. The Inland Rail Trail and Buena Creek Sprinter Station rail tracks are located along the southwestern boundary of the project site. Lastly, the Vista Gardens Memory Care Facility is located directly adjacent to the site to the southeast. In 1994, the Board of Supervisors approved a major use permit for a phase development of a 99-bed skilled nursing facility on the property directly southeast of the project site. The same applicant team for the current York Drive Senior Living project completed construction of the final phases of the skilled nursing facility in the early 2010s for a project now known as Vista Gardens Memory Care. The applicant has submitted the current project based on board direction in the late 2010s to allow for a variety of permitting options for senior housing, including deed restricted group residential uses. The subject project site was previously developed with three single family residences that have since been removed through demolition permits. The southern portion of the project site was used for a staging area for North County Transit District for construction related to the Inland Rail Trail. The project site is primarily vacant with construction materials leftover from demolition of the previously existing residences. project consists of a major use permit for 183 unit deed restricted senior living development on an approximately 4.27 acre property. If the major use permit is approved a certificate of compliance will be recorded to complete merging of existing parcels into a single 4.27 acre parcel. The project includes a four-story senior living building that is approximately 46 feet tall with roof access structures reaching approximately 54 feet. Each floor ranges in size from approximately 34,000 to 35,000 square feet. First floor includes 24 senior units, as well as a variety of onsite amenities for residents, including a salon, library, communal kitchen, recreational rooms, fitness rooms, laundry services, and a theater. The second, third, and fourth floors include 53 senior units each. The remaining portions of the project site include an open courtyard, pool, spa, parking lot, landscaping, and signage. Road improvements for the project consist of widening and restriping York Drive to create a longer left turn lane onto South Santa Fe Avenue, as well as an all-way stop at the project entrance. The project also includes the replacement of a bench with a shelter at an adjacent NCTD bus stop along South Santa Fe Avenue. In accordance with the City of Vista Sewer Master Plan for the Buena Sanitation District, The project will result in construction of offsite sewer improvements approximately 600 feet south of the project site along and near El Valle Opulento. The project has been designed to redevelop a site and construct a senior residential development in a portion of the county near a variety of transportation options and in an existing senior care facility. The main structure of the project is designed toward the center of the property as far away as possible from adjacent property lines. The building is a triangular shape with the front entrance facing northwest toward residences along York Drive, And the central courtyard and pool of the project is directed toward the recreational area of Vista Gardens Memory Care Facility and away from adjacent residences. The applicant requests a height exception to the height regulations of the zoning ordinance, which can be permitted upon approval of the major use permit. The height exception is required for the number of stories requested for the project, as well as fire roof access structures, as shown in the slide. The project would include grading of the site and would result in a finished pad that will be approximately 8 to 18 feet below the existing grade of the adjacent roads and residences northwest of the project site. The project includes planting of mature landscaping with larger box sizes along the frontage of York Drive in order to provide visual relief and screening. The project site is located in an area of the county that is not represented by a community planning group. In the absence of a community planning group, County staff and the applicant conducted several outreach meetings to obtain feedback on the project. Following the initial two outreach meetings in 2022, the project design was revised to include additional landscaping with larger box sizes of trees along York Drive, additional widening of York Drive, North County Transit District improvements to an existing bus stop, and revisions to the architecture of the project. The following slides will address community feedback during public review of the CEQA document, as well as coordination regarding offsite sewer improvements. Mitigated negative declaration was prepared and circulated for a 34-day public review period from July 31, 2025 through September 2, 2025. Public notices were sent to property owners within a 1,500-foot radius of the project site, which included over 350 notices. A virtual meeting was conducted on August 11, 2025 to provide an overview of the CEQA document for the project and facilitate public comments. Staff received 16 formal comments from individuals, North County Transit District, or NCTD, Mayor John Franklin of the City of Vista, and the San Diego Archaeological Society. Six comments were received from individuals in support of the project, including Mayor John Franklin of the City of Vista. Staff met with the NCTD during public review of the project, and NCTD concurred with the requirements of the project that had been incorporated as conditions of approval. Eight comments were received from residents within the community with clarification questions, comments preferring a senior development on the site compared to what could be permitted by state law in the future, and concerns primarily focused on traffic, height, density, and off-site sewer improvements. The following slides will address the comments on traffic and the off-site sewer improvements. The project is located approximately a quarter of a mile away from the Buena Creek Sprinter Station and is in a transit priority area. A transit priority area is a region within one-half mile of a major transit stop such as Buena Creek Sprinter Station. In accordance with CEQA and the County's Transportation Study Guide, projects within a half of a mile of an existing major transit stop are considered to have a less than significant impact related to vehicle miles traveled. The traffic study prepared for the project concluded that the project would generate 643 average daily trips, or ADT. The project includes conditions and improvements such as carpooling and shuttle services, widening of York Drive and extending a left turn lane, improving an existing NCTD bus stop with a shelter, and installation of a stop sign at the project entrance that address traffic operations of the project. Lastly, the Department of Public Works is currently in the process of installing additional directional signage along South Santa Fe Avenue to assist drivers approaching the intersection based on coordination with NCTD. The project is conditioned to complete additional signage along South Santa Fe Avenue in the event that the DPW signage is not completed by the time construction permits for the project move forward. Following public review, County staff in the Buena Sanitation District met with neighbors along El Valle Apulento to discuss the offsite sewer improvements. The neighbors have concerns with the improvements outlined in yellow in the slide, as they are proposed within existing easements granted to the Buena Sanitation District or their existing sewer lines located between homes. The neighbors have requested for the sewer improvements to change alignment to offsite locations and change maintained access to the sewer lines. No homes will be removed as a result of the sewer line improvements, but there are existing unpermitted structures within existing easements granted to the Buena Sanitation District that will likely need to be removed or relocated as a result of the improvements and maintain access. The neighbors have continued to express concerns following public review and are in attendance of the hearing today. County staff and the Buena Sanitation team have communicated that the improvements cannot be redirected to an alternate route as any alternate route will require acquisition of additional easements, funding, grading, and environmental permits. Additionally, any alternate route would not eliminate the need to maintain existing or new sewer lines and manholes between the homes. Regardless of the York Drive Senior Living project, the Buena Sanitation District intends to complete the sewer upsizing improvements due to ongoing growth in the project vicinity. Because the project complies with all relevant codes and regulations, is in conformance with the North County Metropolitan's regional plan, and the required findings can be made, staff recommends that the Commission approve the project as detailed in the staff report. Staff also recommends that the Commission find the project in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act through the adoption of a mitigated negative declaration. This concludes staff's presentation, and we are available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Oberbauer. Commissioners, do we have any questions from staff? No. All right. We'll move on to public testimony then. Madam Secretary, do we have any sponsor or planning groups that wish to speak on this matter?

Sean, do we have any CPGs or CSGs on hold wishing to speak on this item?

We have no CPGs or CSGs on hold. Would you like to take the phone calls first or in person first?

Let's start with the phone calls then.

I'll be joining the calls now. We have three callers. With the caller ending the last four digits of 1299, please press star six and mute your mic, and please state your name for the record before you begin speaking.

Hi, my name is Kim Donahoe. Good morning. I'm calling to share my support. My mom has lived with me for the last nine years, and it's worked for us, but a lot of people aren't able to take in an aging loved one. So I do like the idea of this senior community that helps meet this need. The other piece of this that interests me is how this project brings a bigger discussion on housing. I've seen reports about the push for density next to transit. I think the writing is on the wall that something is going to go here in a matter of time. And when the site gets built out, I would much rather it be for senior citizens who are probably retired than a regular apartment complex where people are still commuting to work or taking kids to school. To me, this is a win-win for our community. We get the housing that is basically inevitable at this point, but with far fewer impacts. There's also the added benefit of it being next to the bus and sprinter stations, which helps seniors who aren't driving anymore. These homes will help a lot of older people maintain their independence and sense of self in their golden years. And I've seen how being surrounded by people and activities has really helped my mom, and I hope this new community can bring that same renewed energy and connection to others. So please vote yes today.

Thank you for your comment. With the caller ending in the last four digits of 7315, please press star six to mute your mic and please state your name for the record before you begin speaking.

Hi, my name is Brittany Smith. I wanted to call in because I heard about this project from my neighbor and I wanted to call and share my support. I understand and I appreciate her passion to the contrary, but we really do need housing. And I could think of a lot of work uses for this land. These apartments and all the programs that they offer I think will really help people in the community. And I know I would love to have my parents and grandparents closer to me. I also understand that the infrastructure upgrades would happen regardless of the project. I thought that any suggestions update the sewer system was because we really need it. And we shouldn't delay quality housing and important interest upgrades. I appreciate you taking the time to make the decisions that will benefit our community.

Thank you for your comment. With the caller ending the last four digits of 9388, please press star six to unmute your mic, and please state your name for the record before I begin speaking.

Dr. Jacqueline DuPont. Hello, everyone. I appreciate everyone's opinion so much, and it's just so valuable. This project means a lot to me, so I'm talking in support of it. And I don't think it's just about lifespan and aging. I think it's about health span. Just for our older adults to be able to stay connected to our community, especially the community they've been living in. Nearby and a communal area where they can cognitively improve their sharpness, you know, like cards, maintain purpose, preserve independence. just really contribute and feel good about it, even if they've lost, for example, mobility. They might have a walker or they aren't driving anymore. They still can feel this. Really, it's all about anti-loneliness, just putting them together to make just a place for happiness and joy. where they can live and be just dry market being isolated or living in a large rural area where they can't get to things that you'll find we'll continue to get there so it's so critical to have this in our neighborhood and I really appreciate everyone.

Thank you for your comments. We have no additional colors for this item.

Thank you Sean. Madam secretary we have the public testimony.

We do, Chair. If, excuse me, when your name is called, please come forward and stand near the lectern. As soon as the person before you is finished, please approach the lectern and state your name for the record when you begin your comments. I will begin with Ms. Kimri Wells.

Hi. As she stated, I'm Kim Rewells. I live at 240 El Valle Opilento since 1993 with my husband, Steve, who is here today also. I'm speaking in opposition of the project on behalf of a group of neighbors that oppose adopting the New York Center Living Project, specifically the condition requiring completion of the offsite sewer line improvement along and near El Valle Opulento in accordance with the City of Vista Sewer Master Plan and Buena Sanitation District dated 2017 and 2025. Our three residential properties will be severely adversely impacted by the imposed project condition And in December 2025, we presented the agency a formal joint owner objection. This objection is not included in the Planning Commission hearing report and was never replied to. It is a very comprehensive objection covering the topics I will briefly address today, including a summary of legal authorities that substantiate our objections. I have a copy if you would like it. The staff video presentation incorrectly states at the time mark 7.56 that neighbors want to change the maintained access to the sewer lines. Easement access has been abandoned on the resident's property for 20 plus years, and if any maintenance has been done, it has been from offsite access locations. Buena Sanitation District Master Plan was prepared without any notification provided to the affected property owners. My husband and I were shocked to hear in October of 2025 from the developer that they believe a sewer easement was granted on our lot in 1965. The only record of this easement is written description on the document they showed us with verbiage that is foreign to the average person. It's a serious breach of responsibility for agencies and developers to assume this easement and demand access to our property without providing legitimate certified proof that the easement exists. Although the majority of the improvement is proposed within known existing easements granted to Buena Sanitation District, the easements granted do not express unrestricted rights to Buena Sanitation District to impose these improvements. The rights of the servient owners will be established under California easement law. The proposed improvement is an expansion beyond the original scope. The easements do not permit vehicular access or roadway access, such as an asphalt road. Long-term abandonment of the easement rights, and for more than two decades, Buena Sanitation has not accessed this easement, exercised operational use, or mitigated or maintained vegetation. The parcels contain voluntary protected oaks and black walnuts and are in an environmentally sensitive riparian corridor. According to CEQA, review has not been provided. The proposed improvement in roadway would be partially constructed in a floodplain. Nothing in the Buena Sanitation Division Master Plan shows proposed improvement, complying with number 28.1 FEMA requirements of the Planning Commission hearing report. In the past, the city has failed to require developers to comply with FEMA regulations, creating increased flood liability and burden to nearby offsite properties. Noncompliance projects include North County Square and the Valvoline Station. The county has a responsibility to cause FEMA compliance and this is not to be overlooked for this improvement within the floodplain. Two environmentally superior and feasible alternative routes exist for the off-site sewer improvement. Both are located outside the riparian corridor, avoid protected trees, and would not create a new or increased burden to the residential properties. One lies at the south end of El Valle Opulento, is an unobstructed roadway easement and outside of the sensitive riparian corridor. This alternative location is supported by the easement owner who has never been contacted by the developer or agencies about granting the sewer easement. and is not addressed in the VHA memo. The second alternative is on the public roads of Santa Fe and Robolini. This alternative was just identified this week. I spoke to Ken with the Buena Sanitation District, who expressed openness in discussing this route. The route is by far the most optimum route for the offsite improvement. It's a global solution to the El Valle Opulento current and future improvement issues. would handle high flow for ongoing growth in the projected vicinity, would reduce flow to the El Valle Opulento sewer lines, excuse me, I have to breathe, negating new access burdens on residential properties. Easements are already available on the public roadways. It would be easily accessible for maintenance. It would not be a burden to any residential properties. It would have zero floodplain and sensitive environmental impacts or hurdles. would be cost effective by eliminating additional future master plan improvements. City of Vista Buena Sanitation District has failed to reply to our formal objection and to comprehensively analyze any of the alternative routes. They have replied solely on the opinion of the BHA memo.

If you could please summarize.

I'm trying, okay. The Planning Commission report has relied heavily on the BHA memo, as well as communicating with Buena Sanitation and the master plan. The improvements cannot be redirected to alternative routes as they would require acquisition of funding grading. Under CEQA, cost alone cannot justify rejection of the environmentally superior alternative. The report also states the maintenance of the lines and the manholes. The route number two would alleviate that. And for 20 years they have maintained this manhole offsite. There's multiple other manholes in the city that do not have access roads and are maintained offsite. I'm wrapping up fast.

Okay, go ahead.

The staff recommends strongly rely on the BHA engineering as well and And apparently they tasked the city to find a way to negate the alternative routes. In closing, without reviewing the joint owner's objection, the commission panel has been denied the opportunity to completely and thoroughly review all the related information relating validating our objection to the off-site improvements. Therefore, it's impossible to fully make an informed objection a reasonable decision. Approval today would cause our properties significant financial harm by substantially depreciating our property values, costing us more money, appealing this highly intrusive burdensome improvement. It will devastate the environmental habitat we love, harshly affect the quality of life, and deny our rights to peacefully enjoy our property and homes. Thank you for your time and consideration. We respectfully request that you do not adopt the permit today until what time we can work, you know, on the major permit for alveoli, opaline to condition, sewer improvement with the point of sanitation and can properly analyze and request and be revised to adequately be equitable for all of us that are affected by this project. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.

I appreciate all your effort that you put into that. Was that the presentation that was supposed to go over three minutes, or is there another one? Okay.

Correct. We actually do have a couple more people who are a part of her group that have been approved for the five minutes. And so up next, we do have Mr. Charles Steve Wells.

Excuse me, sir. Before you speak, I just want a clarification from counsel on this issue. Is this within the jurisdiction of the commission, this issue being Or is it a civil issue outside? The easements? Yes.

Yeah, staff has reviewed the easements. They look like valid easements. It's a civil issue between the easement holders and the property owners. And there's probably a lot of different ways they can try to work that out to do realignment. And I'm sure there's a lot of strategies that the district will employ to try to make it as possible.

And I understand the district's here. We want to hear from the district also, Mr. Director. Okay. We just want to clarify that. Thank you for coming down and speaking, but most of this is outside of our jurisdiction.

Okay, I understand. Thank you for listening to us. And then we'll get back right away to the traffic, because that is in your preview. This is gonna add 650 cars, which is okay. The good outweighs the bad, let's say. But as far as the county has been missing their duty to take care of South Santa Fe. There's no sidewalks. They mention, oh yeah, the sprinter's down there and the bus is over here. Well, they make a quick exit to the bus stop, but it doesn't let you walk to the Sprinter, there's no sidewalks. The roadway is horrible, as well as El Valle Opulento as well. If those improvements were included, it would help the sewer system out, it would help the water system out, it would help the fire and the ambulance people out. All of this has been restricted more and more. All these improvements have been asked and on schedule for a long time but they're not happening. So as residents right there, we're having a difficult time with getting in and out. Recently, it's the way things are going about. We finally got our roadway paved. Thank you very much on El Valle Opulento, and you did Robolini as well, because it's just been horrible. So now we're going to, Now you'd put in 1,200 feet of asphalt, did a really nice job, tore all the old out. Now we're gonna tear 600 feet out and do the sewer. That's dumb. 600 feet, nice road, tear it out. And we told the engineering, the county boys, when they were out there surveying stuff, hey, you know, there's a sewer coming in here. Oh, okay. They tore it up and, beautiful road, now it's going to be a mess again. So that's our thing is the county isn't keeping up. We're just kind of left behind that whole section in there. It's scheduled for improvement, but that's when we moved in there 30 years ago that was on the schedule to be done, and it hasn't happened, and we're upset with that. Then I'll have to turn the page here. I'm having trouble with the confidence on the overall plan that's going to happen here on the sewer. One minute, Joe comes and presents us with a main increase in size from 10 to 12. Not a big deal. About a year later, the boy in the sanitation shows up and says, with the same plan, and they cross out the 12 and they put an 18 down. And it's like, okay, when did this happen? What's going on? The new zoning is all happening. We understand that that's gonna impact everything tremendously. But we're still painting ourselves into a corner with this manhole in the back of the lot. There's other options that are available. Yes, they will cost money. But I believe if they look at the overall picture to come up with a better flow, that it will enhance the whole neighborhood and it's gonna cost money, but it's gonna be county money as well. And we're begging you to release some of this funding. It'll create jobs and stuff. Yeah, it's gonna be expensive, but it's the platform to work with. I don't believe that there's been enough money put towards it to do it correctly. It's a huge undertaking to do it. I agree, but maybe they need a little more time to plan it. Thank you so much. I urge you, I really want the facility to be there. We're not downing the facility. We're just the process for the sewer. Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir.

Up next, we have Fedor Moss.

Good morning. My name is Fedor Moss. I agree with my neighbors, Kim and Steve, and my wife will speak here shortly as well. We live on 238 Avaya Palento, where the easement is running through our property. And like Steve said, we do agree with the senior development place going in and everything, it's just the whole sewer issue, putting a road in our backyard is unacceptable. You know, it's literally hugging the wall of my house, traffic going in and out. They mentioned that they spoke to other neighbors in the area and they weren't agreeing with taking alternative routes where I actually spoke to a few of the neighbors and they did they are opposed to, I'm sorry, they do, you know, they wanna take that option to, you know, considered going that alternative route, which is a street down Evalia Palento. And it's doable, I think. It needs to be revisited. There is other ways to go about it, instead of putting a road in my backyard, literally, where we have a child, seven-year-old. We have parties and the whole shebang. What else we got here? If they do put this road in, the trucks coming in to service this manhole, again, it hasn't been serviced in 25 years plus or whatever the time was. There is no road. It's never been... The manhole, they can... access it. Like I said, we don't know anybody access this since we've been there for the last six years. There is no sign of any kind of road. If you look at the pictures, obviously this is our livelihood. This is my backyard, our backyard, where we spend time playing with kids. But having a truck going by, what happens if he hits my house? Who's going to take care of the repairs? It's just, I think it's a little wild going this way. I say, you know, I ask to take a look at a different routes which do exist, I believe. They need to address it a little bit more and kind of plan on it a little, take a little longer time to revisit all this. And then like if this is to happen, This is taking a toll on our livelihood. It's taking away just the construction in itself. Digging this trench. Where's the spills going? Where's the equipment going to be? Turning the excavators. This is heavy machinery we're talking about. There's not enough space in this easement between my fence and my wall of my house. It doesn't make sense. I don't see it happening. A lot of headaches to come, I guess. So please take a closer look and see what could be done. The easement itself hasn't been serviced. Our neighbor below us, he's a veteran, very nice gentleman. His property is going to get taken up quite a bit as well. Similar layout for the easement on his line, on his backyard. And the elevation between the two properties is crazy. It's the construction that needs to be done with that. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't fit. So, yeah, we ask that you guys, you know, take a good look at it. And hopefully there's different options on this. That's pretty much all I got today. Thanks, guys. Thank you, sir.

We appreciate your comments. Next speaker.

Actually, Vice Chair, we're going to have a short introduction. We're going to actually do the applicant presentation. And then we will resume the remaining of the public comments that we have. So if we can now have the applicant go ahead and come up to the podium to present.

Hello?

Oh, good.

All right, good morning, everyone. Excuse me, madam.

Did you need more than three minutes? How long is your presentation? Like five minutes. Okay, five minutes, that's fine.

I'll go quick. All right, my name's Arlene Tendik, and I'm here on behalf of Joe Balbus and Harry Crowell and the rest of the project team. We've been at this for about five years already and have worked closely with staff and the Buena Sanitation District in that time to address the community concerns that we've heard a little bit about today and we've heard certainly over the last couple years. And the rest are right here at the bottom of the screen. Sean did a great job really digging into our responses to those comments, but there's a couple areas that I'd like to reiterate for you today. The first at the top in relation to community compatibility and kind of shielding of the building, the image on the top is from our initial submittal in 2021. And then on the bottom shows the improved landscaping that we added. These trees are actually within the project fencing. There's a secondary layer of mature trees on the outside. So what that does is really soften those edges and create that visual relief between us and our neighbors. The landscaping is comprised of trees and shrubs to really give that texture and color and make it a lot more welcoming. This section shows just another view of that. You have the landscaping as well as the elevation changes. While we can't shield the whole project, we did try to pay special attention to those edge conditions to making sure that we were really aligning with our neighbors. The vision for this project is really to make sure that our senior citizen population has a safe and welcoming place to age. Contextually, it makes a ton of sense. Some of the speakers have alluded to this. It is immediately adjacent to the Vista Gardens Memory Care. We are close proximity to public transit and about three miles from downtown Vista and the Vista Senior Center. We are adjacent to the Inland Rail Trail. I think one of the commenters mentioned walkability and connectivity. The project does include an electric community shuttle that can also take people over to the sprinter station. NCTD also has programs. They have their lift paratransit for disabled members of the community, as well as reduced fares for seniors. So it makes transit a lot more viable, a lot more convenient for people. Combined, all those things make this project uniquely situated to align with local and regional goals related to transit-oriented development. For me, personally, it's not every day that we get the opportunity to work on a project that hits a little close to home. My mother-in-law has been living with dementia for the last 10 years, and since her diagnosis, we've been really focused on her care. But fast forward, she and my father-in-law are both in their 70s, and so now our family is grappling with both of their care. And my story is not even remotely unique. Everyone we talk to on this project has had a similar story with an aging family or loved one. This project goes above and beyond in delivering the kind of amenities and features and support that really help people with that, not just the folks that live here, but with their family members as well. And there are recreation spaces, activity centers, a centralized dining area where people can just hang, connect, spend time together, which gets increasingly difficult as elderly have more isolated lives. We also have on-site health care for in-home visits and physical therapy. In conclusion, this project is so much more than housing. It creates a thoughtful senior living community that really does fill this critical gap in local housing needs. Through our community outreach and close collaboration with staff and Buena Sanitation District, we believe we've addressed all the questions and concerns that have come forward. We ask that you follow staff's recommendation and vote to approve this project today. Our team's here for questions, and we thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. All right, Madam Secretary, I want to resume public testimony.

Thank you, Chair. Up next, we have Lauren Moss.

Good morning, guys. I'm Lauren Moss. I reside at 238 El Valle Opulento with my husband Fedor. We bought our house in 2020 and were aware of the easement and access that Buena Sanitation had to it. Not once, like they had mentioned, have they ever come and serviced it, maintained it, or done anything along those lines. When we purchased the house and we were talking to the owners, They even mentioned that nobody has serviced it. Kim and Steve are like family to me. I've known them since I was two. They luckily got us in the house because nowadays we would have never been able to afford a house. So this is our livelihood. This is our home. We want it to be our forever home. But at the same time, we don't want it. road going through a backyard. I have provided some pictures that I'm sure you guys have. You can see right outside of my bedroom door we have a little space that's literally where they want to impose the road. So not only is it very invasive and intrusive but it's literally such a lack of privacy. We look at out that door. There is also a view of out of our living room. We have our shutters. Literally that's where they want to put the road. They are now saying when our house was built in 1997, obviously they had to get permits and everything to build it. Now Buena Vista Sanitation and the city or the county, not sure exactly who, but now they're saying our eves are in the way, but they have never proposed anything. as to what they are going to do with our eaves. They also say that our AC pad, which, again, was there when we purchased the house, and I believe you do have to get permits and things for that. I am not an AC person, so I am not completely sure, but that has been there, and they are now saying that we have to repower and reroute everything to our AC and move it so then they can have access to it. Safety. We have a seven-year-old boy. We have a dog, two cats. Our number one priority is our son, obviously. Driving a huge truck up and down that road is insane to me. It's going to be... Horrible. He has tons of friends that come over. We do barbecues all the time, family gatherings. To have something run all the way from that back end all the way to the other side of the house is crazy. You can also see this fence in the back, kind of right where that chair is. That's the fence that we share with Cruz, which unfortunately is our neighbor who has had medical issues. He did want to be here today, but unfortunately he had a doctor's appointment and couldn't be here. He did write a letter just saying that he is opposed. If you guys want this, I have it here. But they are proposing to go right through that fence. His house drops down probably, I don't know, I think it's like four to eight feet that it drops down. and he's got a lot of stuff in his backyard. We do not want to see his backyard. Our backyard looks a lot prettier. We don't want to look at it. They have not told us anything about what they're proposing to do, whether they're going to put a chain link fence up there that we have to see through or how they're even going to go back and forth. Let's see. They also haven't talked about how often they're going to be servicing this manhole. Again, nobody has serviced it since we've been there in over six years. Our neighbors, Kim and Steve, who have lived there for over 30 years, hasn't seen anybody come maintain or do anything to that manhole. And now they want to build a road, which is just insane. Sorry, I thought I was loud enough. Yes. So then privacy or lack thereof, I've kind of talked about that in multiple different ways. Our property value is also a huge thing. Obviously, when we bought the house, we knew that there was an easement on it. At no point did we think that they were going to build a road. It was more so... access to it, and we are happy to grant them access if they need it, but we are not okay with them building a road that goes right through our backyard. It's just not something that we're okay with, and we're going to fight it until we can't fight it anymore because that's our livelihood, that's what we've spent so much money on, and that's what we want to maintain. We kindly ask that you guys put yourself in our shoes as a family, you know, and the negative impact that it will have on not only our property value, but our family, our livelihood. You know, we have the right to peacefully enjoy our home. And by putting a road and driving big trucks back and forth, it's not going to be very enjoyable. So we kindly ask that you guys just reconsider or at least not approve this at this time. Thank you, guys.

Thank you.

Up next, I have Cheryl Leonard.

Good morning. Can you hear me? Okay, thank you, all right. There are several reasons why I am here representing a number of neighbors in the York Drive area. I've lived there for 50 years, so a long time, yes. I know something has to be developed on that property. We're not notified of the first meeting that was held at Shadow Ridge Country Club. I was told by a neighbor, so I ended up going and told Rod that we were not officially notified. We are within the 300-foot area. Then I also noticed that there were additional meetings that were held. We were never invited to any of them. Staff notified us of this meeting. That's the only notification we got. It's sporadic off and on with homeowners throughout our community that have heard about it or have received information. There's not been consistent notification. I called the developers twice, no response. One response he said, we don't have an update for you. We're not giving you any information. The other one, he didn't even bother to return my call. So I was surprised to see that this had progressed to this point. One of our concerns at Shadow Ridge when we met with Rod, the engineer, was the height of the building being four feet tall. If they took off the top layer of it, it was more acceptable. We don't feel that at this time that you have given us enough time to work with staff or to talk to staff. We have a community out there, and I heard that you have no public community to work with, but there is a number of us who have lived out there for a number of years. It's not like we're brand new people moving out there. We love our habitat out there. The owls are out. Even the bats are out at nighttime. A lot of us know coyotes running up and down the street. It doesn't bother us. We're used to that. We have no streetlights. We have no curb and gutters, okay? We prefer that. We moved out there because of that. We don't want sidewalks. And when you develop, you have to put in the sidewalks. Also, we're concerned about the... parking lot lights because they do reflect and they are bright and that's gonna push our habitat away even more. You're talking about putting in a senior facility and they're not gonna walk to the sprinter station, they're seniors. The project does not have enough parking spaces for staff or for the guests and people living there. There's gonna be vehicles going in and out of there, making noises, delivering food, you know, staff, health staff, things like that. So we're requesting for today for you to reconsider and please do not approve this project as of now. Give us time to work with the staff and work with the developer. We've not been told of these additional meetings. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, ma'am.

Up next, Chris Garcia.

Good morning. My name is Chris Garcia. I'm a property owner and resident on York Drive. I wanted to first thank Sean Oberbauer for his communications with me and following up on this item. I'm here speaking generally in support of the project. You know, after talking with my neighbors, I know everyone would prefer lower density, lower height, less traffic. I think we all understand that in San Diego County. Understanding the state mandates of housing and the state laws that are coming down and if and when SB 79 is applicable to the county area, this could result in over 400 units for the site, market rate, minimum parking due to the sprinter station. I think this project is a good complement to the Vista Gardens community next door. I think, again, we would prefer less units, but that's not the reality we live in in the state of California at this time. I do appreciate the improvements and signage for the intersection. It's a weird intersection at Santa Fe and New York Drive, so anything that can be done to assist drivers in that area would be great. I do have a little bit of concern with the four-way stop and the visibility. So if staff in final engineering could take a look at that where the stop limit lines and the landscaping to ensure that there is clear visibility at that corner, that would be perfect. You know, and I sympathize with the residents that have the sewer line. I really hope that a different alignment can be made. can be worked through with the Buena Santa Chastain District. I have a sewer easement in the back of my yard. I will say, luckily, that everyone that's come to service that easement has been professional, and it's been minimal. So I hope that a solution can occur with that. But overall support of the project, and thank you for your time. Thank you.

And lastly, we have Beverly Onstad.

Hi there, I don't know if you can hear me. My name is Beverly Onstott and I live at 1850 Devon. My husband Charles and I have lived there for 30 years and we've been opposed to this for five years that we've known about it. We moved there because of the area, because we enjoyed living in a space that Like this other lady was saying, it's our neighborhood. This is where we live. And putting a four-story building seems so out of place, it doesn't even make sense to us. The height of it, the amount of... of traffic that it's gonna bring to us is such a concern. I mean, there's already enough traffic there to begin with. The intersection there is very concerning to us. I've seen numerous people make mistakes, turning the wrong direction. It just doesn't seem like that is a place that is something that we need in that area. It concerns us also about the, about having, okay, it's concerning about the The emergency vehicles getting there. You know, we hear the blasting of, you know, the ambulances trying to get through. How are they going to get through with, you know, additional... traffic in the area. Many of the neighbors thought that when something was going to be built there, they thought it was going to be a part of Vista Gardens, which our house looks right onto Vista Gardens. Something like that would make much more sense than 183 apartments. We were very sad to hear that that's what they wanted to build. I understand because of you know many issues that this makes sense for a lot of people but there is nothing in our area that would be right for community like a park like a walking trail that could connect to the trail that's already there. Give something to neighbors that is you know makes more sense than adding more you know, more people to the area that's already very, you know, very much congested. Around 20 years ago, when we first moved there, they wanted to build a school for troubled children. And all of our neighbors got together and decided that we would fight, we would go to court to Stop that from happening. And we won because we care about our neighborhood. We care that all of these reasons is going to give us tranquility and a better lifestyle. And putting something there seems so out of place at this point. I understand what people want to say, but yeah, I just don't think that this is something that's going to improve the neighborhood. So thank you very much.

Thank you, ma'am. Madam Secretary?

That is the last speaker. We are done.

All right. Thank you very much. With that, we'll close public testimony and open it up for discussion.

Mr. Chair. There was a public speaker who referenced a owner's letter of objection. I was wondering if we could take a moment to accept that into evidence for good cause. I'm kind of a broken record on this. Last time there were people trying to put in a ski park in Escondido. I asked for the same thing. I'm going to keep doing it. If a lawyer is going to write a letter with legal authorities that pertain to what we're deciding, and I want to read it.

All right, Commissioner, I appreciate that. Has that been submitted?

Yes, that's been submitted. That was in the packet that you should have there in front of you. Is that this letter? Correct.

So, Commissioner, I believe it's been submitted into evidence. So you should have it in your packet there.

Okay. I think the person said that it wasn't in evidence, but if it is, then we're good. Okay.

All right. Thank you very much.

Mr. Sudbury. I'll admit I didn't read the easement word for word, but I'm assuming it's correct that the jurisdiction has authority to put an access road in. Was there ever an exception not to do one? This seems like it would be it. Do we know if that's a for sure foregone conclusion that they can't upgrade the sewer line without putting in an access road? The sewer line's been there for decades already without one? We could hear from the district.

Would that help? Sorry, I thought I was on.

Yeah, good morning, Commissioners. My name's Steve Nowak. I'm a principal engineer from Buena Sanitation District. There is an existing sewer line that's been there since the 1960s. It does represent a large, collects a large tributary area and at the very back of that property meets up with another sewer line that takes another large tributary area. So this is a really large confluence point for the sewer system. It's not like a small six or eight inch local collector. It does have to be upsized from a 10 inch to an 18 inch pipe to accommodate the existing development in the area as well as the future growth. The access road itself, it's really gonna be like a gravel path that's gonna be accessed every 18 months or so with advance notice. The district can certainly work with the neighbors or has offered to work with the neighbors to continue fencing it, give notice in advance. And it is not going to be an in and out type thing. It will be with much advance notice. And the interval is every 12 to 18 months we go in there, we clean the sewer pipe. And then every 10 years we go and we film the sewer line. So it's not a very intrusive type use. And it is very necessary. So as a sewer agency, we're mandated to have vehicular access to every manhole. We don't have that. So we strive for that, especially large infrastructure like this, where you've got so much sewage confluencing at once. The other instance we would use is in the emergency scenario. So not only routine maintenance, but in an emergency, it is very critical, especially adjacent to a creek, that we have access there to clear any blockages or spills or anything like that may occur. So that is our goal, is to upsize the sewer to accommodate the future growth and the existing development in the area and provide reliable maintenance vehicle access on a scheduled, rare interval.

I heard that this upgrade may need to be completed regardless of this proposed project. Is that correct?

That's correct. It was first identified as a need in the 2017 city, uh, when a sanitation district sewer master plan, and then reiterated in the 2025 sewer master plan that the district had just completed taking into account all of the, uh, the density, the general plan density in the county and all of the areas tributary to this area. Uh, and so, It is currently 10-inch. It was originally slated for, I think, a 12 or 15-inch, and then with this new master plan update we've identified, let's make it bulletproof for the next 50 year to the year 2050, and we're going to make it an 18-inch pipe so we never have to go back in there again, or not never, but for the next, you know, several decades.

But going up the extra inches won't create a wider road or any more disturbance to the yard, or will it?

The vehicle that we have to get in there is a large truck. It's a Vactor truck. So we're not looking at cutting off eaves. We're looking at making it, you know, gravel, which is primarily the material that's in the backyard now. It'll be like a reinforced gravel that, like I say, we can drive through with a truck, service it for an hour, and then back our way out and close the gates. I'm sorry, did that answer your question? Okay.

I have another question for you. Will it be replaced by bursting it, or will it be dug up and replaced?

So at this point, you know, this is a conceptual approval. We haven't gotten into the final engineering. Given the depth of it, it's not very deep. I would anticipate traditional open cut trenching, but we haven't fully vetted that out. Pipe bursting could have impacts of like vibration on the existing, you know, on the building foundation. So, you know, after this, you know, the district will go and meet with the developer and work out this actual construction and develop engineering plans to build the project.

Okay. Thank you.

Any other comments from the Commission? I have a couple questions I wanted to bring up with staff. Public speakers brought up lighting. Is the lighting on this project in conformance with dark sky standards?

That is correct, Chair Pallinger. It is required to comply with the lighting code, which means shielded lighting and all those standards you referenced.

And is the amount of parking for this project in conformance with county standards?

It is conformance with it required parking demand in this area of applicant prepared a parking demand memo which resulted in a 160 parking spaces because it is a senior facility they can request that many spaces through the use permit okay.

And finally, there is a concern from the neighbor on site distance at the stop sign at the entrance.

Commissioner Pallager, through the Chair, yeah, the project is conditioned to meet site distance at the all-way stop sign, and there's also a condition for a clear space easement in the event that they need to have additional clear space and no vegetation is proposed in those areas.

Great, thank you for that clarification. And finally, access to the Sprinter Station is via the electric vehicle, or is there a pathway or crosswalk access from the project to the Sprinter Station?

There's multiple opportunities to access the sprinter station. There's the shuttle service. There is some sidewalk along South Santa Fe, but there's also the inland rail trail, which you can walk down as well. Okay, thank you.

Commissioners, any other questions of staff? Sanitation district? If not, go ahead.

No, I would just like to weigh in. We have an application before us, which is a land use consideration. It's a certificate of compliance to merge parcels. And the other is a major use permit, which is allowed under the existing zoning. And it's not that I don't appreciate the concerns about off-site improvements. I hear every bit of that. My own personal experience over the years is that all of these districts go out of their way to try and make their facility installation and maintenance as painless as possible. And so describing it as having a road in your backyard, I don't think is exactly what the end result will end up looking like. I seem to hear there's a little bit more flexibility in all of that. So I don't, it's not that I have a deaf ear to that. And then at the same time, just a personal reflection, I live in, East County and La Mesa, and behind me is a house, and above that is a five-story senior assisted living and independent living facility with mature landscaping, stair-stepped into the hill. And so it's not as overly intrusive as some people might think those type things are. The designers do go out of their way to try and make things fit in the neighborhoods. The engineers go out of their way to make all of the vehicular ingress and egress points very functional and safe. And the only thing I saw in the plethora of plans was I was kind of curious as to whether or not they would put a direct access to the rail trail, which is on the south side of their property. if there's supposed to be orientation of public transit, which, and the neighbors have alluded to this, the state of California is pushing a lot of this stuff downhill on us. And all of this, use the trails, use the buses, use mass transit, get on your feet, use bikes, use electric scooters, whatever is being pushed down to the local governments from above. And so in my opinion, it looks to me like they've gone to great lengths to address all of those types of preferences.

Thank you, Commissioner Ashman. Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Sibilico.

Are we in discussion now or still questions of staff?

We're in discussion.

Okay. So. You can also ask staff questions. Okay, understood. I'd like to make some discussion points. So I heard various concerns from the public testimony and we do listen intently to everything that's presented to us. And one of the things that I'm lasering in on was how long this easement has not been used. I'm not a lawyer. I just did a quick little Google search of the authorities that are relevant on this subject. I found that lack of using an easements is not alone enough to constitute abandonments. In order to abandon an easements, you have to take affirmative steps to show your intent to no longer use it ever again. THIS IS A REALLY HIGH BAR AND, YOU KNOW, EASEMENTS ARE VALUABLE PROPERTY RIGHTS. SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT SOME OTHERS HAVE SAID WHEN THEY PURCHASED THEIR HOME. THEY BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS EASEMENT WAS THERE. I HEARD THAT ON THE RECORD, BUT THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT IT PROBABLY WOULD NOT, YOU KNOW, BE ACCESSED. UNFORTUNATELY, I think the law on this is pretty clear that since the easement is there, that it's there. And we can't pretend that it's not there. So for that reason, I think I have to approve this. But I share my fellow commissioner's comment that I encourage the Buena Sanitation Districts to meet more with the parties that are present here. This is a civil issue. does not concern the county necessarily or does not involve the county directly so to speak so our hands are a little bit tied but i really do empathize with the points that you're saying if i were in your position i wouldn't like it either i think you made a very strong case but i think that We're judges up here. We're quasi-judicial officers, and we have to just apply the law. And if they meet the specifications that we've set forth, we have to approve the project. So I think that's what I'm going to do today. But I really appreciate you coming down and sharing your perspective and telling us what the consequences are of our vote.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any further comments? I'll entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion to recommend approval consistent with the staff recommendation to adopt the environmental findings, which includes the adoption of a mitigated negative declaration and approve the major use permit with the findings and include the requirements and conditions as set forth in the forms of decision.

Thank you, Commissioner Ashman. Do we have a second?

I'll second.

Thank you very much. Madam Secretary, we have a motion and a second. If you would please call the roll.

Commissioners, please vote. Commissioner Ashman?

Yes.

Commissioner Calvo? Yes. Commissioner Pallinger?

Yes.

Commissioner Sudbury?

Yes.

And Commissioner Sabelico?

Yes.

Let the record show that this item passes with a vote of five in favor and two absent.

And again, we appreciate all of your comments and coming down here all your time. Thank you very much. We'll now move on to the director's report.

Thank you. As we've noted in the past, in the months of June, July, this particular hearing room is going to get a audio visual upgrade for our phone and public comment system, as well as some of our display systems. So it'll be a well and needed improvement. We will have these hearings being held in our county administration center at 1600 Pacific Highway. Specific room locations for each of the hearings will be identified based on availability right before those hearings. These upgrades may trail into August, but right now it's just June and July that this room will be down. In terms of our next Board of Supervisors hearing on June 10th, we're going to have two items that may be of interest to this commission. You've heard many public comments on the Socially Equitable Cannabis Program. That item will be before the board on June 10th for consideration at that point. And then also on June 10th, we'll be providing an update on VMT mitigation, which our board directed in the past as well. And so we'll be providing an update to the board at that June 10th hearing. We'll go over the state mitigation program, the SANDAG regional program, and a possible local program as well to give any opportunity the board wants to provide direction on preparing a local program or participation in the regional program. That concludes our update.

Thank you, Mr. Director. I do want to address the cannabis issue. In the past, over the many years, we would send a representative from the commission to represent our position on that matter. I think Commissioner Sibelico did not vote for that. But if there is somebody that would like to represent the commission at the board, I think it would be valuable. It's June 10th.

I can't make it.

Commissioner Subney? Commissioner Ashman? Well, I'll self-appoint myself then to represent the commission if that's satisfactory. Commissioner Calvo?

Yes, I second that motion.

Seeing no further business, I'll close the testimony. Thank you very much for coming down.