Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hello. Let's go, Joe. Are we going to start on time? Yep, we're on time.

Wow You guys ready I Would like to call the meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 6 p.m Roll call chair Planning Commission secretary. May we have a roll call, please?

Certainly Commissioner Flores present Commissioner Cervantes present Commissioner Ayala Vice chair Jimenez present chair Sarno.

Yeah, I

All present?

Pledge of Allegiance. Could I call upon Commissioner Isabel Cervantes to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, please?

I 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. Next, ex parte communications. This section is intended to allow all officials the opportunity to reveal any disclosures regarding site visits or ex parte communications about public hearings. Are there any ex parte communications? None.

None. None. None.

And I have none. So next, public comments on non-agenda, non-public hearing agenda items. At this time, the general public may address the Planning Commission on both non-agenda and non-public hearing agenda items. Comments relating to the public hearing items will be heard during the public hearing. Please be aware that the maximum time allowed for members of the public to speak shall not exceed three minutes per speaker. State law prohibits the Planning Commission from taking action or entering extended discussions on topics not listed on the agenda. Please show courtesy to the others and direct all your comments to the chairperson. Planning Commission Secretary, do we have any members of the public wishing to speak?

We have none.

Next. I will now close public comment and move on to the next item. Presentations. Update on Development Plan Approval Case Number 1000 and 1001 and Tentative Parcel Map NUMBER 84116. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL UPON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR QUAN TO PRESENT ITEM NUMBER ONE.

HOW ARE YOU DOING, SIR? GOOD EVENING, CHAIR SERNO, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. JUST GOT A COUPLE OF PHOTOS TO UPDATE YOU ON WHAT WE CALL THE COONS PROJECT OR COONS SITE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL CASE NUMBER 1000-1001 AND PARCEL MAP 84116. First, I'll start off with the good news. Good news is, as you know, the adjacent wall was painted, and it was actually painted with two coats of white paint. This was taken on September 8th last month, but I can assure you that as of this morning, that wall is still the way it looks today. So that is good news. On to maybe not so good news. So as part of the conditional use permit or the development approval, you had asked to address the stormwater issues and the piles. The applicant submits weekly reports to the state This is one of the reports that was submitted. They provide us with four different reports. I'm just giving you a snapshot of one. As you can see in this report, with regards to the stockpile, there is a recommendation to reinstall protection along the stockpile site. If you look really closely around the perimeter of the stockpile, fencing, if you will, could be better secured. This same comment was listed four times in four separate reports, and as of September, based on the photos, you can see it's still in the same shape, if not worse, as well as in October, which is this morning, still same condition. that was not taken care of. So even with their own weekly report, this should be addressed. In addition to that, back in September when we did the last inspection, there was issues with signage on the perimeter fence. I'm happy to say that that is now gone. However, there's a number of graffiti issues that seem to be occurring on a weekly basis. So to the right, you'll see basically the recent graffiti found this morning. A couple of other areas where graffiti still exist today. In addition to the graffiti, there's a couple of other issues that staff found. Photo to the left is areas where I think we think that the fencing could be better secured to keep intruders from going inside the site. I think that could be addressed. And then photo on the right is not so clear, but showing areas of the fence that could be tightened up, it's sagging a bit. This is along Florence Avenue. And lastly, this was actually probably sometime this morning, if not today. There was quite a bit of trash that was dumped along the Coons entrance. I drive this site every day going to work, and last Thursday this was not there, and I did see this this morning. So that apparently is an issue, at least as of this week. So that concludes my report. Just wanted to kind of see if there's any direction or comments that you have on what's your thoughts of what you see.

Anything?

When are they supposed to begin?

So they're still working with the water board on the water wells issue on site and just also going through a plan check process, I believe. So I guess your short answer is we don't have a time frame. It's just that they're going through the process to get plans approved and also approval to remove the water wells on site.

I think we talked about a year, I think, right? That's the estimate. Roughly. Roughly.

Yeah.

So is there anything that can be done that they are required to have a daily visit there to repair or report issues that they're going to then remove or address?

We can certainly ask them. They do have access to cameras that do basically allow them to keep an eye on the site. The cameras apparently have heat sensors so they can see body movements onto the site. But that's certainly something we could communicate to the applicant.

Yeah, look, the biggest issue was that wall, and they took care of that, right? It's going to be... nearly impossible for anyone who wants to do business with us here in the city of Santa Fe Springs to have control over what happens on an everyday basis. The graffiti, they clean it up today, by tomorrow it could easily be tagged up again. If they're doing it weekly, if they're at least cleaning it up weekly, I think that's sufficient. The trash that someone dumped overnight, once again, they can't have any control over that now. If they've been notified, they don't pick it up, it's there for weeks, that's a different story. but it doesn't seem like that's the case. The only issue that I see is that continuous big pile of dirt, right, which is, I guess, the issue with the senior housing.

It's space.

Right? Yeah. So maybe just another... CONVERSATION AGAIN AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE POINT OUT THE THINGS THAT THEY DID TAKE CARE OF AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S GOOD, BUT THEN JUST ASK THEM AGAIN, TOO.

THE BASE IS SAYING THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE LEFT THERE BECAUSE IT CAME FROM ITS OWN FACILITY, SO THEY WANT, WOULD RATHER, INSTEAD OF TAKING IT SOMEWHERE THAT MIGHT BE CONTAMINATED AND DUMPED, THEY WOULD RATHER USE IT HERE AND BE TESTED, CORRECT, IF I'M WRONG.

Right. It has to be reused on site.

On site.

So I think what we had asked, it wasn't that they remove this, that they at least put a tarp or something over it to avoid it blowing to the... Dust and stuff like that when they do start. So that would be it. It's just that they tarp it or put some sort of cover on it.

Go ahead. I think the fencing on the outside, maybe close it in more. I've seen some of it was kind of open or scattered. Maybe fix that and then just lift a little bit of the sagginess and like... We said the graffiti, there's nothing that we could do about that. I mean, on the outside, just clean it up maybe weekly or something.

I don't have anything to add other than stipulate it when we vote it.

Well, I have an idea. So the graffiti, like we said, we can't control graffiti on a daily basis. And no business is going to come check every single day. We're asking a tall order for that. But what I do think is that we can maybe talk to him. And since we have a graffiti crew, if we notice graffiti once a week or whenever it is, we can have our graffiti people go out there and figure out a cost. And then that way, by the time he does, if he doesn't want to take care of it, we take care of it, he agrees to it. And maybe we just implement those fees to when he pulls his permits and stuff like that based on that. If that's something that is... feasible for him and us because i think that would you know asking him to maintain a property is going to be very hard to do those types of things uh the the fences should definitely uh be tightened up and stuff like that where the base is that little fence is doing nothing that there's nothing really that they're going to be able to do other than either carpet or break them down a little bit so it would be more uh controllable and manageable and i know they're doing it because of the stormwater, the runoff, when it does rain. I don't know how much runoff you're going to get from that because a lot of it will just sink in and into the base. But I think they should, if it becomes a nuisance, take off all of the netting and just have an open fence. It doesn't look as good, but we're going to either pick the graffiti or we're going to pick, you know. Is there a reason for the fence? Yeah, because you don't want people going on the property and then If somebody gets hurt, somebody dies, they have to have a perimeter because there's nobody there.

So it's required?

Yeah.

Certainly for vacant parcels and ones that are awaiting development, we do try to secure the site with some sort of perimeter fencing that has mesh or something to also help screen the inside of the property, especially for vacant properties.

But you've also called him numerous times for a reply, and he's failed to answer those requests.

I have texted him several times this past month. So myself, I'm losing a little bit of patience.

So I think that's something that's another issue that We want to make sure that he understands the severity of what you're asking. And we're not trying to nitpick, but we're also not just give us an answer. I'll get to it next week. I'll get to it next month. Whatever that is, but he should be answering you or at least trying to give you a reply back or putting somebody in communication with you to get that answer.

So with regards to the graffiti and a reimbursement of our graffiti cruise time, is that a option or a request requirement?

Well, we don't charge, so to say, when we have a graffiti, we have somebody come, we call the graffiti line, they come out and they clean up the graffiti. So we... Well, no, we don't charge the people that, when we go out for a graffiti removal, we don't charge them. That's a service that the city provides. So this is almost in kind like the same thing, but if we're going out there every single week, then something, I would figure if it would be okay to do that, to figure out a charge to say if we cover it, because we don't want to call you every week that there's graffiti, Would you be interested in maybe a small fee or donation to cover some of the costs that if we're coming out on a continuous basis?

Do we do that under the existing conditions, Susie, or do we have to kind of amend the conditions?

So would you guys want to see that? Would you want to see if we can charge for that, or is that?

I think we can have that discussion with the business and also to see if that's offered to any other business or is this a unique situation to take that in consideration, right? Is a singular event or does this happen with other businesses? then maybe we can group that same practice together. But I would recommend that we would include that in the conditions just so we have that.

Or we just, even if we use our, if we call our own graffiti people and we go out there, we notation those things and saying, you know. Keep a record. We can't keep just going out there all the time and maintaining your property.

Maybe what we'll do for the coming month is, in addition to their weekly visits, we'll proactively also call in graffiti that we see and see if the tag team effort actually improves the site conditions.

So that's something I think we should do. I think that's definitely a request to ask and then see if it's legal to do, and then we can go from there.

I have another question.

Cool. What are the ramifications if he fails to comply, like responding to you? We take away the CEP.

We have the ability to basically bring the DPA back to revoke it. That was kind of the original thought.

And then are you emailing them, like documenting instead of a text? That way there's a record.

I think that's kind of what these reportings are also to document the progress or lack thereof. So this will be evidence towards a revocation should we go down that path.

And then can you also follow up with the email saying I contacted you on this day, this day, this date. You failed to respond. We need to hear from you by this date.

Otherwise... Yeah, I think that's... And I think we gave them... SIX MONTHS? WHAT DID WE GIVE HIM? I DON'T REMEMBER. JUST ON A MONTHLY OR QUARTERLY, WHATEVER IT IS, BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT CONTINUES AND CONTINUES TO BE A NUISANCE, I JUST THINK WE HAVE TO SOONER THAN LATER HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT. IS THAT OKAY? OKAY.

THANK YOU.

Next, consent calendar. All matters listed under the consent calendar are considered to be routine. Any consent items a planning commissioner wishes to discuss should be designated at this time. All others and items be approved in a single motion. For consent item number two, is there a motion and a second for the approval of this consent item?

I'll move.

I'll second.

We have a first and a second. Planning Commission Secretary, roll call please. Roll vote.

Commissioner Flores?

Aye.

Commissioner Cervantes? Aye. Commissioner Arreola? Aye. Vice Chair Jimenez? Aye. Chair Sardo?

Aye.

Justice Visor?

So ordered. There is a 14-day appeal period for anyone wishing to appeal these matters. Public hearing. We will now begin with item number three, On the agenda at this time, I will open public hearing at 6.15 p.m. I now call upon economic development specialist, Claudia Jimenez, to introduce this item. Commissioners, members of the audience, staff, and council. You don't need a microphone. Go ahead.

This evening, I'll be presenting to you item number three for alcohol sales condition use permit case number 91. The item is a request for an alcohol sales conditions permit ASC UP 91 to allow the operation maintenance of an alcoholic beverage distribution and warehousing facility, including beer, wine, and distilled spirits located at 15614, 15620, and 15700 Shoemaker Avenue within the M2 Heavy Manufacturing Zone. Not sure why it's going back. It's moving.

Stay with me.

The proposed project site located at 15614 through 15620 and 15700 Shoemaker Avenue in Santa Fe Springs encompasses 22 acres designed for industrial use and zoned M2 heavy manufacturing zone. The applicant, Steve Rowling, represents Breakthrough Beverage California LLC, a leading distributor of wine, beer, and spirits. The site is strategically located within the city's industrial corridor and offers easy access to major regional transportation routes, making it ideal for large-scale distribution operations. And this project is consistent with the city's industrial land use, objectives, and integrates responsible and surrounding industrial neighborhoods.

A little history about Breakthrough Beverage Group.

So Beverage California LLC, commonly known as BBCA, is a multi-generational family-owned and operational company that has been serving California since 1973. The company is a leading wholesale distribution of fine wine and beer and distilled spirits and supplies products exclusively to licensed retailers, including restaurants, grocery stores, hotels. The proposed facility represents BBCA's fifth location in California, joining existing operations in Commerce, Richmond, and Modesto. The company has built a strong reputation for quality, reliability, and responsible distribution and remains committed to operating sustainability while maintaining positive relationships within the communities it serves. The site photo illustrated before you is the footprint of Building A and Building B. Building A measures about 170,000 square feet, 553 square feet, 170,555 square feet, and B is 350,000 square feet. Additionally, the photos of the highlights and the ingress and egress points for all vehicles, including truck deliveries, demonstrates how staff and delivery vehicles will safely access and exit the site. The visual provides a clear and understanding of the site layout circulating the overall operational flow. So the areas that are highlighted in the darker blue, those are the ingress and egress of this location off of Shoemaker and Alondra. BBC is requesting approval of ASCUP case number 91 for the proposed facility. While the staff anticipates no issues with ABC licenses, if it is denied, the applicant will have up to a year to secure the necessary ABC approvals if they fail to do so. The ASCUP will automatically become null and void in accordance with section 155.811 of the zoning code. So before you here today is the ABC licensee types and operational notes. The applicant has applied for the following California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control ABC licenses, type 09, type 12, type 17, and type 18. These license types do not permit any retail or direct to consumer sales. Breakthrough Beverage California operates strictly as a business-to-business distributor, selling exclusively to entities holding valid ABC licenses. The public will have no access to the facility and no on-site consumption of alcohol will occur. The facility operates 24 hours a day, Monday through Friday, exclusively for internal warehousing functions conducted entirely indoors, thereby generating no noise, traffic, or offsite impacts. Saturday operations occur as needed between 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., with no regular operations on Sundays, except in emergencies. The business employs 125 personnel, with an average of 55 employees on a day shift, and 70 employees on the night shift. The night shift employees arrives about 3.30 to 3.45 to begin their shift around 4 p.m., resulting in a scheduled overlap with the day shift during the shift change. The facility provides ample on-site parking capacity to accommodate this overlap without creating parking shortage. In addition, the site is located approximately 4.93 miles from the nearest residential zone and major transportation corridors. The site benefits from a significant buffer distance that minimizes potential impacts to the surroundings of the community and delivering external operations are limited to daytime hours and ensuring no increase in noise or traffic levels. The site provides a total of 265 stalls, which includes 100 truck stalls and 165 passenger vehicle stalls, with an addition of 40 surplus stalls available. The parking supply exceeds code requirements, ensuring ample on-site capacity to accommodate all operations without impacting surrounding streets and neighborhoods.

This moves by itself. Yeah.

Oh, that's probably why, yeah. Breakthrough Beverage is implementing a comprehensive security system to ensure the safety of its facility and personnel. As part of this effort, Building A and Building B are being equipped with motion sensor alarms, which will enhance site security by monitoring for unauthorized activity. In addition, access to the site is strictly controlled, and all staff and authorized visitors are required to check in at the guardhouse and must present a valid breakthrough beverage ID badge for entry. These layered measures help maintain a secure and well monitored facility. Environmental review, so this project is exempt from the California Environmental Act, CEQA, under section code 15301, class 1, existing facilities. Additionally, there are no expansions of the building footprint or increase in operational intensity. And therefore, the project is not expected to result in any significant environmental impacts.

even touching it goes by itself.

On October 22, 2025 notices regarding the project were mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site and posted on the key public locations, including Santa Fe Springs City Hall, City Library and the town center kiosk. In October 3 2025. The notice was published in the Cerritos community newspaper and to date staff has received no public comments regarding the project itself or inquiries. Okay, so some key considerations for you tonight. Again, the project is located at 15615 through 15620 and 15700 Shoemaker Avenue on a 22-acre site designated for warehousing and distribution. It fully complies with all zoning and permitting requirements and CEQA exempt. It fully complies with all zoning and permitting requirements. I said that. And the facility operates 24 hours a day, Monday through Friday, supporting internal warehouse activities such as packaging and product organization. At full capacity, the site employs approximately 125 employees with adequate parking and planned deliveries designed to minimize traffic impacts. And security is a key component to the site's operation. And overall, the project operates efficiently and remains compatible with the surrounding community. And the recommendations before you tonight. are as follows. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine that project to be categorically exempt under Section 15301, Class 1 of the existing facilities of the California Environmental Quality Act. As proposed, improvements involve minor alterations to an existing facility with no expansions. of the CUP or the use and further staff recommends the planning commission approve ASCUP case number 90 subject the conditions of approval outline a resolution number 303-2025 exhibit A and finally staff recommends that the planning commission adopt resolution 303-2025 incorporating the Commission's findings, determinations, and actions related to the project. And this concludes my presentation. I do have the applicant here, Mr. Steve Rawlings, on behalf of BBCA, should you have any questions for him tonight. Thank you.

All right, thank you. We'll now move to Commissioner questions or comments. Does any member of the Commission have any questions or comments for staff? None? None? Does any member of the Commission have any questions or comments for the applicant? I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION, SIR, IF YOU WANTED TO STEP TO THE PODIUM. SO YOU GUYS ARE STRICTLY WHOLESALE TO RESTAURANTS, NO SALES TAX AVENUE FROM YOUR point of sale anywhere. Is that correct?

That is correct. There's pretty strict guidelines from ABC that is a separation between distribution and retail sales. You can't have two licenses at the same address and we're a distributor and the sales tax is at the point of delivery.

And you're moving close to Southern Wine Spirits right down the street, huh?

Yeah, we are. This is central to Southern California, and the space became available, and so the company took that. They're relatively new here to the state of California, but they're excited to be here and excited to be here in Santa Fe Springs. They certainly have an excellent reputation of working with the community and giving to the community, and we're hoping to have a ribbon-cutting ceremony. TBD?

Nice.

BUT LOOKING FORWARD TO BEING, STAYING INVOLVED WITH THE COMMUNITY GOING FORWARD.

YOU GUYS DIDN'T PURCHASE YOUNG'S MARKET, DID YOU?

NO, WE DID NOT. THERE WAS A COMPANY, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS REPUBLIC, AND THEY LEFT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ALTOGETHER. YEAH. AND BREAKTHROUGH, KIND OF HAD A BREAKTHROUGH INTO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WITH THEM EXITING, AND WE'VE TAKEN UP A LOT OF THEIR CUSTOMERS.

NICE. WELL, WELCOME, AND WE HOPE YOU NOTHING BUT SUCCESS.

What type of involvement would you consider yourselves having with the community?

I know that they have frequently been sponsors at community events, and I think Claudia is in touch with the local person here. So to the extent and the actual details, I couldn't give that to you exactly, but I do know that they're very proud of that.

It's always good to have businesses give back to the community, so thank you very much for that. All right, we will now open up public hearing and comments for this With this item planning Commission Committee secretary do we receive any cards or written comments for this item? Okay Nobody no speakers if there are no obligation no objection by members of the Commission I will now close public comments on the public hearing item number three and If there's no further Commission questions or comments, I will now close the public hearing at 635 or 625. May I have a motion and approval of ASUP case number 91 and adopt resolution number 303-2025, which incorporates the Planning Commission's findings and actions regarding this matter? One motion. I have a first and a second. Planning Commission Secretary, please conduct a roll vote.

Commissioner Flores? Aye. Commissioner Cervantes? Aye. Commissioner Arreola? Aye. Vice Chair Jimenez? Aye. Chair Sarno? Aye. Justice 5-0.

So ordered. There is a 14-day appeal period for anyone wishing to appeal this matter. Congratulations, sir. Does any... Next item, staff communications. Does any staff have any communications, announcements?

Yes, thank you, Chair. We have two quick reminders for you. First, in front of you is a flyer for the Santa Fe Springs Economic Growth Luncheon. It is this Thursday, so you should have received some email communications on it, opportunity to RSVP. If you did not, please let us know so we can get you that information. Okay. Second is regarding the zoning code update. There is a joint study session with the city council on Wednesday, November 5th. We're going to send you that written reminder tomorrow with a link to all the documents to review prior to that joint study session. Thank you. That's all we have.

Thank you. Commissioners, AB 1234, council conference reporting. Any commissioners have something to report on?

None. None.

All right. This meeting is now adjourned at 6.30 p.m. The next meeting of the Planning Commission is set for November 10, 2025, at 6 p.m.