Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I would like to call to order. There's an echo. Of course. Can it be fixed? All right. Good morning. Good morning. Commissioner Boydston. Here, Commissioner Cushing here. Commissioner Ayala here. Vice chair. Sandlin here. Chair. Kesley, here. Thank you, Secretary Luce. Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Okay. The next item is public comments. Secretary Luce, did we receive any comments on items not included on this agenda? The chair. Kesley I did not receive any items or any comments that is not included on this agenda. Thank you, Secretary Luce. The next item is approval of the minutes for November 20th, 2025. Do we have any discussions or emotion to

approve those minutes? Move to approve. Thank you, Mr. Bergstrom. Second motion. Thank you, Commissioner Cushing. Secretary Luce, please take roll call. Okay. Commissioner Boydston. Yes, Commissioner. Cushing. Yes, Commissioner. Ayala. Yes. Vice chair. Sandlin. Yes. Chair. Kesley. Yes. Thank you. The next item is item six a it's case number PL 20 5-0072. The appellant is Desmond Sandlin. On behalf of Somis storage LLC. The project description. This is an appeal of the denial of a zoning clearance application. Case number 20 5-0538 request for establishing temporary outdoor storage use for food trucks to park overnight for 180 days. The project location 3250 Somis Road and Somis, California. I'll defer to Commissioner Sandlin, chair Kesley, I'd like to make an announcement under the California Political Reform Act. I have a personal financial interest regarding this item. My interest consists. This is my parents property. I help manage and insure it. As a result of this financial interest, I am recusing myself from participating in this item in the capacity of Planning Commissioner. However, I'll be outside the chambers watching. Thank you. And. Thank you, Commissioner Sandlin. Now, I would like to defer to Chief

Deputy Counsel John Barnes for opening remarks. Gosh, this is terrible. Thank you. Chair. Kesley, members of the commission. The audio is a little disconcerting. I feel like we're in a stadium. In any case. Yeah. I just wanted to give your commission a little more background. So this is an appeal of a zoning clearance. It doesn't happen every day. So that's why I wanted to say a few words. So zoning clearance under the non coastal zoning ordinance and the coastal zoning ordinance is a ministerial approval. That's either granted or denied outright by the planning director. So it's typically an administrative decision. Under our zoning ordinances any administrative decision is appealable to your planning commission and then to the the Board of Supervisors. And so you're standing in the shoes, essentially of the planning director. But this is still a ministerial entitlement that either needs to be granted or denied based upon the objective standards that apply to zoning clearances. And first and foremost. The objective standard that applies is, you know, requires that the requested zoning clearance or requested entitlement is consistent with the provisions of the zoning clearance itself. And so then the Non-coastal zoning ordinance says that a land use has to be specifically permissible under the zoning ordinance in order to be approved. And so that means

that the specific land use has to be included within the use matrix of the zoning ordinance, and it has to be approvable with zoning clearance. So that's a basic objective standard that needs to apply. And so that's the first and foremost rule governing this appeal. I'd be happy to end it. It requires three affirmative votes to be issued. Because even though this is an appeal. The applicant has the burden of showing that they're entitled to the application. The appeal basically just raises the decision making authority from the planning director to your planning commission. So I'd be happy to answer any questions again on this, this type of request doesn't happen every day. Thank you, Deputy Barnes. Now, I would like to ask Planning Director Ward to proceed with your presentation. Thank you. Chair. Kesley. Commissioners. The audio is challenging. We are trying to get a technician to see if they can assist with us. Today's item. If you can bring up the PowerPoint. Okay. Today's item is case number P 25 0072. Oh well. It's going. Sorry. There

we go. How did we go. The whole thing. Sorry. This whole thing is. Can you read? It didn't start from the. Yeah. There we go. Case number PL 25 0072. If you are on the zoom and you would like to address the item during public comment, you would raise your hand button on the zoom now so that we can put you in the queue to be linked on at the appropriate time. If you are participating by telephone, you would use the press, the star and then nine to also be queued. Agenda item six A. As I provide my presentation, I'm going to give you an overview of the location and context and then the description of the project. The project site is at 3250 Somis Road. The site is a general plan designation of industrial and the zoning is industrial. M2 10,000ft■!S. The proposed project, as you heard, as far as a zoning clearance application, came to the county in the early part of the summer where the applicant was requesting a temporary outdoor storage use for food trucks to park overnight for a period of 180 days. This proposed use with their application materials, described grading and compacting of the surface,

new perimeter fencing, gates, landscaping, new lighting and security cameras, new designated entrance turn lanes, one way entrance, two way two one way exits and emergency fire access loop in staffs coordination with the applicant. At the time, we described that the proposed use is not contained in our zoning ordinance. The Non-coastal zoning ordinance, but we do have a use that is appropriate, that is the transportation services, which is a use that is allowed through a discretionary plan development permit in the M-2 zone. This use is defined as establishments primarily engaged in undertaking the transportation of goods and people for consumption, compensation, and which may in turn make use of other transportation establishments in affecting delivery. Importantly, this definition includes parking areas for overnight truck storage, commercial truck fueling, and such establishments as commercial distribution services, freight forwarding services, and freight agencies. As a planned development permit. This is a discretionary action that is reviewed by all the appropriate agencies of the county to determine if there will need to be any conditions of approval for the proposed use for a particular location. For the description of the use being sought. This would include from Public Works Agency, Roads and Transportation Division, assessing the traffic circulation as it might relate to Somis Road for access. The county fire department would be involved for site improvements and understanding how fire apparatus would be able to move

on the property if needed, and there would be other agencies involved, such as the building division and environmental health. None of those agencies have been involved in this case, because it has not been applied for as a planned development permit. The zone clearance. As Deputy Chief Counsel Barnes described to you, is based upon objective criteria for staff to be able to issue the permit. In this case, it's a transportation services use needing that discretionary review. So we did engage with the applicant about that described what would be required. And we then resulted in our notice of denial that occurred on July 29th, 2025. The applicant then did a timely appeal on August 8th, 2025 for that action. And that's what's the item before you today, the appellant's ground of appeal is related to different provisions within the Ncso, which shows on the screen the various subcategories in which it's contained in exhibit three of your staff report where the appellant was describing different components of the code and how that might be used for issuance of their desired use. In this section, there are also three sections that do not exist in our code staff's review of these appeal points ultimately results in the temporary outdoor storage not being a use defined in our code. Our issuance of permits need to be tied to uses that are

established in our code. One of the appeal points describes outdoor sales and services, which is a use in our code. But that description is for a one day use in a 90 day period. The proposed use, called temporary outdoor storage that's being sought, is something that would be 180 days, so that use does not apply. As I've stated, the classified use that we have is transportation services, and that is the one that's subject to the discretionary permit plan. Development permit. While there are different provisions that were cited in the appellants filed appeal, those zoning regulations really relate to the planned development permit process. They make reference to the conditional use permit findings. All of those activities are not tied to a zone clearance. Those are part of a discretionary permit application. So staff finds that the ground of appeal is without merit. I did want to bring to your attention that the Board of Supervisors last month, November 18th, did provide staff direction on zoning, planning and zoning, regulatory reform, substantial regulatory reform that they are seeking the division to process. There were 22 components in their reform package for staff to develop, some of which include trying to downshift certain permit categories, meaning ones that are discretionary, like a plan development permit or a

conditional use permit. Seeing which ones could be shifted to a ministerial being the zone clearance type of action. It also included looking at potential new uses, including the idea of temporary use permit, as one additional strategy that could be added to our zoning codes. Staff has been directed to pull together. What would be the strategy to move forward with these 22 provisions in our work plan? This work plan objective aligns with the board's strategic plan, which is to see our permitting processes countywide more efficiently and to benefit our residents and to be business friendly. We will present to the board in March of next year our strategies to complete the regulatory reforms, likely in bundled packages, some things that we can move forward quicker, some things that will take longer to to process. But the desired use that you'll hear about today could be part of that temporary use concept. And we would be able to try to develop that and through certain objective standards, could potentially be at a ministerial permit level. However, we're not there yet. This will be legislative changes that we need to make into our code and to process those forward through public review. Coming to your commission to get recommendations, and then as an adoption hearing before the Board of Supervisors. Staff has described to the applicant that processing forward for now is the plan development permit the applicant, while the appeal was in process, did file last month,

November 10th, that discretionary plan development permit application PL 20 5-0102 for the transportation services I described also for self-storage. And it does include a component for a one year food truck storage. So for now, staff's recommendation is that the applicant continue to pursue that plan development permit to establish their desired uses. In conclusion, for environmental review for your item today, this is exempt pursuant to 15270A Sequa does not apply to project that are disapproved by a public agency. So a denial action today is Ceqa exempt. And finally, the recommendations for your commission today would be to certify all the information you received today, staff's presentation and the appellant applicant's presentation, and any other public comment. Find the exemption just described. Deny the application for the zoning clearance. Deny the appeal in its entirety, and declined to refund any appeal fees and designate the planning division to hold all records. I'm available for any questions you may have. Thank you, Planning Director Ward, are there any questions of staff from the Commission? What's the timing on the PD review as it moves forward as a discretionary application? It has first a 30 day review of the application materials by all the county agencies that will have a review step in the process that's happening right

now. That first 30 day review, if it is deemed that additional information is needed, then it's deemed incomplete. We provide what items need to be provided, additional items or corrections that comes through all the different agencies. And then it's back to the applicant to prepare for those additional items and then resubmit. And that Resubmittal could be another 30 day period. Hopefully it's less than that because it's only addressing certain items that are necessary. And then once it's deemed complete, then we assess it for environmental review. What type of environmental analysis may be necessary. Then we would work to complete that effort. Plus, the staff analysis for policy consistency, staff report production and then getting it to a hearing. In this case, this would be at the lower level, not your commission, but it would be a plan. A planning director hearing still publicly noticed. So has there been discussion on a staff level of how to expedite this process? For projects in general? Are you asking for this project? Well, we've only gotten the application in November 10th, so we're still reviewing that. It would really be the queue of our projects. How quickly if it's if it's deemed complete, we'll be coming up to that 30 day is next week. Then we'd be looking at what steps are necessary to move forward. But we are working with all different projects, so it's not the only case that we have. We'd be managing our time to try to move that forward to hearing. Thank you. Yes, if I may, planning Director Ward, after reviewing the staff report, just wanting some clarifications here. So if the applicant decides to move forward or is moving forward now with the planned development permit, there was a

key takeaway I took from the staff report that the fertilizer business on site would be expected to cease operations to make room for the proposed self storage. Would this still be the case under the pursuit of the planned development permit? I believe so, yes. Thank you. Understood. Thank you. So the use the ultimate use that there could get going, assuming they get it on a planned development permit is. It would be able to be. That's I guess that's a use that's okay with that zoning right. That's subject to the discretionary review. So yes, it's an allowed use through a planned development for that zone okay. Thank you. No further are no further questions of staff. All right then I will now open the public hearing with the applicant. Like to make a presentation on this item. And you will have 15 minutes. Great. Thank you. Commissioners and chair. Good morning. My name is Bill Lindsey representing the appellant and property owner Desmond Scanlan. The kitchen terminal. Thank you for the opportunity to present this appeal to the denial of zoning clearance. ZC 25 0538 for temporary outdoor storage. Case number PL 25 0072. This is a critical step in addressing pressing public health and economic issues in our county. Our presentation today will last about 15 minutes, and I'll

walk you through this kind of step by step. Is that first slide that's up. We're waiting for the slide to come up. I'd like to just address a couple of the items. As we heard from director Ward and a couple of this to clarify, we saw with the last month Board of Supervisors kind of requesting immediate action in really major reform to the zoning ordinance and expediting these. And one of the concerns we have as we've applied for our PD permit, as we heard from director Ward, we still don't have a time frame. So many of these last upwards of 12 months, 18 months as they drag on. So as we lay this out today, you'll see that there is a public health threat. And there at the time we were collaborating with planning staff, there really wasn't a mechanism in place. Since then, we've looked at a few other options and paths forward that would be within the zoning matrix and allow under article 13, and we'll come back and address many of those. So you do have the discretion and direction to direct staff to approve this through other means. And so really, we may not understand the language or have exactly down which ordinance that falls under. The common goal is to try not to displace current operators, of which we county currently faces a crisis. Of these trucks not having a legal location to be able to park at and housed where we got this up. It's just the hard copies that does brought in. So so it's not a they all have it though. Okay. So you'll just go page. Do you have a copy or do let me pull that up. So we just flip to the

next page I think. But they all have it. So everybody has their packet I believe. We'll start with slide number. The agenda. Let's start with an overview of the agenda. We'll cover Ventura County's food truck parking parking crisis, example of illegal operation. The kitchen terminals current operation and role provide solutions for 3250 Somis road. This location meets regulatory compliance. A traffic impact analysis aligns with county policy addressing the staff report, broader community benefits, and finally, our conclusion with a specific request. This will highlight why approving a temporary permit is essential and aligns with Ventura County goals. We'll move to the next slide. Food truck parking crisis moving to the core problem, Ventura County is facing a severe shortage of legal food truck parking spaces, a mobile food facility or food truck means a vehicle used in connection with the commissary or other permanent food facilities upon which food is sold. Distributed at retail, as documented by Ventura County Resource Management Agency, this shortage leads to over 60 food trucks operating illegally every day across the county. Operators are forced into illegal situations because they simply aren't enough permitted parking spaces that provide access to essential cleaning, dumping operational infrastructure. This crisis has worsened since Covid 19 pandemic beginning in 2020, leading to hundreds of complaints reports to the county police, health and code compliance departments. Without immediate solutions, these trucks end up parking in residential areas on streets lacking proper sanitation facilities and elevate risk to public health. We'll move to our next slide to illustrate the real world impact. Let's

take a look at the examples of illegal food truck operations throughout Ventura County. These photos here show unpermitted food truck operators, sidewalk taquerias, and food trucks in action, all without permits, proper refrigeration or sanitation. One such illegal operation is even right next to the proposed site at 3250 Somis Road. These setup pose immediate health risks to the consumers and are symptomatic of countywide crisis driven by the parking shortage. If you turn to slide six. Now let's discuss the kitchen terminals role in addressing the infrastructure gap. The kitchen terminal operates food truck parking lots, overnight storage across Los Angeles, Ventura and San Luis. San Luis Obispo counties. And they've seen dire need in Ventura County firsthand. That's why we have partnered with local property owners like appellant Desmond to build our compliant infrastructure. Their current site at 115 Dawson Drive in Camarillo, which opened in 2021 with 23 spaces, serves a fully compliant commissary handling, washing, waste disposal and food preparation. They've also secured an adjacent property for additional 55 spaces. It's currently under construction and set to open April 1st, 2026. Slide number seven. In the meantime, they've obtained a temporary use permit in the city of Camarillo to use 89 Dawson Drive, which now holds 23 food trucks. However, that permit ends January 15th, 2026, leaving these trucks without a legal spot until the new facility opens. In anticipation of this expiration, the kitchen terminal secured a proper zoned Em2 lease at 3250 Somis Road, just three miles away, as an auxiliary facility to temporary overnight food truck parking. All the dumping and truck washing will occur at 115 Dawson in Camarillo, not at 3250 Somis Road. This would

only be used for overnight parking. No operational work will be done there. Slide eight has a couple of different slides of our site plan at 3250 Somis Road. You can see the circulation. We've also I just want to interject. I've talked with the fire department. They have no issue. They have full access. We did talk with them earlier this week and have not an issue with this moving forward as a temporary use or a continuation of the existing use that we have in place. This leads us why action is needed now with Camarillo Temporary Use Permit expiring on January 15th, 2026, and the permanent facility not ready until April 1st, there's just a critical gap that displaced 23 compliant business owners, all of which currently meet health department regulations. The City of Camarillo temporary use cannot be extended for another year. These operators will have no choice but to park illegally or just completely go out of business. Again, exasperating the hundreds of complaints that we've seen since 2020 and worse, worsening health risks and community disruptions. Delaying approval during the holiday season only makes things worse. Our proposed solution using current commercial parking at 3250 Somis Road, can be implemented in days, offering immediate relief to these 23 businesses. Ultimately, this appeal is about saving those 23 businesses and families that it provides for. This will secure overnight parking, easy access to proper cleaning and dumping facilities at 115 Dawson Drive, again just three miles away. Slide number ten. So what is our proposed strategic use of 3250 Somis Road? We've secured the lease for a commercial parking lot, which has been used for such for the last 85 years. It lowers the traffic impact compared to the current use by the old. Aggregates generated about 75 daily trips, while our temporary overnight food truck parking and mini storage would generate only

about 30 daily trips. This site is ideally suited for an auxiliary parking and mini storage used generate only about 30 trips daily trips. The site is ideally suited to 115 Dawson Drive commissary, accommodating up to 23 trucks with electrical hookups for refrigeration. Its close proximity is just three miles to the washing facilities. Makes it a perfect location. This is a dual site approach. Leverage existing resources efficiency. Camarillo handles compliance and dumping and washing, while Somis provides parking. It's a rapid, scalable fix to the short term parking crisis we've already seen submitted to a full plan development permit application. We're seeking this temporary use zone clearance to bridge the gap during this process. Slide 11. Importantly, this proposal ensures ensures full compliance with county requirements. The property is zoned M-2, which is compatible for vehicle storage and services, which we heard from director Ward. It does meet those requirements. It meets the California Retail Food Code through proper waste management and sanitation via commissary. We've addressed the safety, the Ada compliance and ensured adequate space for the truck maneuvering with no traffic disruptions. Our prior collaboration with Ventura County Environmental Health demonstrates our commitment to regulatory inspections and insurance alignment with health and safety standards. No reliance on non existing sections. The proposal fits into allowance for storage such as planned development for the warehouse and zoning clearance. Temporary accessory use of this section in the 8105 matrix. Lower traffic than the current use. Let's turn to the traffic impact which allows for use in actual negative impact, meaning reduction. Currently, the property is operated by a retail store that operates 7 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and on Saturday, 70 7 a.m. to noon. It generates high traffic, about 75 daily movements, and with peaks

during morning and middle day visits based on walk ins and using the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation manual. In contrast, our proposed mini storage and food truck parking lot would generate much lower traffic about 2.5 moments per hour and totaling about 30 per day. Food trucks would see about one movement per hour, staggered throughout the day and avoid peaks. The storage units would be about 1.5 per hour, minimal and even distributed data from our comparable site at 115 Dawson Drive supports this. As shown in the chart, the current 75 daily movements would drop to 30, a clear reduction and eliminates peak congestion. Moving on to slide 16. Continuing with all staff report on nonconforming history, it states that the current fertilizer use is legal. Nonconforming expansion requires a permit under the section 81 135.4. However, section 81 135.4 allows change to a less intense use, and our proposed storage is less intense with reduced traffic and no chemicals. It's compatible with the site storage since 1940, there's no violation as per Certificate of compliance. 12 03805A ministerial zoning clearance facilitates a bridge to continuation permit of the planned Development Permit without hurdles. Addressing the crisis while upholding the NC Zeo. This aligns with the Board of Supervisors reforms for immediate action and needs that are feasible. The appellant grounds. Here we see finally addressing staff. The staff report notes the appellant cited in section 80, 107, 12.1 Dash 12.3 do not exist. These existing sections 80, 107 and 12 limits temporary outdoor cell to one day every 90 day while proposing amendments and will expand include temporary use. Align with the November

18th reform from Board of Supervisors. Existing Zeo supports reclassification as open storage or accessory warehouse. Warehousing. Sections 8105 five allows zoning clearance for temporary building materials storage in the M-2. The board's reform mandate, immediate action and on temporary permits for public needs, requesting staff to implement all feasible measures without further approval. Ventura County Planning Commission has already has the authority to approve this temporary use instruct the zoning clearance, just as the city of Camarillo did, three miles away. Slide 18. Beyond the immediate fix, approving the temporary site brings positive impacts for Ventura County. It keeps 23 legal operating businesses in business with access to proper parking dumping facilities. It supports the vibrant food truck industry, which employs hundreds and saves, serves thousands by reducing illegal operations while enhancing community safety, improve neighborhood esthetics, prevent residential disruptions and stop illicit dumping, illegal operations, and costly and costing the county 1.7 million. Informant. Based on the 2425 estimates from May, this also bolsters small businesses, many owned by local entrepreneurs, during post-pandemic recovery, contributing economic vitality and providing a scalable solution will end full permit and full processing. In conclusion, the appeal addresses the urgent public health crisis over 23 compliant businesses, reduces traffic and aligns seamlessly with the Board of Supervisors reforms. We respectfully request that you overturn the denial of the zoning clearance and grant temporary use permit. Overnight food truck parking at 3250 Somis Road, serving as auxiliary site to the commissary at 115 Dawson Drive. Additionally, direct staff to approve the zoning clearance

process continuation permit for the overnight food truck parking storage. This can be implemented immediately, protecting the community. Supporting the board's directive, bolstering the economy and ensuring full compliance. Thank you for your time. I'm happy to answer any questions. Secretary, are there any questions of the applicant at this time? Yeah. Thank you. So if you if you get this denial of the denial and you move forward. Is 115 Dawson. Once it gets finished, you're not going to need this site in Somis Road. There is such a demand in Ventura County, as we see. There's well documented, you know, 60 to 100 units that are needed. So even with 30 to 50 Somis Road, the new location coming on that has over 50 sites. In addition, on Dawson, there will still be a need in Ventura County. Okay. So this is to stopgap so that you don't have to just take those 23 and say sorry, we're done. We can't do it. Correct. And already we see this crisis. And really it's a health concern. Again, you can drive throughout many of the streets throughout Ventura County and see these trucks parked illegally, illegally dumping. We've had many that have witnessed dumping into our stormwater systems. So this does meet and is again, it keeps the 23 that we currently have, keeps them compliant. Okay. And then you can't you can't extend your permit and temporary permit camera. Right. We did meet with the city of Camarillo and they will not extend it okay. Thank you. So I've heard a lot about storage and things like that. You're basically parking

vehicles. That is correct. You're not plugging into anything. You're parking a vehicle. We are parking vehicle. And at this location has existing electrical. And under a building permit, we would get electrical permit for these units to plug in for refrigeration as needed. Not all of them need to have electrical, but you could, as a stopgap, just park vehicles there without electrical. Commissioner. That is correct. And that's what we're looking to have, is that we just need to have a location to park the vehicles. All they're servicing would be at Dawson, which is an approved commissary. Okay. Could you. Because I didn't really see it. How does the operation work? So the operator comes in at what time in the morning, pulls the truck out, goes to the Dawson site, then goes out, does their business, then comes back. So when do they leave and when do they come back? It really varies. Many of them may be at lunchtime. You might have a couple that come in the morning that serve a breakfast. Maybe in some of the local businesses. So it really varies throughout the day. And that's why we see that trip count, not just during peak traffic time, but we see it throughout the day. And again, much of its operating out of the commissary that that would be housed there. So it's coming out of Camarillo. So again, it does reduce traffic in that. And I just want to really cite going back to this article 13 and allowing that we do have a mechanism for to reach our goal. And I just want to cite here 8113 5.4 the continuance of nonconforming use and structures. We have no modification to the structure. Now hearing from fire department. We do not have any grading proposed. That was originally part of our application. We thought we'd need to clean some of that up. We do not need to clean the site up. It's been used by AG Rex. They have tractors, heavy trucks, delivery trucks over it. We will not need to do any

grading at the site. And item two it says the continuance is not detrimental to the public interest. Health, safety or welfare. This is in fact just the opposite. Actually keeps that from happening by allowing the zoning clearance for this continuation. And so again I just want to reclarify many of our projects as we come before and work with staff. It's in the spirit of trying to find a way to get us to an approval. And what's so exciting to hear about the Board of Supervisors is that's really what they're looking at, because we've worked and engaged with many public elected officials who all of a sudden began something very simple, even just a project at their own home, and find it takes eight months to ten months to obtain a permit. And so we find with what has been approved and adopted, resolution last month really allows the Planning Commission to direct staff to implement this immediately based on their comments and decisions last month. Thank you. Secretary Lewis, do we have any public comments or speakers for this item? Chair Kelly Yes we do. We have five speakers for this item. Would you like me to start? Okay, okay. The first one is Sue Sandlin, followed by Christina Greiner and then Tyler Cobb. Sue your your up. Good morning, Madam Chair and honorable members of the Planning Commission. My name is Sue Sandlin. My husband Desmond and I are the proud new owners of 3250 Somis Road. Like many

of you, I care deeply about Somis. We didn't buy this property to be absentee landlords. We bought. We bought it to be good stewards and good neighbors. Overnight food truck parking and future self storage is quieter, cleaner and generates less traffic than half the traffic, dropping from 75 daily trips to only 30, mostly outside peak hours. That's a genuine improvement for everyone who lives and drives on Soma's Road. We have already done our homework to make sure that this is safe and compliant. The fire department reviewed the site and stated they have no concerns. There's ample access to remove. I'm sorry to maneuver. All electrical hookups for refrigeration will be fully permitted and inspected. Every truck will continue to use and approve commissary just three for 3 or 4 miles away for washing and dumping exactly as they do today. This is not an expansion of a non-conforming use. It is less intensive storage use that fits squarely within a non-coastal zoning ordinance. And the property's 85 year history of storage. The Certificate of Compliance confirms that legally, this qualifies for a simple continuation permit, not a conditional use permit. Most importantly, we are racing against a January 15th, 2026 deadline. Without this approval, 23 legal, family owned food truck businesses, many of them Latino owned, will suddenly have nowhere legal inventory. County to park overnight. That means jobs lost, dreams crushed and more illegal parking on our streets. My husband and I are invested in Somis for the long

haul, granting this short term zoning clearance until April 1st keeps 23 small businesses alive, cuts traffic, eliminates chemicals and cost accounting. Nothing in enforcement. It's the right thing to do and it's fully compliant. Please overturn the denial. We need to be responsible partners every step of the way. Thank you. Any questions? Thank you. All right. Next one is Christina Green. Hello, commissioners and staff. I'm Christina Green with RWC. And we've been working on this project now for several months. And I have I wanted to add a little bit of additional information. It seems that we have an increased problem in the unincorporated areas because of the regulations from some of the local cities, City of Ventura and City of Oxnard. And this food truck facility parking facility would address those concerns because we have more and more trucks now parking outside the area, which creates all kinds of safety hazards. We have dangerous traffic conditions when these set up illegally. As you can see from some of the photos in the presentation, individuals pulling off the streets presents a danger to the roads and a danger to the customers and people themselves. We believe that, you know, by not approving this or basically by removing the denial of this application, we would be forcing these current vendors that are legal to become illegal vendors or operating illegally, or they would go out

of business, which would be a real shame for these 23 folks, not counting others that are in the area that are facing the same condition. We also had held a town meeting and workshop with the adjacent neighbors, and they had no objections to this project. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Tyler Cobb, followed by Sunita Singh and then Daniella Davis. Good morning, chair and commissioners. My name is Tyler Cobb. I serve on the Somis Municipal Advisory Council. But I'm here speaking on behalf of myself today. This project was presented to our council last month at our meeting, and the community saw no issues with this project. It was presented in its main form, not the temporary, but either way, it's it's the same project and it had no impact on the community. And as a matter of fact, it was better on the traffic because it was less turning in and out, which with the 75 and sometimes more trips that Ajax had, it was sometimes a traffic issue there. And that's what the community is more concerned about going forward. But it was presented by the applicant and there was little conversation. And as far as the overall the final application that there asking for, it was kind of a net positive for the community because they're going to clean up the property and make it a little bit nicer and change the egress and ingress of how it was before. So from a community standpoint, there was there was zero impact and kind of a net

positive. So that that's basically my comment today. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Sunita Singh and then Daniella Davis afterwards. Good morning. Thank you for having me. Daniella Davis and I started this business in 2013 to help small food entrepreneurs. We started it because my partner Daniella was looking for somewhere to operate her catering business, and there was nothing in Los Angeles County. So we broke some barriers there and opened a legal food truck. I'm sorry, legal kitchen commissary, the one in Redondo Beach does not have food trucks. So we saw a need here in Ventura County. We we met with the health department and we opened up a food truck commissary. We have about 150 food truck entrepreneurs and kitchen members across Redondo Beach and Ventura County and San Luis Obispo. We're here mostly to help small businesses operate and be compliant. And we have a business that we've set up that allows them to. Dump greywater, do the washing, and provide places where they can safely operate their business. Food trucks are, you know, food industry is. Sorry. Let me regroup. The success rate is higher with our commissaries because it allows them to come

in and operate without the danger of being illegal. We would greatly appreciate this. It's a dire need. This 23 food trucks will. If we don't get this approval, we'll be out of business or operate illegally. Thank you. Any questions? No. Thank you. Next is Daniella Davis. Hello. Thank you for hearing us speak today. As it's been mentioned, we at 115. We currently house, you know 50 food trucks. And we were able to take on those 23. We also have a waitlist for for trucks that don't even have spaces to begin with. When we spoke with when we found the Somis property, we spoke with Ventura County, and they are reading the code to allow us to split the services. So the parking and electricity can be one place, and then they're allowing all the graywater dumping, dishwashing, all of the other, all the other services that are required to be done at 115. Because of this dire need, we work closely with all the health departments in the counties that we are a part of. As my partner mentioned, San Luis Obispo, LA. And we do it in a way to bridge compliance with economic development. So we think of ourselves as like a Segway between that, these 23 trucks. Well, most of you know, 70% of our business owners are people of color or women. And these trucks, they won't have a place to go. They won't have a permit, so they won't be able to operate. And, you know, due to the construction delay, it really, you know, that it says,

you know, they say April could be June. And that's a long time for them to carry the expense of having the truck. And they have nowhere for it to park. So we would really, you know, beseech you to help these small food businesses so that we can continue to provide these services and promote economic development in the county. So thank you so much. Thank you. Chair. Kesley, these are the only speakers that we have for this item. Thank. Thank you. Secretary Luce, would the appellant like to present any rebuttal. And if so you have five minutes for that. Thank you. Go ahead. Yeah, yeah. This was I want you to know. Okay. I'm sorry. I thought we turned the card in for myself, but I guess we didn't. Okay. Did you say you had a question or. Ma'am? Only if you have a rebuttal or an additional comment to make. Basically, have a comment. If you don't mind. I'll say good morning, chair. Members of Ventura County Planning Commission. My name is Desmond Sandlin. I am the owner of 3250 Somis Road in Somis, California. Thank you for allowing me to speak today in support of this appeal for zoning clearance. As the new owner of this property, which has served our community for over 85 years as a commercial parking and storage lot, we have a deep personal stake in seeing it used responsibly and beneficially today. Here, I

urge you to approve the temporary use for overnight food truck parking and to direct staff to allow us to continue using this property as a less intensive storage site than the current use. This is not only addresses the critical county crisis, but it also aligns with my vision for the property as a positive community asset. This site has always been about supporting local community zoned M-2 for industrial uses like storage, fertilizer, chemical and parking. When the kitchen terminal approached me about leasing it temporarily as an ancillary parking facility for 23 food trucks while their permanent expansion at 115 Dawson Drive in Camarillo is completed, I sw an opportunity to reduce the impact and help solve the Ventura County food truck parking shortage. Currently, as aggregates the property. Sorry about this. Generates about 75 daily traffic trips with peak hour congestion, switching to self storage and overnight food truck parking drops that just to 30 trips staggered and minimal, creating what we call a negative traffic impact. A real improvement for neighbors and the road approaching these bridges. The gaps from January 15th to April the 1st, 2026, saving 23 small businesses for legality or closure. No one wants to tell 23 legal operating businesses right before Christmas that there will be no longer no legal places for them to park in

Ventura County after January 15th, 2026. This approval supports the Board of Supervisors. November 20th November 18th reforms for streamlining permits and boosting economic vitality. Reforms that call for immediate action on public needs like this. As a recent owner invested in Somis, I believe this temporary use enhances safety, cuts county enforcement costs, and keeps our local economy thriving. Please overturn the denial and grant the zone clearance, directing staff to process a continuation permit if needed. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Go ahead. Are there any questions for Mr. Yeah. Staff didn't make any any reference to a continuation permit. Is that applicable? I mean because Mr. and Mrs. Salen said something about the permit to be a continuation permit rather than an thank you chair. Kessler. Commissioner Cushing, continuation permit is not before your board. It's not part of the application materials. The applicant applied for zone clearance. And so that is what's before you today. The information that he's described about continuation process is a separate provision of our code. It's tied to the actual use on the ground. The use today is the business. That's not what the zone clearance application is before you. If. Yeah, okay. I do have some closing comments from staff when you're ready. Thank you. Please. Chair and commissioners, two more minutes

to thank you. Chair. I would just like to add a comment that we were directed by staff to use the method and the vehicle of a temporary permit. So again, if you look through this, we've all in the spirit of trying to get these goals and approved. Staff had instructed us to go down the road of applying for the zoning clearance as a temporary because really traffic or. A trucking operation does not meet their current operation. It's really storage. It's storage. It's housed overnight. That is it. And so again, we would ask that the commissioners direct staff, in whatever case it is to reach our goal. We are okay with applying for a new zoning clearance tomorrow morning with it being a continuation. That is true today. That's not before you, but we would ask that you give staff some sort of direction that allows us a stop gap and immediately allows what Board of Supervisors would like to have, and that is a continuation so that we have some mechanism in place. We get caught up in these technical items and then it stalls businesses, it stalls incomes that are happening and does not allow these businesses to be successful. So I would ask that we look at whatever that goal is. But the direction it came was from staff. Thank you, thank you. I actually do have one question from the appellant. Many times you've referenced self storage. Is there a self storage facility on the premises as it exists today? There are currently AG Rex did have mobile storage units that come in and out of there. And that would be a use that we are also requesting within our PD that would have mobile storage units that would come to the site. There's currently two that are there from AG Rex, and they already are permitted to be there. That's been part of their operation the last 50

years. Thank you. With staff like to present any closing remarks. Thank you chair Kesley. Just two points. One, in regards to the legislative actions that directed by the Board of Supervisors, that is going to take legislative changes, meaning the code needs to be amended to facilitate the direction that they provided. US staff will be working on the package of how to go about completing those legislative changes, and that's what the board's directed us to come back on March 20th, in March 2026, to provide that direction and show how we're going to tackle that in our work plan, the work plans that the board adopts for the planning division is in a three year cycle. That three year cycle is coming up, and so we will be looking at ways to prioritize the reform directions that they've given us within the work plan, and what things will move to the side or go in later years while we focus on those priorities. As far as immediate implementation items, those relate to processing aspects such as completeness, reviews, ways we work with the other divisions, and doing our environmental review. Things of that nature nature not legislative changes, but actual processing steps the day to day, the inner coordination and work between all the county agencies as we complete development review for the county. Lastly, is just identifying the decision before you today. You are acting as the planning Director in an implementation. Then of the code. The code on page three of your staff report provides you the findings at the bottom of page three. Those findings to issue a zone clearance are for the ministerial action is 81 1111.1.1 B. And there are ten provisions that need to be satisfied. The first one is the

most substantive. Is is the use to issue the zone clearance permissible under the present zoning on the land, and complies with the standards of Division eight, chapters one and two of the ordinance code. So all ten of those findings would need to be made by your commission. And it's an objective decision and the yes no of a ministerial action, not discretionary. And I'm available for any questions you may have. Thank you. Question is vehicle parking allowed on site at the present time? Vehicle parking tied to the current use? Yes. Tied to any use. Well, the use in operation needs to comply with the code. So it would be the use of the business. Is a parking lot allowed in the zone? Yes. As. And that's without use. Actually I would need to look that code provision up. If you give me a moment I can do that. Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt. Could could we have a five minute recess? I want to confer with the planning director real quick. Thank you. We will take a five minute recess. Thank you, thank you.

It. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. And to the applicant appellant team giving us an opportunity. The information raised about the the continuance. Question about a continuing permit is what I was huddling on quickly to evaluate. It's not part of what's before you today. It's not part of what the appellant applicant had submitted for the appeal. I have described to the appellant that I would review and consider what they've described, but I cannot give a determination today that is new information I would need to evaluate separately. So my recommendation still to you today is what's been described in the staff report, those ten findings that are necessary to ensure issue a zone clearance still apply. And staff's recommendation to your commission is to deny the appeal. That's before you today. Thank you. Thank you. Director Ward, are there any questions? Were you able to find out if a parking lot is an acceptable. It requires a plan development permit as a parking facility. That's still a discretionary plan development permit, a parking lot? Yes. Vehicle parking? Yes. Director. Would I do have a question? I'm kind of wrestling with this because there's a lot of complexities to it as as being brought up today. So in an industrial zone property, is there a truck as truck storage allowed as in that use? Is it the M1 or M2? I don't recall which one it was. It's the transportation services. As a PD permit. It does require a PD permit in the

industrial zone. Correct? Okay. And the one area of the ordinance is the emergency use authorization, and that is probably the only area where this could potentially land. I just wanted you to be able to explain that a little bit more in detail, whether or not there's room in that area for us, the emergency use authorization is a provision in the zoning code. We actually spoke with the applicant about that. They were requesting that as a potential path. But you need to find that there is an emergency. It's a specific provision in the code. And we were not able to make that determination that it's an emergency for us. For me as planning director, to issue an emergency use authorization that was fully explored, discussed with the applicant, my consideration, including other staff in the resource Management Agency about that. And we could not make that finding. Thank you, director Ward. I know you you said you couldn't make a determination today, but the continuance of a business would allow for vehicle parking, potentially without a zone clearance or without a PD for the R business to continue. That's correct. What's being raised as a new topic as of today in the hearing is whether or not there's another provision that could be looked at. I am willing to explore that, but I cannot give a decision. Today. The applicant appellant has asked me to give a decision today. I cannot do that. So my staff's recommendation to you

remains the same. So how much time would you need? I'm just a little concerned if we. If we. Deny the appeal. What the next step is, is is it better to continue this until you have a determination with the new information, rather than continue on and have a definite denial decision made today? If you can't make that decision, the the applicant appellant would. If you make a decision today and you decide to deny the appeal, that your action could be appealed to the Board of Supervisors, so that would be still a path available to them. In the meantime, I'd still be evaluating with new information provided to me and doing my analysis, whether or not there's another path forward, and I'm committed to them that I would still look at that. But I've been asked to make a decision that I'm guaranteeing that I cannot do that until I have evaluated the provisions of the code, their site plan, their information to do that. Thank you. Thank you. Director Ward. The appellant has requested to have one further one final comment and I've agreed. So please come up. Thank you. Thank you, thank you, director Ward, for your comments. We are not opposed to a continuation. We would we would be opposed to withdrawing our appeal. But we're not opposed to a continuance. We believe that storage, trucking, overnight parking of trucks is allowed by right under article 13 for M2 zoning. So in the matrix it is by right allowed. I also believe that there's a change of use that is also made a provision in article 13 that

does need to be reviewed. And I believe if planning staff would really review that and help us find a path forward. We've looked at emergency, we've looked at temporary, we've looked at a continuation. We're not experts in these areas. We're relying on staff and the director to give us that direction to a path forward, to have these businesses successful. Our appellant and his family is going to be able to eat tomorrow. They're going to be able to make it. They'll have a roof over their head. These 20 some that individuals that have these businesses do not have that luxury. They live day by day. They'll be the ones displaced. And I think that's the greater need that we need to look at. No different than we struggle with homeless, those that we want to supply food to. This is along those same lines of helping to create a path forward. I'm willing to work with director Ward that we can find and achieve that forward. Unfortunately, it's been difficult to navigate that, but I am definitely willing to work with the staff to find that moving forward. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Any questions? Okay. Seeing none, I would like to close the public hearing portion of this meeting. I will now open it up to my fellow commissioners for any discussion or emotion. I don't know, it just seems like common sense is is not prevailing here. Both sides, I think, are making it more complicated than it needs to be. And I don't know the reason why, but the ability to have an industrial site where you can park vehicles makes sense to me without going through a zone clearance, without going through a PD permit. I may be

ignorant on on that from a by the book standpoint, but it just doesn't make any sense to me. I don't I don't support the appeal, but I also don't think they actually need his own clearance to park vehicles if that's all they're doing. So I guess I would. Be comfortable with a continuance while we work it out and we get rid of all this gobbledygook of temporary outdoor storage for food trucks and start calling it vehicle parking. How do we get vehicle parking on the site and look for a way forward to do that? And I don't feel comfortable making a final decision today and and denying your appeal, but I would I would deny the appeal if I thought it would lead to further communication and not starting over. I'm not sure that's the case. So I would suggest that we continue this and let them work it out. The only thing is the time. When is the year permitted in Camarillo expiring January? January? Okay, Commissioner, it's January, January, January one or fifth, 15th, 15th. That's the only that's the only time constraint. There's like, would we even have a meeting in January to rule on it beforehand? Well, I'm not sure what happens if you park a few vehicles on the site as it is and just keep doing it. Please come on up. If I can just make one other comment and maybe a path forward. Director Ward, if

possibly you would support this. We've worked on many other cases where we have violations in the county for decades that go on. We have what's called a compliance agreement to to reach this area. Maybe we can adopt a compliance agreement that allows parking until we can reach this continuation agreement and do some sort of compliance agreement. So we we're we're prepared to pay the fees for these compliance agreements, have regular inspections, but we would even support a compliance agreement while we're working through this. Thank you. County Council. Yeah, I mean, I completely appreciate where the applicant's coming from, but that's not before you. That's a Brown act issue. And it's not before your commission. I mean, could it play out that way? Perhaps. But that's not for you to consider and chime in on today. I would like to just make some comments, and I want to support Commissioner Boyd's recommendation. It's very difficult because the basis for the appeal is going to be very difficult for us to support based on those ten items that we have to meet. So it seems that the best opportunity to get to a resolution that makes sense is to continue this. I agree, because industrial properties typically do allow if the owner of the property agrees for truck storage, vehicle storage. So it's hard for me to understand why it is so convoluted. And I think maybe it's because of the application for a temporary use storage zone clearance. So I my recommendation might be that we. Support a continuation. The only other question is if we

continue this, when could we have another meeting to. A planning commission meeting to resolve it? Well, it seems to me that it behooves both parties to to come to a quick resolution before the the January 16th date. Thank you, director Ward. Thank you. Chair. Kesley, if your commission directs for a continuation, you would need to set a date for that. The up. Our schedule now is looking to be January 15th as your next Planning Commission hearing, where we have agendized items coming December 18th. We had no items scheduled for that date. So it would be a question to of all you being available if you were to continue it to the 18th. That also means the time frame in which to produce staff report things are other than public noticing, because your notice today would serve as public noticing. So that's not required to achieve that part of it. But the staff work coordination, figuring out those details would it would be a very time certain to make that happen that quickly. So the other one would be January 15th. And I thought this might be my last meeting. Is there any discussion with regards to the time frame? Not in regards to the time frame. I'm willing to to make a motion to continue to January 15th. Specific. Thank you. Commissioner Boydston, I have a motion on the floor. Do I have a second? I'll second that. Thank you. Commissioner. Secretary Luce,

is there any further discussion? So if so, January 15th. So they're not going to kick out any of these people prior to January 15th. Correct? At this time we would not kick any people out based on this continuation. We would keep the business there and support them. We'll also talk with the city of Camarillo, will immediately start working with director Ward and his staff on a path forward. As commissioner mentioned, I believe that's very vital to this. With the holiday season, we'll move forward right into that and see if we even need to amend or look at a path forward. But we'll plan to meet with director Ward and his staff to to get this resolved and see if we can't. Again, I believe this is just a great opportunity. Not not only as we see this reform, but also just public and staff to come together to find a solution. I believe there can be a win win in this situation, so we'll work to get that achieved. Coming back to you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. I have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Bergstrom, a second by Commissioner Ayala. Secretary, please take roll. Commissioner. Yes, Commissioner. Cushing. Yes, Commissioner. Ayala. Yes, chair. Kesley. Yes. Thank you. The motion passes with four votes for. Yes. All right. Wow. The next item is item number seven. A report from Planning Director Ward. On board actions and other matters. Are there any items? I'm sorry, director Ward, is there any report? Sorry, I'm just completely. Thank you. Chair. Kesley, the one reportable item in part I addressed related to the hearing item and that was the board's direction on November 18th for the planning and zoning reform package that they prepared and came forward

with and got full board direction to proceed with. That action was led by Supervisor Gorell and Supervisor Lavier, and did involve staff coordination with key planning management during the summer months, and looking at the components and what items could be addressed, and giving our suggestions as well. And so now we will be returning with how to complete the work is what will come back to the board in March of 2026 as part of the next three year work program. Other than that, the hearing date would be the next 1st January 15th. We do have items for that also, including the selection of the chair for and vice chair for 2026, as well as setting the full calendar for 2026. Thank you. Thank you. Director Ward, are there any items the commissioners wish to discuss or introduce? I just wanted to wish everybody up here and staff Happy holidays, since we won't be seeing you until after the first of the year. And. And I look forward to working with you all next year. I'll do that.