Oct 19, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:05]

CALLING TO ORDER THE MEETING OF THE CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION FOR OCTOBER 19TH, 2022.

FOR A PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

COMMISSIONER SABELLICO PLEASE.

READY. BEGIN.

MADAM CLERK, ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

RECORD WILL REFLECT ALL SEVEN MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ARE IN ATTENDANCE.

WE HAVE NO MINUTES FOR APPROVAL.

TONIGHT WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.

[PUBLIC COMMENT]

MADAM CLERK, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER SLIPS? CHAIR, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKER SLIPS.

LOOKING AT THE AUDIENCE, I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

SO WE WILL PROCEED TO THE NEXT ITEM.

WE HAVE NO PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT.

WE WILL GO TO THE FIRST OF THREE NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS.

[1. PCD2022-0003 (DEV2022-0168) - STRAWBERRY FIELD OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT USE]

THANK YOU, CHAIR STINE.

THIS FIRST AGENDA ITEM RELATES TO A MATTER THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED AT A PRIOR MEETING.

THIS IS A CONFIRMATION OF THE APPEAL AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO COMPLETE THAT APPEAL PROCESS.

AND HERE TO PRESENT THIS ITEM IS PROJECT PLANNER KYLE LEEUWEN.

PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON, COMMISSION MET ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2022, TO HEAR AN APPEAL OF THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION RELATED TO THE SPECIFIC TYPES OF USES AND ACTIVITIES PERMITTED OR CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED ON THE AREA OF LAND, TYPICALLY REFERRED TO AS THE STRAWBERRY FIELDS WITHIN THE PUBLIC UTILITY ZONE.

AFTER HEARING PUBLIC COMMENTS AND DELIBERATING ON THE APPEAL, THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED A MOTION ON A VOTE OF 7 TO 0 TO OVERTURN THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE APPEAL.

THEREFORE, ALLOWING THE USES AND ACTIVITIES IN QUESTION, WHICH INCLUDE STAGES, INFLATABLE BOUNCE HOUSES, FACE PAINTING AND GAMES OF CHANCE OR SKILL.

THE RESOLUTION PROVIDED AS EXHIBIT ONE TO THE STAFF REPORT, FORMALLY OVERTURNS THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION AS IT APPLIES TO THOSE SPECIFIC USES.

AND IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED THE RESOLUTION PROVIDED.

THANK YOU. ANY COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER LUNA. I'M HERE OUT IN FLORIDA.

I FEEL LIKE THAT ON THE MAP OF THE UNITED STATES.

HE AND I ARE DOWN OVER HERE.

SO WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS ACTUALLY IN THE EVENT THAT, LET'S SAY, AN APPLE CANNON OR A MECHANICAL COUPLE USE OCCURS ON THE SIDE, I WOULD HOPE THAT THE STAFF WOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE DISCUSSION THAT THE COMMISSION HAD WITH RESPECT TO THE OTHER USES AND THAT IN THE EVENT OF A ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTANT COMES IN THAT YOU WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THAT VERY CAREFULLY IN LIGHT OF WHAT WE'VE DECIDED IS CONSISTENT WITH SOME OF THE USES IN THAT, IN THAT SONG.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.

MORE OF A PROCEDURAL QUESTION.

DO WE HAVE TO DO EX PARTE AGAIN? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

CITY ATTORNEY? NO, BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT HAVING A HEARING.

YOU'RE JUST ADOPTING A RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING WHAT HAPPENED.

THANK YOU. I LOOKED AT THE RESOLUTION.

I THINK IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUR DISCUSSIONS AND THE MOTION, SO I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT.

I THINK THAT IT REFLECTS OUR DECISION AND WE'RE NOT RECONSIDERING OUR DECISION TONIGHT.

WE'RE JUST CONFIRMING IT THROUGH THE RESOLUTION.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MOVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LUNA.

IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MEENES.

PLEASE VOTE. MOTION ADOPTED 5-0. THANK YOU. 7-0.

EXCUSE ME, SEVEN. SEVEN.

[LAUGHTER] NUMERICALLY CHALLENGED HERE TONIGHT.

[2. DISCUSSION ABOUT THE LAYOUT OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORTS]

[00:05:09]

AGAIN, ASSISTANT COMMITTEE DIRECTOR, DIRECTOR STRONG.

WOULD YOU PLEASE LEAD US IN THAT, PLEASE? THANK YOU. CHAIR STINE.

THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

NO FORMAL ACTION IS NECESSARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THIS IS A DISCUSSION ON THE FORMAT AND LAYOUT OF STAFF REPORTS.

AND HERE TO PRESENT THIS AS DIRECTOR JEFF MURPHY.

SO GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU. CHAIR STINE AND PLANNING COMMISSION.

I DO HAVE A VERY SHORT PRESENTATION THAT'S 45 MINUTES LONG SO WE CAN GET RIGHT THROUGH IT.

JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND.

AS THE COMMISSION REMEMBERS BACK IN JULY, WE DID A WORKSHOP THAT KIND OF COVERED A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TOPICS, ONE OF WHICH WAS THE PURPOSE, THE FORMAT, THE CONTENT, THE REASONS BEHIND STAFF REPORTS.

AS WE MENTIONED AT THAT TIME, A LOT OF THE CONTENT IN THOSE IS TO ESTABLISH A RECORD, THE FOUNDATION FOR DECISION MAKING BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

SO THERE IS NOT A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF THE CONTENT, BUT HOW WE PRESENT THE INFORMATION IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO HAVE A LITTLE FLEXIBILITY.

AND SO WE POSED THE QUESTION TO THE COMMISSION, AND YOUR COMMISSION AGREED THAT WE CAN LOOK AT DIFFERENT WAYS OF PRESENTING INFORMATION IN THE STAFF REPORT. SO AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE EXHIBITS, WE PROVIDED NINE DIFFERENT SAMPLES, SAMPLES OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORTS.

THERE IS NO INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICE.

YOU'LL SEE THERE ARE ALL OVER THE BOARD.

THEY ALL HAVE DIFFERENT REASONS WHY THEY DO THINGS.

SO IT'S REALLY A MATTER OF WHAT FITS WITH.

FOR CARLSBAD WHAT HELPS YOU BE ABLE TO NAVIGATE THE STAFF REPORTS AND BE ABLE TO PULL OUT THE INFORMATION IN ORDER FOR YOU TO MAKE A DECISION.

FROM THE THE OPTIONS OR THE EXAMPLES, WE IDENTIFIED THREE POTENTIAL OPTIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

AGAIN, THESE ARE NOT THE ONLY OPTIONS THAT THE COMMISSION WANTS TO DO A HYBRID OR KEEP THE CURRENT STAFF REPORT.

SO THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE CAN, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH.

WHEN DEVELOPING THE OPTIONS WE LOOKED AT THESE KEY COMPONENTS.

ONE IS THE PROJECT SUMMARY.

WE FELT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO HAVE ON THE FRONT PAGE BEING ABLE, AT A GLANCE, KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS BEING ASKED AND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED AND WHAT ASK OF YOU WE'RE HAVING.

THE OTHER IS THE BODY OF THE STAFF REPORT IS BEING TRY TO ORGANIZE IT TO TELL A STORY, WHAT IS GOING ON, WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED AND WHY IS IT IN FRONT OF YOU? ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU NOTICE IN OUR CURRENT STAFF REPORTS, THERE'S A LOT OF REPEAT TEXTS.

WE'RE TRYING TO ELIMINATE THAT TO THE, AS BEST WE CAN.

AND DOING THAT, IT'S KIND OF TYING INTO THE STORYTELLING OF THE PROJECT.

ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT I PUSH WITH THE DEPARTMENT STAFF IS WHITE SPACE IS GOOD SPACE.

AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING MORE SUBHEADINGS, HEADINGS, BULLET POINTS, USE OF FOOTERS TO BE ABLE TO BREAK UP THE MONOTONY OF SOME OF THESE STAFF REPORTS THAT CAN BE VERY LENGTHY AND VERY LENGTHY.

THE OTHER IS THE LENGTH THEMSELVES.

WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF [INAUDIBLE] WITH ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE TO PUT IN THERE.

A LOT OF THE INFORMATION GETS INTO THE STAFF REPORT.

AND SO THESE REPORTS CAN BE 15 TO 20 PAGES LONG.

WE'RE LOOKING AT TRYING TO TAKE OUT SOME OF THAT INFORMATION.

IT STILL NEEDS TO BE IN THE STAFF REPORT, BUT MAYBE IN THE FORM OF AN ATTACHMENT OR PART OF THE RESOLUTION AS PART OF THE FINDINGS.

SO WITH THAT, WE CAME UP WITH, AS I MENTIONED, THREE DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO GIVE YOU KIND OF A SENSE OF HOW THESE PROJECTS OR HOW THESE THESE TEMPLATES WOULD ACTUALLY WORK. WE USED A STAFF REPORT THAT YOUR COMMISSION APPROVED A PROJECT BACK IN AUGUST OF THIS YEAR.

THE MIX, THE JEFFERSON MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.

YOU MAY REMEMBER THAT ONE.

SO THAT CURRENT STAFF PART IS ON THE FAR LEFT HAND SIDE ON THIS, ON THIS SLIDE.

THEN OPTION NUMBER ONE IS WHERE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT REDUCING MOST, THE SAME AMOUNT OF CONTENT THAT WAS IN THE CURRENT STAFF REPORT, OR, HAD 16, WITH 16 PAGES LONG.

OPTION ONE ACTUALLY REDUCES IT DOWN TO FOUR PAGES, AGAIN USING EXHIBITS AND USING THE RESOLUTION AS A WAY TO CAPTURE THAT INFORMATION.

OPTION TWO IS A LITTLE LONGER.

IT RETAINS SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND THEN THREE IS KIND OF A HYBRID BETWEEN THE TWO.

SO KIND OF JUST, I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE REALLY QUICKLY SO WE CAN HAVE SOME MORE JUST GENERAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

SO LOOKING AT THIS AGAIN, THE FIRST PAGE THERE SHOWS A SYNOPSIS OF OF THE PROJECT.

SO YOU AS THE COMMISSION, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S BEING ASKED.

THE STORYTELLING STARTS WITH THE EXISTING CONDITIONS HERE.

STAFF WILL SHOW EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON ON THE PROPERTY.

YOU WILL NOT SEE WHAT'S, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, WHAT THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ARE.

THIS IS JUST WHAT IS OUT THERE TODAY.

AND THEN YOU GO INTO THE NEXT BULLET IS TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED.

[00:10:06]

THIS TALKS ABOUT WHAT OUTREACH WAS DONE.

AND THEN THE NEXT SECTION TALKS ABOUT THE HOW WE RESPONDED TO THOSE CORRECTIONS OR THOSE CONCERNS OR ISSUES.

THE FINAL ON THIS ONE GETS INTO THE DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS AND FINDINGS.

SO THIS IS WHERE WE REALLY RELY ON THE ATTACHMENTS AS A WAY TO CAPTURE THE INFORMATION.

SO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, WE TALK ABOUT WHAT IT IS AND THEN SAY WE FIND IT MEETS THE CODE REQUIREMENTS, LOOK AT ATTACHMENT X FOR THE SUPPORTING INFORMATION. AND WE DO THAT FOR EVERY, FOR EVERY PERMIT TYPE THAT'S GOING TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT.

AS I MENTIONED, THIS ONE, THIS ONE WAS A COMPLICATED ONE.

THERE WAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT ACTIVITY GOING ON, A LOT OF DIFFERENT PERMITS BEING PROPOSED.

SO AGAIN, WHAT, MOST PROJECTS ONLY HAVE TWO, MAYBE THREE PERMITS.

SO STAFF REPORTS WOULD BE EVEN SHORTER.

LOOKING AT OPTION NUMBER TWO, AGAIN, THIS IS CAPTURING SOME OF THE COULD YOU GO TO THE FIRST PAGE AGAIN? OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS THE SECOND OPTION.

A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THE SUMMARY PAGE.

A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THE CEQA ANALYSIS.

THIS ONE ALSO CAPTURES OR RETAINS SOME OF THE EXHIBITS OR CHARTS THAT YOU, THAT YOU HAVE SEEN IN OUR CURRENT STAFF REPORTS.

BUT IT ALSO GOES INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL, WHICH IS THE REASON WHY IT'S A LITTLE LONGER, BUT IT'S STILL ONLY HALF THE SIZE OF THE, OF OUR CURRENT CURRENT STAFF REPORT.

AND THEN OUR FINAL ONE IS, AS I MENTIONED, IS A HYBRID.

A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL IN THE FIRST PAGE.

AGAIN, RETAINING SOME OF THE TABLES THAT ARE IN THE CURRENT FORMAT OF OUR STAFF REPORTS.

STILL GOES INTO PUBLIC COMMENTS, AND THIS ONE RELIES ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY ON THE USE OF THE RESOLUTION AS THE SUPPORT FOR ALL THE, FOR ALL THE DIFFERENT FINDINGS.

SO WITH THAT, I KIND OF WENT THROUGH THAT QUITE QUICKLY.

I CAN PULL UP ANY ONE OF THE OPTIONS FOR YOU GUYS TO LOOK AT, BUT THIS IS KIND OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A Q&A SESSION AND DISCUSSION AS TO IF THERE'S A DESIRE TO CHANGE THE KIND OF THE FORMAT OF THE STAFF REPORTS, AND IF SO, HOW DO YOU WANT TO DIRECT US TO DO THAT? ANY QUESTIONS FROM OUR COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER MEENES. JEFF, I HAVE A QUESTION.

WITHIN THE PACKET, YOU HAVE SAMPLES OF OTHER CITIES, ENCINITAS, MARIETTA COUNTY, SAN DIEGO, CITY OF SAN DIEGO, SAN MARCOS, AND THE LAST ONE.

BUT IN THAT REGARD, I THOUGHT IT WAS HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT AS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO SEE THE CONTRASTING OF HOW EACH AND EVERY CITY DEALS WITH IT. ONE OF THE CITY, I GUESS YOU SAY AGENDA ITEMS THAT I WAS IMPRESSED WITH WAS ENCINITAS.

I FELT THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY WENT INTO, AND OF COURSE IT MADE IT MORE LENGTHY, AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE AS A COMMISSION CAN ADDRESS.

BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING THAT THEY HAVE, FIRST OF ALL, IT WAS BULLET POINTS SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU HAD PROVIDED IN THE OPTIONS TODAY, BUT YET THEY STILL GOT INTO THE GENERAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, INCLUSIONARY HOUSING DESIGN REVIEW, CLIMATE ACTION, AND THEY HAD A PUBLIC NOTICE OR WHAT THE PUBLIC INPUT HAPPENED TO BE.

I THOUGHT WAS THAT WAS VERY, VERY HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT BULLET POINTED OUT, BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN I GO THROUGH OUR AGENDA ITEMS, I ALWAYS KIND OF LOOK AT VARIOUS THINGS AND OFTEN SOME OF THAT INFORMATION IS NOT NECESSARILY IN OUR AGENDA ITEMS. AND AGAIN, ENCINITAS MIGHT HAVE INCLUDED THOSE BECAUSE THEY MIGHT BE, I GUESS, ITEMS THAT THEY ARE THEIR PRIORITIES, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY. BUT I WAS IMPRESSED WITH THAT.

AND I'M THINKING THAT, AND I'M KIND OF OPENING IT UP TO TO THE COMMISSION, THAT MAYBE SOME OF THOSE THINGS LIKE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING, DESIGN REVIEW, BECAUSE WE HAVE A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE GOING ON RIGHT NOW, THAT MAYBE WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER SOME OF THE COMPONENTS THAT ENCINITAS HAVE WITHIN THEIR AGENDA ITEM.

ANY ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.

THIS IS A GREAT IDEA.

AS A RELATIVELY NEW MEMBER I STRUGGLED THE FIRST YEAR TRYING TO GET THROUGH SOME OF THESE REPORTS AND I FOUND THE REPETITION NOT NECESSARILY HELPFUL AT ALL. I LIKE IT A LOT.

[00:15:04]

I ALSO THOUGHT THIS WAS A GREAT IDEA, PARTICULARLY ATTACHING THE REPORTS FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS TO SEE HOW THEY DO SIMILAR THINGS.

THAT WAS HELPFUL, AS WELL AS PROVIDING US WITH OPTIONS, ALTERNATIVES FOR THE WAY WE'VE BEEN DOING THINGS.

THERE'S NO COOKIE CUTTER, THERE'S NO MAGIC ONE SIZE FITS ALL HERE.

EVERY JURISDICTION DOES IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.

AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THE STAFF REPORTS FROM THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STOOD OUT TO ME, AND IT'S PROBABLY BECAUSE I'M A VERY VISUAL LEARNER AND I BET I'M NOT ALONE ON THE DAIS, FOR I LIKE TO SEE PICTURES AND DIAGRAMS. I THOUGHT THE MARIETTA, CITY OF MARIETTA HAD A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT VERY EARLY ON.

IF YOU LOOK AT ATTACHMENT E AS IN ED, THERE, I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THE FIRST PAGE OR BUT THEIR THIRD PAGE THEY HAVE A GOOD PICTURE.

SHOWS THE STAFF SITE AND THEN IT'S FOLLOWED ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE WITH A VERY NICE DIAGRAM THAT CALLS THINGS OUT.

PERSONALLY, I LIKE A VISUAL, A MAP, A DIAGRAM EARLY ON IN THE STAFF REPORT.

THAT GIVES ME AN ORIENTATION.

YES, I READ THE WORDS, BUT HAVING A DIAGRAM, HAVING A PICTURE, HAVING A MAP.

REALLY HELPS THE INFORMATION SINK IN FOR ME.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN OUR STAFF REPORTS PERHAPS A LITTLE BIT MORE ATTENTION TO THE VISUALS AND MAPS EARLY ON IN THE STAFF REPORT.

I'M NOT SAYING ON THE FIRST PAGE, BUT MAYBE SECOND OR THIRD PAGE, LIKE THE CITY OF MARIETTA DID.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS A VERY HELPFUL THING.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? COMMISSIONER MERZ.

I DON'T KNOW THIS IS A FAIR QUESTION FOR MR. MURPHY OR NOT BUT SINCE YOU PREPARE EACH OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS UP THERE, IS THERE, IS THERE ONE YOU LIKE BETTER OR DO YOU, IS THAT A FAIR QUESTION TO ASK BECAUSE YOU'RE PUTTING THESE THINGS TOGETHER. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FAIR TO ASK YOU THAT QUESTION OR NOT.

IT'S FUNNY YOU SAY THAT BECAUSE WE DID START THIS AS A LITTLE COMPETITION BETWEEN ME, MIKE AND ERIC.

[LAUGHTER] AND SO BUT IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE I'M ALSO SMIRKING BECAUSE BOTH MIKE AND I WERE WERE INVOLVED IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS' PLANNING COMMISSION OR STAFF REPORT WHEN WE WORKED THERE.

I WAS INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT FOR MARIETTA.

SO. SO YOUR COMMENTS ARE, YES, I THINK THEY'RE ALL GREAT.

I DO. I DO AGREE.

I MEAN, THAT HAVING HAVING A VISUAL, A GRAPHIC OF LIKE AN AERIAL, THAT DOES HELP A BIT.

SO YOU'RE NOT DOING YOUR OWN HOMEWORK, TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT THE, WHAT THE SITE LOOKS LIKE FROM AN AERIAL VIEW.

SO THAT IS A GOOD SUGGESTION THAT WE WE CAN INCORPORATE INTO ANY OF THE OPTIONS.

AGREE IT SHOULDN'T BE MAYBE NOT ON THE PAGE ONE BUT MAYBE IN TWO OR THREE JUST SO YOU CAN HAVE THAT VISUAL.

AS FAR AS THE PART OF THE OTHER ONES, I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY INCORPORATE THAT BECAUSE SOME OF THAT STUFF IS RELATED TO FINDINGS.

AND SO IT'S A MATTER OF DO WE HIGHLIGHT THOSE IN THE STAFF REPORT? I THINK THERE COULD BE SOME DISCUSSION IN TERMS OF WHAT WE WANT TO HIGHLIGHT IN THE STAFF REPORT, BUT TYPICALLY WE STILL NEED TO MAKE THOSE FINDINGS AS PART OF THE RESOLUTION SO THEY WILL BE INCORPORATED.

SO IT'S A MATTER OF DO WE WANT TO ALSO HIGHLIGHT THEM ELSEWHERE? SO. CHAIR.

IF I CAN ALSO RESPOND TO THAT.

I WON'T OBJECT TO JEFF'S RECOMMENDATION ABOUT THE FIRST OPTION BEING THE BEST.

BUT I WILL SAY FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, THE EXISTING STAFF REPORT FRAMEWORK IS A VERY DIFFICULT TO WRITE ONLY BECAUSE IF ONE ELEMENT CHANGES IN ONE PORTION OF THE REPORT OR IN THE RESOLUTION, WE HAVE TO DATA SCRAPE THE REST OF THE DOCUMENT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF REDUNDANCY AND A LOT OF REPETITION.

SO SIMPLIFYING WAS ONE OF THE KEY OBJECTIVES OF THIS EFFORT, AND THAT'S REPRESENTED IN EACH OF THOSE THREE OPTIONS THAT WERE PRESENTED.

AND I THINK AS A TESTAMENT TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE AT THE JULY 6 WORKSHOP, OR WORK SESSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, A FEW OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS SPECIFICALLY SAID THEY SKIP THE STAFF REPORT AND GO STRAIGHT TO THE RESOLUTION BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE MEAT OF THE MATERIAL IS.

AND SO THAT WAS AN AHA MOMENT FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, BECAUSE THERE REALLY SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF REFERENCE DOCUMENT BEFORE THAT SETS THE STAGE.

AND I THINK THAT WAS REPRESENTED IN ONE OF THE BULLET POINTS, TELLING THE STORY, SETTING THE STAGE.

SO THAT WAS THE GUIDING PRINCIPLE TO THE THREE OPTIONS.

[00:20:01]

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER LUNA.

SO WHICH ONE DID YOU LIKE, MR. STRONG? I AM RELUCTANT TO SAY [LAUGHTER].

THANK YOU, MR. MURRAY.

HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY.

SO I LIKE TO DIRECT THIS TO MR. KEMP. THE PROPOSALS, THE OPTIONS ONE, TWO AND THREE, I'M ASSUMING THEY ALL MEET YOUR LEGAL BAR.

NO. THE ONE THAT'S BARE BONES I DON'T LIKE.

MAINLY BECAUSE I'VE BEEN TAUGHT, AND THERE'S TWO ATTORNEYS HERE ON THE DAIS WITH ME, AND THEY CAN SPEAK TO THIS.

THE JUDGES GENERALLY LIKE TO BE ABLE TO READ THE STORY IN THE MAIN DOCUMENT AND NOT HAVE TO FLIP BACK MULTIPLE TIMES TO DIFFERENT EXHIBITS TO TELL THE STORY.

IT BECOMES, YOU REMEMBER THE OLD CHOOSE YOUR OWN ADVENTURE BOOKS, KIND OF LIKE IF THIS THEN GO TO THIS PAGE OR GO TO THAT PAGE.

SO MY PREFERENCE, AND WE'RE ONLY GIVING OPINIONS, RIGHT, WOULD BE TO DO EITHER THE HYBRID OPTION OR ONE THAT HAS THE INFORMATION IN THE STAFF REPORT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ELICIT FROM ME? WELL, SINCE I SAT MANY DAYS IN COURT [LAUGHTER].

YOU'RE SPOT ON. SO I DID LIKE COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN RECOMMENDATION TO GO TO M.

I DID LIKE THAT OPTION.

I LIKE THAT THE PRESENTATION, THE BOXING AND ALL THAT, I THINK IT ADDRESSES COMMISSIONER MEENES CONCERNS THAT ENCINITAS HAD WITH RESPECT TO DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS.

I THINK THE LEVEL OF THE, THE LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE THAT THE COMMISSION HAS UP HERE, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THAT'S WHY I'M APPEALING.

I'M SUPPORTING COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, HE'S BEEN ON HERE, HOW LONG NOW, ON THE COMMISSION? OH, I'M JUST. YEARS. AND, YOU KNOW, IT TAKES A WHILE TO GET YOUR RHYTHM.

AND WE HAVE NOT HAD A LOT OF PROJECTS, A LOT OF CASES.

SO I THINK THAT HIS COMMENTS, I THINK, ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ME.

FOR THOSE OF US THAT DID IT FOR A LIVING, JUST GIVE ME A RESOLUTION.

FOR THOSE OF US THAT ARE BRAND NEW AND AREN'T EXPERIENCED, I LOVE THE WAY THAT YOU'VE COMPARTMENTALIZED IT, THE BOXES . THE COMMISSIONERS ARE LEARNING, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS THE CEQA STATUS.

IT'S RIGHT THERE. WHAT WAS THE CEQA DETERMINATION? STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THERE.

ALSO THE COMMISSION ACTION.

I LIKE THAT BOX LIKE RIGHT UP THERE.

SO DOES THIS GO TO CITY COUNCIL? DOES IT REST WITH US? GREAT, GREAT JOB ON OPTION ONE, TWO AND THREE.

BUT I THINK I WOULD DEFER TO COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN IN THAT I THINK IT INCORPORATES, I THINK PROBABLY A LOT OF THE STUFF THAT WAS RAISED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

I THINK IT ADDRESSES COMMISSIONER MEENES CONCERN ABOUT ENCINITAS AND THEN ALSO COMMISSIONER STINE.

WHEN I WAS AT A COUPLE OF JURISDICTIONS, I DID ALWAYS MAKE SURE THAT OUR STAFF REPORTS INCLUDED SOME TYPE OF GRAPHIC DESCRIPTION PHOTO.

SO I THINK IF YOU COULD INCORPORATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITHIN M, I WOULD BE A BIG FAN OF THAT, THAT TYPE OF A STAFF REPORT.

WELL, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS UP HERE.

I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT.

SO IF YOU TURN TO THE ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT, THAT'S GOING TO BE ATTACHMENT J AND THEN PAGE FIVE OF ATTACHMENT J.

THERE'S TABLE C, WHICH IS GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE.

I REALLY LIKE THIS TABLE.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT HAS TO BE IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR EVERY SINGLE AGENDA ITEM, BUT IF THERE IS A WAY THAT WE CAN.

BECAUSE I KNOW THAT PART OF YOUR REVIEW OF STAFF, I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS.

YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PROJECT AND MAKE SURE IT COMPLIES WITH THE GENERAL PLAN.

AND THIS IS LIKE OUR BIBLE.

LIKE THIS IS WHAT, THIS IS, BEHIND STATE LAW.

LIKE, THIS IS, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN TERMS OF THE QUALITY OF JUDICIAL ACTIONS.

WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT THIS IS COMPLYING WITH THE GENERAL PLAN.

SO I DON'T THINK, I DON'T SEE THAT IN ATTACHMENT M.

[00:25:02]

IS THAT, IS THAT THE CASE? THROUGH CHAIR STINE, IF I COULD RESPOND TO THIS.

PLEASE. MR. SO THERE ARE NUMEROUS TABLES AND CHARTS PROVIDED IN THAT ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT, AND THE IDEA WAS TO MOVE THOSE TO EITHER THE RESOLUTION OR ATTACHMENTS.

BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF THE EXPOSITION OF THE TABLE, IT JUST MADE SENSE TO SET IT ASIDE IN ANOTHER AREA.

THE REASON WHY IT MAKES SENSE TO PUT IT IN THE RESOLUTION ITSELF IS BECAUSE THOSE ALSO CONSTITUTE FINDINGS.

THE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY.

YOU NEED TO STATE FOR THE REASONS WHY RATHER THAN MAKING CONCLUSORY STATEMENTS.

SO RATHER THAN DUPLICATING IT IN SEVERAL LOCATIONS, THE IDEA WAS TO HAVE A SINGLE SOURCE LOCATION AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE RESOLUTION.

SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PUT LIKE IN PARAGRAPH FORM, LIKE WHEREAS FOR GOAL 2, G2, IT SATISFIES THIS BECAUSE X, AND IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO PUT IN THE RESOLUTION OR ? THE WHEREAS THE RECITALS ARE MORE OF THE FACTUAL RECORD PRECEDING THE DETERMINATIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND SO THE IDEA WOULD BE THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE SUBSEQUENT SECTIONS WHERE THE FINDINGS ARE ACTUALLY MADE.

SO FOR THE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY, THERE'S SOME ELEMENT OF THE PLAN THAT DEMONSTRATES COMPLIANCE OR NOT COMPLIANCE, AND THAT BECOMES THE FINDING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

SO WE HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO THE PHYSICAL FORMATTING OF THE RESOLUTION BECAUSE THE EFFORT WAS REALLY FOCUSED ON THE STAFF REPORT.

AND I'M SURE RON WOULD ATTEST THAT CERTAIN FINDINGS NEED TO BE MADE TO HAVE A LEGALLY ADEQUATE ACTION.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE ONE ELEMENT.

SO WHERE IT IS IN THE RESOLUTION, I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE'D HAVE TO SORT OUT SEPARATELY, BUT IT WOULD BE THERE SOMEWHERE.

OK. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS MISSING AND I GUESS, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE LIMITING THIS DISCUSSION TO THE STAFF REPORT, BUT IT SEEMS. I'M A LITTLE HESITANT TO, LIKE, CHANGE THE STAFF REPORT AND REMOVE SOMETHING FROM THE STAFF REPORT IF I IF I'M NOT CLEAR ON WHERE AND HOW IT WILL BE IN THE RESOLUTION. BUT IF IT CAN BE PROMISED TO ME THAT THIS INFORMATION WILL BE IN A EQUALLY GOOD FORMAT IN THE RESOLUTION, I CAN SUPPORT OPTION THREE.

AND FOR CLARIFICATION, MR. STRONG, STAFF IS NOT RECOMMENDING CHANGING THE FORMAT FOR THE RESOLUTION PER SE, IS IT? IF THERE ARE CERTAIN ELEMENTS OF THE STAFF REPORT THAT ARE ELIMINATED THAT DO RELATE TO FINDINGS THAT NEED TO BE MADE, SUCH AS GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY, IT WILL HAVE TO EXIST SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE RECORD THAT'S TAKEN.

BUT THE RESOLUTION ITSELF WILL STILL HAVE ALL THE REQUISITE FINDINGS.

WE'RE NOT, CONTENT WISE YOU'RE NOT RECOMMENDING A CHANGE TO THAT OR AM I MISUNDERSTANDING? THE OBJECTIVE WAS NOT TO CHANGE IT IN LARGE SCOPE.

BUT IF THERE WERE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDED TO IT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS A LEGALLY BINDING DOCUMENT, WE WOULD DO SO.

AND I BELIEVE JEFF MURPHY WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO THIS.

YES. AND I JUST I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.

SO THE INTENT OF TODAY'S MEETING IS JUST TO SEE IF THERE IS AN INTEREST IN CHANGING OUR STAFF REPORTS.

SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS AT LEAST SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS ARE INTERESTED IN OPTION THREE, WHICH IS ATTACHMENT M IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SO WHAT'S NEXT IS IF THAT HAS BECOME THE MAJORITY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DESIRES TO PURSUE THAT, WE THEN WILL GO AND WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO COME UP WITH A FORMAT THAT THEN COINCIDES WITH ANY RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES TO GET ATTACHED TO THOSE DOCUMENTS, TO MAKE SURE THAT ONCE THIS GETS IMPLEMENTED, IT WILL BE DEFENSIBLE AND IT WILL ADDRESS THE OBJECTIVES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.

SO TODAY, IT'S NOT TO DECIDE THAT, CONGRATULATIONS, THIS IS THE NEW STAFF REPORT.

IT REALLY IS GIVING US THE GREEN LIGHT OF NARROWING IT DOWN TO ONE STAFF REPORT WHERE WE CAN WE CAN FOCUS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY ON HOW TO MAKE IT WORK.

THANK YOU FOR CLARIFICATION AND FOR CLARIFICATION FOR OUR DISCUSSION.

WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ATTACHMENT M, THAT IS ALSO OPTION THREE.

WE'RE TALKING THE SAME THING, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.

I WASN'T READY FOR THAT. THANK YOU.

I WANT TO GO BACK TO JUST BRIEFLY.

I THINK THAT ALL THE COMMENTS ARE ADEQUATE.

THE THING THAT HELPS ME THE MOST IN THE EXISTING STAFF REPORT IS THE COMBINATION OF THE DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS AND THE CASE NUMBERS.

THE CASE NUMBERS DIRECTLY RELATE THE GPA IS THE GENERAL PLAN.

THE ZC IS ZONING.

YOU KNOW. SO THE IDEA THAT THERE IS A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ACTUAL CASE NUMBER AND WHAT THE ACTUAL SPECIFIC DISCRETIONARY ACTION IS, TO ME IS VERY HELPFUL, MOSTLY BECAUSE THE NUMBERS DON'T REALLY MEAN ANYTHING, BUT THE ACTUAL CALLING OUT THE GENERAL PLAN, THE CODE AMENDMENT,

[00:30:02]

AND THAT'S REALLY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT ISN'T IN THAT M.

BUT IT IS IN THE EXISTING STAFF REPORTS.

SO, SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S VERY HELPFUL TO ME.

THE OTHER THING ABOUT GOING BACK TO THE, THE BEGINNING WHERE YOU BULLET POINT ON PAGE TWO IN THIS STAFF REPORT, YOU TELL THE STORY, I WAS SORT OF CONCERNED THAT MAYBE YOU WERE, I UNDERSTAND WE'RE TRYING TO TELL, INTERPRET SOMETHING, BUT I ALSO WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE FACTS ARE.

SO THE IDEA THAT THERE'S A BASELINE ESTABLISHED AND THAT SORT OF IS HELPFUL IN THE . I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHICH ONE IT WAS, WHERE YOU HAD THE EXISTING CONDITION DEFINED AND THE PROPOSAL DEFINED.

I THINK THAT WAS ACTUALLY REALLY GOOD BECAUSE THE EXISTING CONDITION IS ONE THING, BUT THE PROPOSAL IS THE THING THAT'S CHANGING.

AND AGAIN, IT'S MORE OF BREAKING IT DOWN TO THE POINT WHERE WE UNDERSTAND, OKAY, SO THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, BUT THIS IS, SO THERE MIGHT WANT TO BE SOME KIND OF MIDDLE GROUND OF WHAT THE CITY REQUIRES IN THAT FROM THE EXISTING CONDITION TO THE PROPOSAL, IS THERE THE CITY BASELINE OF WHAT'S EXPECTED.

AND I KNOW THAT'S AN INTERPRETATION SOMETIMES BECAUSE I KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

AND A LOT OF THESE THINGS ARE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF UP TO THE DESIGNERS AND UP TO THE OWNERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR CITY IS INFORMED ABOUT WHAT THE EXISTING CONDITION IS, WHAT THE PROPOSED IS, BUT ALSO WHAT OUR CITY AND OUR ORDINANCES AND CODES AND THINGS LIKE THAT ARE ACTUALLY SAYING ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

AND IF THERE'S A VARIANCE LIKE A DENSITY BONUS OR WHATEVER IT IS, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S NOT A VARIANCE, THEN IT'S DENSITY BONUSES AND A VARIANCE, BUT IT DOES ACTUALLY CHANGE FROM WHAT OUR CODE IS TO WHAT THE, YOU KNOW, PROJECT IS PROPOSING.

SO THAT'S TO ME SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL IN THIS INTERPRETATION.

I THINK IN ALL THREE OPTIONS AT LEAST, WE ARE TRYING TO ATTEMPT IS, YOU'RE CORRECT, COMMISSIONER, THAT THE FIRST STEP IS TO TALK ABOUT THE EXISTING WHAT'S ON THE PROPERTY TODAY. THE NEXT IS JUST DESCRIBING WHAT THE PROJECT IS.

BUT THE FOLLOWING SECTION TALKS ABOUT WHAT THE CODES ALLOW AND WHAT IS THE PERMIT PROCESS THEY NEED TO FOLLOW.

SO IF IT IS A DENSITY BONUS PROJECT THAT'S SECTION THREE AND ALL THREE OPTION IS WHERE YOU ARE GOING TO GET THAT ANALYSIS.

SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR WITH ANY OF THE OPTIONS, INCLUDING THAT THAT ATTACHMENT M/OPTION THREE.

SO I THINK, WE'RE I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT SAME THING.

I THINK THE CHALLENGE WITH THIS ONE IS WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.

YOU GUYS SEE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ONES WITH ALL DIFFERENT PERMIT TYPES.

SO YOU WILL SEE OVER TIME THAT I THINK THAT SECTION IS GOING TO KEY IN ON WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

AND THEN THE OTHER THING, GOING BACK TO MR. STINE'S COMMENTS, THIS ATTACHMENT, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE IT, BUT IT'S THE SITEMAP.

COULD THIS BE INCORPORATED INTO THE STAFF REPORT? WELL, WE CAN INCORPORATE ANYTHING IN THE STAFF REPORT AND MAPS ARE INCLUDED.

BUT IT'S A QUESTION OF WHETHER IT'S AN ATTACHMENT OR WHETHER CHAIR STINE WAS SUGGESTING IT BE EMBEDDED INTO THE STAFF REPORT ITSELF.

THE ONE, I PERSONALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF THE HAVING LIKE AN AERIAL WITH AN OUTLINE OF THE PROJECT SITE SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S THERE TODAY AND ITS RELATION TO WHAT IS IN THE SURROUNDING LAND USES.

BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU ALREADY HAVE IN YOUR, WHEN YOU LOOK UP THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW, YOU ACTUALLY CAN DO THAT ON YOUR SYSTEM, CORRECT? CORRECT. BUT THE IDEA IS THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE IN PAGE TWO, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO LOOK IT UP.

IT'S RIGHT THERE. WHEN YOU TURN THE PAGE, IT'S THERE.

AND SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO ANY EXTRA WORK.

SO IT IS SOMETHING I KNOW WE DID IT IN MARIETTA, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD DEFINITELY BE DOING, WE CAN DO IN OUR OUR STAFF REPORTS.

WELL, AND I THINK ULTIMATELY THE LAST THING WE WANT TO DO IS SHORTEN THE STAFF REPORT AND MAKING THE RESOLUTION LONGER.

DOES THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M SORT OF HEARING HAPPENING.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S.

I GUESS THE YOU GUYS KNOW BECAUSE YOU'RE LAWYERS, WHAT IS THE THING THAT PEOPLE GO TO WHEN YOU'RE IN A DISPUTE? RIGHT. WHICH ONE? WELL, THE IMPORTANT THING IS THE RESOLUTION, BECAUSE THE RESOLUTION IS A RECORDATION OF THE ACTION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TOOK.

[00:35:03]

THE STAFF REPORT REALLY IS THERE TO TELL YOU THE STORY OF THE PROJECT AND WHAT THE BACKGROUND IS.

BUT THE ACTIONS THAT YOU TAKE IN APPROVING THE PROJECT, THE FACTS THAT YOU'RE ACCEPTING, AND THE FINDINGS THAT YOU MAKE IS WHAT THE COURT'S GOING TO LOOK AT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU CAN SUPPORT YOUR DECISION.

AND ALL OF THAT HAS TO BE IN THE RESOLUTION REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT.

I REMEMBER HAVING A DEBATE.

I CAN'T TALK.

WITH A PLANNER A FEW YEARS AGO WHO WOULD REFER IN HIS RESOLUTION TO THE STAFF REPORT.

AND I SAID, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.

HAS TO BE IN THE RESOLUTION.

AND THERE'S ONE LAST QUESTION I HAVE.

THE ROLL OF DRAWINGS, ARE THEY ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT OR ARE THEY ATTACHED TO THE RESOLUTION? I WOULD SAY THEY'RE ATTACHED TO, I'LL LET MIKE.

CURRENTLY, THEY'RE ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT.

ONE THING THAT WE'LL LIKELY DO WHEN WE RETURN WITH A UPDATED TEMPLATE THAT REFLECTS A LOT OF THE DIRECTION RECEIVED TODAY IS TO EVALUATE WHETHER IT'S MORE APPROPRIATE TO ATTACH IT TO THE RESOLUTION SO IT CAN BE PART OF THE RECORDATION OF ACTION.

I GUESS I WOULD SAY FOR WHAT PURPOSE WOULD THEY BE ATTACHED TO THE RESOLUTION? WELL, WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION AND BRIEFING ABOUT POLICY 35 AND THE CONSISTENCY OF THE ENVELOPE, THE BUILDING ENVELOPE, TO WHAT WAS PROPOSED, AND APPROVED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

SO WHAT I'M ASKING THEN IS, IS YOUR INTENTION IN ATTACHING IT TO THE RESOLUTION TO SAY THAT THE DEVELOPER IS BOUND TO BUILD THIS AND ONLY THIS? WELL, YOU'RE, WE'RE TALKING, WE'RE HAVING A LEGAL DISCUSSION HERE ABOUT WHAT'S IN THE RESOLUTION? WHAT'S NOT IN THE RESOLUTION? AND IF WE AS A QUASI JUDICIAL BODY, ARE APPROVING THESE THINGS AND THE DRAWINGS ARE ATTACHED TO THAT BASE, THAT ARE THE BASIS OF OUR APPROVAL, RIGHT, ALONG WITH THE STAFF REPORT.

I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF THE DRAWINGS ARE THAT IMPORTANT? WELL, I GUESS MAYBE EITHER MR. MURPHY OR MR. STRONG CAN ADDRESS WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE DRAWINGS ARE IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE I WOULDN'T SAY THEY'RE CONCEPTUAL, BUT THEY'RE NOT THE FINAL PRODUCT EITHER.

AND MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT IF YOU ATTACH THEM TO THE RESOLUTION, THEN WE'D ALMOST BE SAYING THIS IS YOUR FINAL PRODUCT AND YOU CAN'T CHANGE IT.

AND MAYBE MR. MURPHY CAN ADDRESS THAT A LITTLE BETTER, RIGHT? NO, I COMPLETELY AGREE.

THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THE POLICY AND IT'S NOT UNIQUE TO CARLSBAD, ALL CITIES HAVE A, YOU KNOW, A DEVIATION PROCESS WHERE YOU'RE GOING THROUGH A CONCEPTUAL, YOU'RE GOING THROUGH A DISCRETIONARY PERMIT REVIEW.

SO THE FINAL DRAWINGS ARE NOT DRAFTED.

THAT HAPPENS AFTER THAT.

AND SO SOMETIMES THINGS HAPPEN WHERE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WAS APPROVED IN THE RENDERINGS.

AND SO THE PROCESS, IN OUR CASE WE HAVE THIS POLICY THAT ALLOWS THE CITY PLANNER TO MAKE DETERMINATIONS WHETHER IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY IN CONFORMANCE WITH WHAT WAS APPROVED.

THAT ALLOWS, WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT.

THAT'S VERY EFFECTIVE, ESPECIALLY REALLY GOING TO BE MORE REALLY IMPORTANT TO US RELATIVE TO HOUSING PROJECTS BECAUSE WE GET INTO WHOLE ISSUES REGARDING THE NUMBER OF HEARINGS THAT WERE LIMITED TO AND OUR ABILITY TO DENY PROJECTS BECAUSE OF SUBJECTIVE STANDARDS.

AND SO HAVING THAT ABILITY IS GOING TO BE REALLY IMPORTANT ON THOSE PARTICULAR PROJECTS.

SO, IF ATTACHING THE THE EXHIBIT OR THE RENDERINGS AS PART OF THE RESOLUTION IS GOING TO FRUSTRATE THAT, THEN THAT IS SOMETHING WE WOULD RECOMMEND NOT DOING. BUT THEY WOULD BE PART AS, OF THE ATTACHMENT, AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE STAFF REPORT, MAYBE NOT DIRECTLY TIED TO THE RESOLUTION, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON.

YOU KNOW, IF WE DO DO THAT, DO WE STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO DEVIATE FROM THEM? IF THE APPLICANT COMES IN WITH A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT OR A CHANGE TO THE APPROVED RENDERINGS? YEAH, I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT OBVIOUSLY WE'RE BASING IT ON THESE PRELIMINARY THINGS.

AND SO AND WHEN IT GETS BUILT, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY KIND OF RECOURSE IF THE DRAWINGS AREN'T EVEN ATTACHED TO THE RESOLUTION.

RIGHT. SO THAT'S REALLY, I THINK, ALL I'M CONCERNED WITH.

AND WE'VE SEEN SOME OF THE COMPLAINTS COME THROUGH THAT BUILDINGS HAVE CHANGED OWNERS AND DESIGNERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO CODIFY IT IN THE RESOLUTION, THEN AT LEAST YOU HAVE A

[00:40:05]

I THINK THEN, I THINK IT SORT OF TAKES THE GUESSWORK OUT OF IT TO ME, BUT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE THINKS.

SO. AND I GUESS THEY'D ALSO THROW IN AND THIS, I THINK, IS THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE THAT YOU'RE ON RIGHT NOW.

WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE A PRETTY GOOD MEASURING STICK, IN OTHER WORDS, DESIGNED REVIEW STANDARDS THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE.

RIGHT NOW I THINK OUR DESIGN STANDARDS ARE.

LIMITED. THAT'S A GOOD WORD.

LIMITED. AND SO OUR ABILITY TO GET PEOPLE TO CONFORM TO THOSE STANDARDS IS ALSO LIMITED AS A RESULT.

SO THIS IS MAYBE A DISCUSSION WE CAN HAVE WHEN THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE'S WORK IS COMPLETED AND WE HAVE A MEASURING STICK POTENTIALLY IN WHICH TO GO UP AGAINST.

AND I CAN SAY KIND OF TO EXPAND A LITTLE BIT.

I MEAN, THE STATE IS GOING MORE AND MORE TOWARDS OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS.

SO THERE IS NO SUBJECTIVITY.

THERE IS NO, IT'S GOING TO BE HARDER AND HARDER TO DEVIATE FROM APPROVED PLANS WHEN YOU CAN POINT THAT HERE'S THE DESIGN STANDARDS YOU HAVE TO APPLY.

SO AGAIN, BETTER FOR WORSE, THAT'S GOING TO REALLY KIND OF LIMIT THEIR ABILITY TO DEVIATE FROM WHAT GETS APPROVED.

FROM HERE IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, RIGHT? RIGHT. THE IDEA IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS.

WE'RE GOING TO SHOW THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THOSE STANDARDS.

AND IF THEY COME IN AND DEVIATE FROM THAT ON A STANDARD THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH OUR STANDARDS, IT'S HARD TO, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO APPROVE THAT DEVIATION.

RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S WHY IT MIGHT WARRANT HAVING AN EVALUATION OF WHAT THE DRAWING THE ROLE OF THE DRAWINGS IS IN THE RESOLUTION.

LET ME WEIGH IN QUICKLY.

AND I SAY WE HAVE TWO OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO WANT TO SPEAK UP ALSO.

I HAVE, I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME TRUST AND FAITH AND I DO IN STAFF TO MAKE JUDGMENTS IN TERMS OF DEVIATIONS FROM WHAT WE APPROVE.

THERE IS THIS SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMITY PRINCIPLE.

I WAS INVOLVED IN ANOTHER JURISDICTION AND WE DEALT WITH THAT TOO.

SO I'M NOT SEEING THAT AS A REAL PROBLEM HERE.

WE DON'T WANT TO, EVERY LITTLE NAIL AND EVERY LITTLE COLOR AND EVERY LITTLE THING, THAT WE CAN'T TIE THAT UP NECESSARILY IN OUR RESOLUTION. BUT THE, AND I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE THE STAFF SOME JUDGMENT.

AND I THINK IT'S NARROW JUDGMENT AND IT'S GOING TO BE NARROWER WITH THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS TO GRANT A LITTLE, AND I SAY LITTLE, DEVIATION, BUT NOT MUCH.

AND I THINK WE'RE DOING THAT JUST FINE.

GOING BACK TO THE STAFF REPORT OF THE THREE THAT WE MENTIONED, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONERS LUNA AND KAMENJARIN THAT THE LAST ONE, WE'VE LABELED THAT IS M, AS IN MARY OR OPTION THREE, WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE OF THE THREE THAT WE HAVE ALTERNATIVES.

I SEE THAT I'M LOOKING AT OUR BASE REPORT NOW WHERE ON PAGE ONE YOU HAVE TO PULL OUT THIS INFORMATION FROM A VERY LONG PARAGRAPH AND I FIND MYSELF TRYING TO DO THIS AND SAY, OKAY, WHAT'S OUR DISCRETIONARY PERMITS HERE? I'M TRYING TO DO THAT MECHANICALLY, AND I DO DO THAT MECHANICALLY IN MY PREPARATION.

BUT HAVING A NICE TABLE LIKE THIS, AS YOU HAVE ON OPTION THREE OR M I THINK IS A MUCH, IS AN IMPROVEMENT.

IT MAKES IT EASIER.

IT CALLS IT OUT RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU.

I DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PARAGRAPH AND PULL IT OUT.

IT'S THERE FOR ME.

SO I THINK THAT'S EXCELLENT.

SO OF THE THREE VARIATIONS, I THINK M WITH THE HYBRID, WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE IT TOO STREAMLINED THAT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION.

BUT I THINK WE'RE ERRING RIGHT NOW ON THE SIDE OF TOO MUCH INFORMATION AND TOO MUCH VERBIAGE.

SO I LIKE M, THAT HYBRID APPROACH AS AS A MEANS OF DEALING WITH THAT, WITH THE ONE CHANGE THAT I MENTIONED, AND THAT IS INCORPORATING SOMETHING LIKE THE CITY OF MARIETTA HAS, OR EARLY ON, MAYBE IN PAGE TWO OR THREE, I'M LOOKING AT, MAYBE AROUND PUBLIC COMMENT OR PUBLIC OUTREACH AND COMMENT, THAT I LIKE HOW THAT WAS CALLED OUT TOO IN OPTION NUMBER THREE.

HAVE A NICE DIAGRAM, PICTURE, MAP, SOMETHING THAT GIVES ME A VISUAL ORIENTATION OF THE WORDS IS VERY HELPFUL.

SO I FAVOR OPTION THREE WITH WITH MORE VISUALS AND MAPS EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS.

COMMISSIONER LUNA. PERFECT.

PERFECT TO WHAT I'M GOING TO ADDRESS.

SO BACK IN THE DAY, THE NUMBER OF JURISDICTIONS THAT WE'VE HAD BETWEEN US IS PROBABLY, WHAT, 30? WHAT WAS REALLY HELPFUL TO THE COMMISSIONERS AS WELL AS TO THE PUBLIC WAS AN EXHIBIT THAT HAS THE AERIAL.

BUT ON IT YOU COULD EITHER PUT EXISTING ZONING OVER THE AERIAL, THEN THEY HAD ANOTHER EXHIBIT, SAME AERIAL THAT HAD

[00:45:09]

SO YOU HAD YOU HAD TWO EXHIBITS AND MAN, THAT SAVED A MILLION QUESTIONS.

I JUST, I DON'T KNOW WHY IT DID, BUT THEY WERE TWO EXHIBITS.

THEY WERE AIR EXHIBITS. AND SO ONE HAD THE EXISTING ZONING ON IT AND ONE HAD THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION.

AND THAT REALLY HELPED.

I THINK THE COMMISSION, AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC, KNOWING THAT THE GENERAL PLAN CONTROLS THE ZONING AND IT GAVE, I THINK IT SORT OF BOXED IT FOR EVERYBODY AND VISUALLY AND THEY COULD LOOK AT IT.

SO I'M FOLLOWING UP ON CHAIR STINE'S AND VICE CHAIR LAFFERTY'S.

I THINK, I'D PROPOSE, LIKE IF WE COULD PUT TWO OF THOSE EXHIBITS IN THERE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MEENES.

I'M GOOD. JEFF, THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION WITH MRS. LAFFERTY'S. EXCUSE ME, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY'S QUESTION.

I'M GOOD. COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.

WELL, I THINK WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION, AND I ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT WE WERE KIND OF DECIDING ON THE OFFICIAL NEW REPORT GOING FORWARD.

BUT SINCE WE'RE NOT DOING THAT, I THINK THAT WE CAN DECIDE ON WHAT GOES IN THE RESOLUTION AND EXACTLY HOW IT'S FORMATTED AT A POSSIBLY LATER HEARING. BUT FOR NOW, I THINK I WOULD, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT STAFF FURTHER DEVELOP OPTION THREE WITH THE AERIAL EXHIBITS THAT COMMISSIONER LUNA MENTIONS, SOME OF THE EXHIBITS THAT COMMISSIONER MEENES HAD HIGHLIGHTED THAT HE LIKED IN ENCINITAS.

AND ALSO ONLY THE EXHIBITS THAT ARE LEGALLY NECESSARY TO INCLUDE IN THE RESOLUTION, TO ALLOW THE CONTINUED IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICY 35.

IS THAT MOTION CLEARED TO STAFF OR DO YOU NEED SOME CLARIFICATION? MR. MURPHY YOU OOK PUZZLED A LITTLE BIT.

ON THAT LAST ONE, THE CONFORMANCE WITH POLICY 35.

CAN YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR ON THAT ONE? WELL. I CAN STRIKE THAT PART OUT BECAUSE WE CAN DISCUSS THAT AT A FUTURE HEARING.

OKAY, SO YOU'LL STRIKE OUT THE REFERENCE TO POLICY 35 IN THE MOTION.

CAN I REPEAT THE MOTION? PLEASE, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

SO I MOVE THAT STAFF FURTHER DEVELOP OPTION THREE WITH THE AERIAL EXHIBITS THAT COMMISSIONER LUNA HAD MENTIONED, AND ALSO SOME OF THE EXHIBITS THAT COMMISSIONER MEENES HIGHLIGHTED FROM THE CITY OF ENCINITAS.

IS THAT CLEAR TO STAFF? YES. IS THERE A SECOND ON THE MOTION? WELL, IT'S THE SAME EXHIBIT.

WHAT MR. MEENES WAS BRINGING, COMMISSIONER MEENES WAS BRINGING UP IS WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSING.

SO WE DON'T NEED A THIRD OR FOURTH EXHIBIT.

COMMISSIONER MEENES ALSO REFERRED TO SOME OF THE EXHIBITS ABOUT INCLUSIONARY HOUSING.

AND WHAT WERE THE OTHER ONES THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED, COMMISSIONER? WELL, BEFORE I GO ANY FURTHER, THEN I NOW NEED TO ASK THE QUESTION I WAS GOING TO ASK EARLIER TO JEFF.

SO I WAS GOING TO GO BACK TO MY COMMENT IN REGARD TO THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING DESIGN REVIEW, ETC.

WHEN YOU WERE ANSWERING COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY'S ISSUE AND SOME OF THE CONCERNS SHE HAD IN REGARD TO DESIGN REVIEW, YOU ANSWERED IN THE FASHION AND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT IN A PLACE WHERE WE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE OBJECTIVITY.

I KIND OF TOOK THAT SAYING TO MYSELF, WELL, THEN WE'RE NOT REALLY PREPARED TO HAVE THAT BE A BULLET POINT OR HIGHLIGHTED SECTION THAT IS WITHIN THE FORMAT OF THE AGENDA ITEMS. MAYBE NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO GET INTO SOME OF THE CLARITY THAT THE CITY OF ENCINITAS HAS WITHIN THEIRS.

AND IT COULD BE THAT THAT'S KIND OF JUST A, I GUESS, A PART OF WHAT ENCINITAS NEEDS BUT MAYBE WE DON'T NEED THAT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF HIGHLIGHTING WHEN A PLANNING COMMISSIONER LOOKS AT THE AGENDA ITEM.

SO HOW I WOULD, I WAS PLANNING ON RESPONDING IS LOOKING AT THE CITY OF ENCINITAS AND THOSE BULLETS AND INCORPORATING THEM INTO A REVISED OPTION THREE.

AND THEN THAT WILL COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR YOU GUYS TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER, IF DESIGN STANDARDS, IF A DESIGN REVIEW IS ONE OF THOSE, IF WE CHOOSE TO DO THAT, IT'S A MATTER OF DO WE HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WE ARE REVIEWING THE PROJECT AGAINST.

FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S IN THE VILLAGE BARRIO MASTERPLAN AREA, THERE ARE SOME LIMITED STANDARDS IN THERE THAT WE WOULD WRITE A DISCUSSION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY COMPLY.

IF THERE ARE NOT STANDARDS, WE WOULD PROBABLY, LIKELY AS STAFF WOULD TAKE THAT ONE OUT, WOULD NOT INCLUDE IT IN ANY ANY FUTURE, OR IN THAT STAFF REPORT THAT GETS PRESENTED TO THE

[00:50:04]

SO AGAIN, SOME OF THOSE BULLETS, I WOULD SAY THAT SOME PROJECT WOULD HAVE THEM, SOME NOT, BUT I WOULD PUT THEM IN THE TEMPLATE SO YOU GUYS WOULD SEE IT AND SAY WHETHER OR NOT YOU WOULD WANT US TO INCLUDE THOSE IN FUTURE PROJECTS OR FUTURE STAFF REPORTS.

OKAY, SO THEN WITH COMMISSIONER SABELLICO'S COMMENT AS TO INCLUDING THOSE, THEN YOU WOULD YOU ARE ACCEPTING THAT YOU WOULD INCLUDE THAT WITHIN THE ACTION.

CORRECT. AND THIS AGAIN WOULD BE A TEMPLATE.

NOW THE TEMPLATE IS AGAIN, IT WOULD BE MODIFIED TO FIT THE PROJECT.

AND SO, BUT THE IDEA IS TO BRING THIS BACK TO YOU FOR FINAL SAY AS TO YES THIS IS THE TEMPLATE YOU WOULD WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, AFTER YOU SEE IT.

I'M GOOD. COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.

MAY I JUST RESTATE MY MOTION ONE FINAL TIME? OKAY. [LAUGHTER] I MOVE THAT STAFF FURTHER DEVELOP OPTION THREE, WITH THE AERIAL EXHIBITS TO INCLUDE THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION THAT COMMISSIONER LUNA REFERRED TO AND ALSO INCLUDING THE EXHIBITS FROM ENCINITAS THAT WOULD BE RELEVANT TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD THAT'S IT. EXCELLENT. OKAY.

IS STAFF CLEAR ON THE DIRECTION? IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? OKAY. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MERZ.

COMMISSIONER LUNA, DID YOU HAVE FURTHER COMMENTS? NO. IT'S BEEN TAKEN CARE OF. YOU'RE STILL ON MY BOARD YOU'RE STILL ON MY BOARD HERE.

ALL RIGHT. MOTION AND SECOND.

LET'S VOTE. MOTION PASSES 7-0.

THANK YOU. VERY GOOD.

TURNING TO OUR LAST ITEM NOW, AND THAT IS A DISCUSSION ITEM FROM STAFF.

[3. DISCUSSION ON AGENDA SETTING AND PACKET DISTRIBUTION]

THIS THIRD AND FINAL ITEM RELATES TO AGENDA SETTING AND PACKET DISTRIBUTION.

THE AGENDA REPORT OR MEMORANDUM FORMAT DISCUSSES THE TWO ITEMS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMISSION.

ONE IN PARTICULAR IS IF AN ITEM IS ROUTINE IN NATURE AND IS NOT COMPLICATED OR CONTROVERSIAL TO SOLICIT COMMISSION OR INPUT ON WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD STOCK AT THAT AS A CONSENT ITEM.

IT WOULD BE PLACED ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND THERE WOULD BE NO STAFF PRESENTATION ASSOCIATED WITH THAT ITEM.

THERE ARE SOME LOGISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT STEP UNDER LOCAL LAW OR STATE LAW.

THERE ARE SOME ITEMS THAT DO REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARINGS, SO THOSE BY DEFAULT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE PUT ON CONSENT, BUT WE'D STILL FOLLOW THE SAME OBJECTIVE, PUT IT FIRST ON THE AGENDA, AND NOT PREPARE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION AND ALLOW THE COMMISSION TO OPEN AND CLOSE THE HEARING AND VOTE ACCORDINGLY.

THAT PROCEDURE, EITHER HAVING A CONSENT CALENDAR OR AN EARLY AGENDA ITEM THAT IS A PUBLIC HEARING WITHOUT A STAFF PRESENTATION, COULD STILL BE PULLED FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING OR COMMISSION DISCUSSION IF NEEDED.

SO IT STILL PRESERVES THE RIGHT TO HAVE THAT OPEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION OR ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS FROM THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.

THE SECOND ITEM ON THE AGENDA FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM IS PACKET DISTRIBUTION.

CURRENTLY, THE DEFAULT OPTION IS TO DISTRIBUTE HARD COPIES OF THE AGENDA PACKET.

THAT USUALLY TAKES A FULL DAY OF ADMIN STAFF TIME IN TERMS OF COLLATING, ASSEMBLING THE PACKETS AND DRIVING THEM THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO EACH OF THE SEVEN INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS.

PURSUANT TO POLICY, WE COULD CHANGE THE LOGISTICS AND THE PROTOCOLS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT BY GOING TO AN ELECTRONIC FORMAT AS A DEFAULT OPTION.

AND ALL THAT MEANS IS THAT THE DEFAULT OPTION WOULD BE AS A CHOICE IS TO RECEIVE THAT ELECTRONIC PACKET.

IF A COMMISSION MEMBER WANTS TO STILL RECEIVE A HARD COPY, WE WOULD OFFER THAT TO THAT INDIVIDUAL, BUT THE COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD HAVE TO ELECT TO RECEIVE THAT.

AND OCCASIONS WHERE THERE ARE COMPLEX PLANS OR CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS OR GRADING PLANS THAT THE COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD BENEFIT FROM RECEIVING A HARD COPY, THE CITY STAFF WOULD ACTUALLY DELIVER JUST THAT PLAN SET AND NOT NECESSARILY THE REST OF THE AGENDA PACKET PRESERVING ADDITIONAL PAPER PRINT PRODUCTION AND COLLATING.

IN THE EVENT THAT THE COMMISSION DECIDES TO, OR PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ELECTRONIC DISTRIBUTION, THE CITY WOULD LIKELY STILL HAVE HARD

[00:55:02]

I THINK RON KEMP MAY WANT TO SUPPLEMENT THAT FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE ON LOGISTICS.

MR. KEMP. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER STINE.

IT CAME TO MY ATTENTION THIS AFTERNOON AFTER I TALKED TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE THAT CELIA BREWER, FORMER CITY ATTORNEY, HAD ADVISED THAT CITY COUNCIL NOT BRING PERSONAL ELECTRONIC DEVICES TO MEETINGS.

SO IF YOU RECEIVE THIS ELECTRONICALLY, I WILL NEED TO TALK WITH OUR NEW CITY ATTORNEY AND SEE IF HER OPINION WOULD STILL BE THE SAME.

BUT CELIA VERY MUCH ENCOURAGED COUNCIL NOT TO BRING THEIR OWN PERSONAL DEVICES TO THE MEETING BECAUSE, THERE, SHE FELT STRONGLY THAT PEOPLE SHOULDN'T USE THEIR PERSONAL DEVICES TO DO CITY BUSINESS.

YOU KNOW, I'M SITTING HERE WITH MY IPAD THAT I USE TO LOOK UP CODE SECTIONS, WHICH ISN'T THE SAME THING.

SO I THINK THAT'S OKAY.

BUT TO ACTUALLY BE GOING THROUGH DOCUMENTATION OR POTENTIALLY I THINK THE ISSUE WAS COMMUNICATIONS WITH THOSE DEVICES.

SO IN TALKING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE THIS AFTERNOON, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION THAT THE IT DEPARTMENT, AND YOU MAY HAVE RUN ACROSS THIS ALREADY, WAS LOATHE TO ISSUE CITY DEVICES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THAT PURPOSE.

SO WHEN MIKE AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS THIS AFTERNOON, HE PROPOSED THAT WE COULD BRING HARD COPIES TO THE MEETING, WHICH IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO REFER TO THE AGENDA PACKET THAT WAY THEY COULD.

SO WE'LL HAVE TO DISCUSS THE LOGISTICS OF THAT.

I THINK MIKE'S, MR. STRONG'S, MAIN QUESTION HERE IS DO YOU WANT IT DISTRIBUTED TO YOU FOR REVIEW ELECTRONICALLY OR A HARD COPY? I MEAN, WE CAN DISCUSS THAT, BUT WE WILL NEED TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE LOGISTICS OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU COME TO THE MEETING, MAYBE BY A SHOW OF HANDS.

HOW MANY OF YOU REFER TO YOUR PACKET DURING THE MEETING? YEAH. SO WE'LL HAVE TO TRY TO FIGURE THAT ONE OUT.

OKAY. IN A CLARIFICATION OF STAFF HERE, ALSO, ON THE FIRST ASPECT OF THIS, AND THAT IS THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND, IF IT'S LISTED ON A CONSENT CALENDAR, WOULD ANY INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PULL THAT ITEM? AND IF THE ITEM IS PULLED, DO WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING LIKE WE HAVE OTHER PUBLIC HEARINGS? AS I SPOKE TO DURING THE PRESENTATION, IF IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM, IT WOULD NEED TO BE ACTUALLY DOCKETED AS A BUSINESS ITEM SO IT WOULDN'T BE ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

THE COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO PROCEDURALLY OPEN AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO IT WOULD BE ON THE REGULAR BUSINESS.

WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING, IF THERE IS A DISCUSSION ITEM, WELL, NOT A DISCUSSION, BUT AN ITEM SUCH AS THIS EVENING.

THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING WAS A RESOLUTION TO CONFIRM THE DECISION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALREADY HAD.

THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AN EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THAT ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR, DISPENSE WITH ANY STAFF PRESENTATION AND MOVE ON TO THE REST OF THE BUSINESS AND HAVE MORE TIME DEVOTED TO THINGS THAT MATTER TO THE COMMISSION.

SO WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING IS IF SOMETHING REQUIRED A PUBLIC HEARING, IT'S STILL BEYOND THE BUSINESS, BUT BE ON THE FRONT END OF THE AGENDA SO THAT STAFF CAN MAKE THE INTRODUCTION AND SUGGEST THAT THERE WOULD BE NO STAFF PRESENTATION ON THE ITEM BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE CONTROVERSIAL.

IT WOULD BE ROUTINE IN NATURE BASED ON THE LAST THREE OR FOUR MEETINGS THAT I'VE BEEN SITTING UP HERE.

THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE OF NIGHTS WHERE THERE HAS BEEN A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME WHERE THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS.

THERE WAS LITTLE DISCUSSION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THAT AGAIN WOULD HAVE BEEN A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE IT UP ON THE CALENDAR SO THAT WE COULD QUICKLY ADVANCE AND BEYOND THAT ITEM AND HEAR SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS. BUT THAT WOULD STILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IN THAT CASE, BECAUSE THAT WAS A QUASI JUDICIAL DECISION THAT REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO I DON'T MEAN TO CONFLATE THE TWO ISSUES.

THE IDEA IS TO STREAMLINE THE, HOW THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONDUCTS ITS BUSINESS, IF WE CAN, AND HAVE THE LEGAL BASIS TO MOVE SOMETHING TO A CONSENT ITEM TO DO SO, AND IF NOT, MOVE SOMETHING UP EARLIER IN THE AGENDA.

SO THE IDEA IS THAT WE CAN QUICKLY ADVANCE AND PROGRESS TO THE REST OF THE BUSINESS.

SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, IF IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM, WE'RE OPERATING IN A QUASI JUDICIAL CAPACITY.

IT'S LIKE A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, BUT THERE'S NOT A LOT OF OPPOSITION.

THAT WOULD STILL BE ON THE PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA, BUT IT MIGHT BE THE FIRST OR SECOND ITEM.

SO WE CAN DISPENSE WITH THAT EARLY.

IT WOULD NOT BE ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

DO I HAVE THAT RIGHT? IN THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE, YES, CORRECT.

[01:00:03]

SO WHAT HAS CHANGED THAT WE CAN DO THIS NOW THAT PREVIOUSLY WE COULD NOT? I THINK IN A WAY WE'RE PLAYING A SEMANTIC GAME WITH USING THE WORD CONSENT BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO A PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT.

SO WHAT WE COULD DO IS THE COMMISSIONER HERE, STINE, COULD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

WE'LL KNOW WHEN HE OPENS IT UP IF WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS, BECAUSE OUR RULES REQUIRE A SPEAKER SLIP.

IF WE GET A SPEAKER SLIP, THEN WE GO FORWARD LIKE WE NORMALLY WOULD.

IF ANY COMMISSIONER WANTS IT TO BE A HEARING, YOU WOULD GO FORWARD LIKE YOU NORMALLY WOULD.

I THINK WHAT MR. STRONG IS SUGGESTING IS YOU WOULDN'T GET A STAFF PRESENTATION.

THERE WOULDN'T BE A DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSION.

YOU WOULD JUST GO STRAIGHT TO A VOTE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE DO HAVE TO OPEN IT.

WE HAVE TO CLOSE IT.

THE CLERK IS REQUIRED TO RECORD THE TIME OF THE OPENING AND THE CLOSING IN THE MINUTES.

SO THERE HAS TO BE AN ACTUAL OPENING AND CLOSING.

SO IT REALLY ISN'T A CONSENT AGENDA ITEM.

IT WOULDN'T BE NOTICED AS A CONSENT AGENDA ITEM.

BUT I THINK WHAT MR. STRONG IS SUGGESTING, IT COULD BE MOVED TO THE FRONT OF THE AGENDA.

IT COULD BE PRESENTED AS IF, AND SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE BEEN WITH THE COMMISSION LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT THERE WAS A TIME WHEN DON NEU WOULD SAY, DO YOU WANT A PRESENTATION FOR THIS? HE STOPPED ASKING THAT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.

FOR WHATEVER REASONS.

I THINK HE WANTED TO GET SOME PLANNERS TO HAVE SOME.

YEAH. SOMEBODY MAY HAVE WANTED TO PULL IT.

HE MAY HAVE WANTED A PLANNER TO GET SOME EXPERIENCE PRESENTING.

I THINK HE TOLD ME AT ONE POINT IN TIME.

BUT I THINK WHAT MR. STRONG IS SUGGESTING IS MAYBE WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT, METHODOLOGY OF WE HAVE A VERY UNCONTROVERSIAL ITEM.

STAFF WOULD BE READY TO PRESENT A PRESENTATION IF REQUIRED, IF WANTED.

IF NOT, YOU COULD JUST OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSING AND GO STRAIGHT TO A VOTE.

SO THERE WOULD BE NO TECHNICALLY CONSENT ITEMS. WELL, I THINK THE ITEM TONIGHT, NUMBER ONE, IT WOULD BE VERY RARE YOU WOULD HAVE ONE.

BUT TONIGHT, NUMBER ONE, YOU COULD HAVE DONE CONSENT.

CORRECT? CDPS CANNOT BE CONSENT.

JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW.

BUT OK, I'M SORRY.

I'M GETTING CAUGHT UP IN THE WEEDS BECAUSE.

YEAH. NO, THAT'S ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE.

MY BUSINESS. IT WAS TERMINOLOGY.

NEU ABOUT DON'T CALL IT A CONSENT CALENDAR BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A CONSENT CALENDAR.

RIGHT. SO WE DID THEM PROPERLY.

WE OPENED THEM, WE CLOSED THEM.

WE JUST PROBABLY DIDN'T LABEL IT CORRECTLY.

AND I DO UNDERSTAND THE USE OF YOUR OWN PERSONAL ITEMS HERE.

IF THEY ARE NOT CITY ISSUED.

DISCUSSIONS COULD BE OCCURRING AMONGST PEOPLE WITHIN THE CHAMBER, WITH PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE CHAMBER THAT NONE OF THE REST OF US ARE PRIVY TO.

SO I DO TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT AND APPRECIATE THAT AND HOW IT, WE'VE BEEN ROUND AND ROUND WITH IT ABOUT ISSUING US.

SO I'M, GIVE ME A HARD COPY.

DROP OFF A HARD COPY FOR ME.

COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.

THANK YOU. THREE ITEMS. ONE, THIS CONSENT CALENDAR IDEA, HOWEVER WE WANT TO LABEL IT, IS A GREAT ONE.

I THINK IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING AND I WOULD APPLAUD IT AND VOTE IF NECESSARY FOR THAT.

SECOND. YOU CAN DELIVER ME A HARD COPY, FOREVER.

PERHAPS IT'S GENERATIONAL, BUT.

[LAUGHTER] BUT I JUST WANT YOU.

I JUST WANT YOU TO THINK TONIGHT HOW EASY OR DIFFICULT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TO GO THROUGH ATTACHMENTS A THROUGH M IF YOU WERE STUCK STARING AT YOUR MONITOR.

I THINK IT'D BE IMPOSSIBLE.

I NOTICED, EVEN TONIGHT, THERE WAS SOME DIFFICULTY JUST TALKING ABOUT ATTACHMENT K, L AND M.

SO I THINK PAPER IS REALLY THE WAY I PREFER AND I'D WANT IT TO GO.

THIRDLY. AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE PACKETS DELIVERED MORE THAN 96 TO 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE.

THOSE OF US WHO HAVE OTHER DEMANDS, YOU KNOW, END UP DOING THIS STUFF AT NIGHT OR ON WEEKENDS.

[01:05:03]

AND I KNOW THAT'S UNUSUAL, BUT THE EARLIER WE CAN GET IT OUT, THE BETTER.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.

WELL, I'M VERY CURIOUS AS TO THIS THIS LEGAL GUIDANCE THAT CITY ATTORNEY BREWER HAS PROVIDED THE CITY COUNCIL.

AND I WISH I HAD KNOWN ABOUT IT BEFORE I BROUGHT MY LAPTOP HERE TO THIS HEARING.

I MEAN.

ME AS WELL. BUT WHEN I FIRST GOT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, I DID ASK, SO I GET A CITY EMAIL, RIGHT? AND THEY SAID, NO, YOU DON'T GET A CITY EMAIL.

YOU HAVE TO DO ALL OF YOUR CITY BUSINESS ON YOUR PERSONAL EMAIL, WHICH TO ME, I'VE ALWAYS BEEN UNCOMFORTABLE WITH.

I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT, OH MY GOSH, SOMEONE CAN JUST LIKE DO A PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST.

AND I HAVE TO SEARCH MY OWN, SEARCH MY OWN EMAIL, WHICH I'M HAPPY TO DO IF THAT DOES HAPPEN, WHICH HAS NEVER HAPPENED YET.

I'M PROBABLY JINXING MYSELF THERE.

BUT THEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S UP TO ME LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU KIND OF HAVE TO TRUST ME TO DO IT.

AND I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THAT'S A BAD SYSTEM.

I WANT TO GO ON RECORD NOW.

I THINK THAT WE SHOULD ALL HAVE CITY EMAILS AND I WOULD AGAIN EXPRESS THAT.

BUT SINCE WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE CITY EMAILS AND SINCE WE HAVE TO USE OUR PERSONAL EMAILS ANYWAY, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT WEIRD TO SAY YOU CAN'T USE YOUR PERSONAL DEVICE IF YOU CAN'T EVEN HAVE, IF YOU HAVE TO USE YOUR PERSONAL EMAIL.

LIKE I JUST, IT SEEMS A LITTLE BIT, HYPOCRITICAL, I GUESS, FOR FOR THE CITY TO TELL US THAT.

BUT I UNDERSTAND.

I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO NOT HAVE OUTSIDE INFORMATION TRICKLING INTO THE COMMISSIONER, YOU KNOW, GETTING TO COMMISSIONERS WHILE WE'RE UP HERE. I JUST KNOW THAT A LOT OF OTHER AGENCIES ARE FINE WITH IT.

AND I'D RATHER NOT KILL A TREE AND COST THE MILEAGE FOR THE CITY STAFF TO DELIVER THE PACKET OVERNIGHT OR WHENEVER THEY DELIVER IT.

SO. I'M HAPPY TO CONTINUE GETTING THE COMMISSIONER, THE STAFF REPORT ELECTRONICALLY.

I'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR A FEW MONTHS NOW AND IT WORKED OUT PRETTY WELL.

SO, TONIGHT. SO.

IF I CAN RESPOND TO COMMISSIONER SABELLICO REAL QUICKLY.

I WASN'T CONVEYING HARD AND FAST RULES TONIGHT.

I WAS CONVEYING THAT THIS IS NOT SETTLED AND THAT WE WILL NEED TO LOOK INTO IT IN THE FUTURE.

SO WE DO HAVE A NEW CITY ATTORNEY.

I HAVE NOT TALKED TO HER.

SHE IS OUT OF TOWN TODAY.

I'M ACTUALLY THE ACTING CITY ATTORNEY RIGHT NOW, SO I GUESS I COULD MAKE THE DECISION, BUT I WON'T EXERCISE THAT PREROGATIVE.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IT WITH MS. MCMAHON AND SEE WHAT SHE THINKS, BECAUSE BELIEVE IT OR NOT, ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU SAID, I'VE THOUGHT, AFTER I TALKED TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE TODAY AND, YES, WHEN YOU USE YOUR PERSONAL DEVICE TO COMMUNICATE CITY BUSINESS, IT OPENS YOUR PERSONAL DEVICE UP TO PUBLIC RECORD SEARCHES.

AND IF THERE WAS LITIGATION, IT COULD BE POTENTIALLY MORE THAN JUST YOU SEARCHING.

SO, YEAH.

SO THERE'S SOME UNANSWERED QUESTIONS.

I THINK THE BEST MAYBE WE CAN DO WITH THIS ITEM TONIGHT IS TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN POTENTIALLY USING ELECTRONICS UP HERE IN THE FRONT.

AND THEN MAYBE WE CAN GET TOGETHER WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND SEE HOW WE CAN MAKE THAT WORK.

BECAUSE I 100% AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.

I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE THROUGH THE EXHIBITS UNLESS SOMEBODY GAVE ME A PDF DOCUMENT THAT WAS INDEXED VERY WELL THAT I COULD TOUCH EXHIBIT AND IT WOULD GET ME RIGHT THERE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE'RE THERE WITH OUR PRESENTATION OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS OR NOT, BUT IF THERE'S A DESIRE TO GO TO ELECTRONICS, I THINK WE NEED TO AS STAFF GET TOGETHER AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE THERE YET.

OKAY, LET'S HOLD THAT QUESTION.

AND WE'VE GOT A NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS WHO WANT TO SPEAK UP.

COMMISSIONER MEENES. MR. KEMP.

CURRENTLY DOES ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS RECEIVE THEIR AGENDA ELECTRONICALLY, OR DO THEY STILL HAVE HARD COPY? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

I CAN GIVE YOU MY BEST GUESS, AND WHAT I THINK I HEARD TODAY INFORMALLY WAS SOME DO AND SOME DON'T.

[01:10:02]

YOU KNOW. SO I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER.

WE'LL NEED TO WORK THAT OUT.

YEAH, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE DISCUSSION WE'VE JUST HAD IN REGARD TO USING PERSONAL DEVICES, NAVIGATING THROUGH THE AGENDA ITEMS WITH EXHIBITS AND WHATEVER IS ALL VALID.

RIGHT. AND, YOU KNOW, REALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE AGENDA, WHAT'S LABELED HERE IS PACKET DISTRIBUTION.

BUT THE OBVIOUS NEXT QUESTION IS IF YOU GET IT ELECTRONICALLY, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU GET UP ON THE PODIUM? SO MR. STRONG AND I TALKED THIS AFTERNOON.

HE CAME UP WITH WHAT I THOUGHT WAS A SEMI WORKABLE SOLUTION, WHICH WOULD BE WE COULD HAVE HARD COPIES AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE HERE IF THEY NEEDED TO REFER TO THEM.

BUT TO ME, THAT KIND OF BEGS THE QUESTION, IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET IT HERE, THEN YOU MIGHT AS WELL GET IT AHEAD OF TIME SO YOU CAN TAKE NOTES ON IT.

I KNOW I TAKE NOTES ON IT.

I KNOW COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY [LAUGHTER] TAKES NOTES ON THEM.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT, IS THAT I KNOW MYSELF.

I MEAN I MAKE NOTES AND TABS AND IDENTIFY WITH HIGHLIGHTING PENS, WHAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT, ETC., ETC., ETC., AND ELECTRONICALLY WOULD BE DIFFICULT.

ALTHOUGH AND I'M SURE I MEAN, I ACTUALLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SEARCH FOR THE WORDS THAT I LIKE, I'M LOOKING FOR WITH ELECTRONIC, WHICH I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO ON PAPER.

SO. AND I DO THE SAME THING WITH.

MATTER OF FACT, I GO BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE THEY'LL SEND ME A PDF OF THE DOCUMENT.

SO IF I WANT TO FIND SOMETHING REAL QUICK, I'LL SEARCH THE PDF AND THEN I'LL GO TO MY HARD COPY AND GO, OKAY, IT WAS ON THIS PAGE.

COMMISSIONER MERZ. THANK YOU.

ONE THING THAT I THINK IS VERY NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART ON BEING A PLANNING COMMISSIONER IS I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY SUBSTITUTE FOR STANDING ON THE SITE AND SEEING WHAT'S GOING ON, WALKING AND BEING ON THE SITE TO THE POINT OF NOT EVEN JUST DRIVING UP TO.

IF I POSSIBLY GET OUT AND WALK IT.

AND YOU JUST ALWAYS LEARN THINGS WHEN YOU'RE ON THE GROUND WALKING THE SITE.

THERE'S JUST NO SUBSTITUTE FOR THAT.

AND I CAN'T IMAGINE TRYING TO PULL UP THE PLANS ON A TABLET IN THE BRIGHT SUNSHINE, TRYING TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON.

USUALLY I JUST I PULL UP TO THE SITE, I LAY THE PLANS OUT ON MY, ON THE TAIL OF MY CAR AND LOOK AT IT.

OR AM I SITTING AROUND? AND IT TELLS ME A LOT, THAT YOU JUST CAN'T SEE ANY OTHER WAY.

THE ONE THING I WOULD SAY, THOUGH, I THINK IF THERE'S MAYBE THERE'S A HYBRID WAY WHERE THE NUMBER OF SHEETS WE GET IN THE PLAN I DON'T THINK ARE ALL SO NECESSARY.

BUT IF THERE WAS, I FEEL FOR THE NEED TO CUT DOWN THE AMOUNT OF PAPER FOR SURE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, JUST BEING ON SITE AND WALKING THE SITE, THERE'S NO SUBSTITUTE FOR THAT.

AND THEN BEING ABLE TO LAY THAT OUT AND YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHERE ON PAPER, IF THERE'S A SITE PLAN OR FLOOR PLAN OR MAYBE EVEN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF SHEETS THAT ARE DELIVERED IN HARDCOPY, JUST SO, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME TO USUALLY WHEN I REVIEW, I'VE KIND OF CHANGED THE WAY I DO THINGS NOW.

WHEN I GET A PROJECT, I FIRST LOOK AT THE PLANS, THEN GO TO THE STAFF REPORT BECAUSE THEN I HAVE A VISUAL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S HAPPENING AND THEN WHEN I'M ON THE SITE I USUALLY PULL THOSE PLANS OUT. BUT DO I GO THROUGH EVERY SHEET? ABSOLUTELY NOT. SO MAYBE THERE'S A WAY TO.

BUT I ALSO STRONGLY AGREE WITH THE COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN SAYS TOO.

SO YEAH.

COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.

THANK YOU.

I ACTUALLY DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE.

I READ THE WHOLE DOCUMENT AND THEN LOOK AT THE PLANS [LAUGHTER] BECAUSE THAT'S SORT OF, THE PLANS ARE KIND OF MY WHEELHOUSE, RIGHT? SO AND IF, AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO KNOW WHAT STAFF IS SAYING ABOUT THE PLANS BEFORE I GET TO THE PLANS, JUST TO UNDERSTAND IT.

SO, SO AND TO BE HONEST, I'M, I HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR A CITY WEBSITE EMAIL ADDRESS APP SINCE WE WENT THE FIRST TIME TO THE LEAGUE OF CITIES, YOU KNOW, LIKE THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, WHATEVER IT WAS, WHERE MOST CITIES HAVE ASSIGNED EMAILS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, WHICH WOULD SORT OF HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, MITIGATE SOME OF THESE CONCERNS, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, AND HAVE A REAL SEARCHABLE, IF THERE IS A DISPUTE.

BUT THE OTHER THING IS, YOU KNOW, WE USED OUR PERSONAL DEVICES FOR TWO YEARS DURING A PANDEMIC.

YOU KNOW, SO THE IDEA THAT GOING TO ELECTRONIC SEEMS REALLY SORT OF, WE ALREADY DID IT, YOU KNOW, AND WHY WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY ENCOURAGING THAT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE DRIVING, THE TREES, THE WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, ALL OF THOSE THINGS COST A LOT OF MONEY FOR THE CITY AND FOR THE DEVELOPER.

THOSE PLANS AREN'T CHEAP.

LARGE FORMAT PLANS ARE REALLY EXPENSIVE.

AND TO BE HONEST, MOST JOB SITES NOWADAYS, BECAUSE PLAN SETS ARE SO ENORMOUS, EVERYBODY HAS AN IPAD AND THEY ENLARGE AND REDUCE THE PLANS TO LOOK AT THEM.

AND THEY HAVE THOUSANDS OF DRAWINGS ON THESE IPADS.

[01:15:05]

YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING ABOUT THE CONCERN WITH THE RESOLUTION.

IT'S THE SAME IDEA WHERE, YOU KNOW, THE PRELIMINARY PLAN IS THE ENVELOPE WE'RE APPROVING.

BUT WHEN THEY GET TO ACTUALLY THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, COULD BE A COMPLETELY SEPARATE THING.

YOU KNOW, SO SO THAT'S, SO I'M INTERESTED IN HAVING ELECTRIC PLAN, ELECTRONIC PLANS.

AND I'M ALSO INTERESTED IN THE CONSENT OPPORTUNITY, BECAUSE I DO SEE WE HAVE RUN INTO IT IN THE LAST FEW YEARS WHERE THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, EASY PROJECTS THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO APPROVE.

BUT I THINK THE PERSONAL DEVICES, WE'VE ALREADY USED OUR PERSONAL DEVICES FOR A FEW YEARS NOW.

AND SO HAVING THAT PROHIBITION SEEMS A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE STEPPING BACKWARDS INSTEAD OF MOVING FORWARD.

SO I'M HOPING WE CAN KEEP MOVING FORWARD.

BUT I'M GOOD WITH BOTH.

OKAY. LET ME WEIGH IN HERE.

I LIKE STAFF'S IDEA WITH REGARD TO A CONSENT CALENDAR.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WOULD BE USED VERY SPARINGLY.

IT WOULD ONLY BE ITEMS THAT WERE NOT PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS SUCH AS A RESOLUTION THAT WE HAD TONIGHT.

SO THERE ARE TIMES FOR THAT ON NON PUBLIC CARRYING ITEMS THAT I WOULD SAY, YEAH, WHY DON'T WE JUST LIKE ONE MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR, LIKE I UNDERSTAND COUNCIL DOES, SO I'M FINE WITH THAT.

BUT ANYTHING THAT'S A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM, EVEN IF IT'S A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT WHERE THERE'S NO OPPOSITION WHATSOEVER, IT'S STILL PUBLIC HEARING AND WE NEED TO DO AN ABBREVIATED PUBLIC HEARING, BUT PERHAPS WE DON'T NEED A STAFF REPORT.

YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALL BEEN TO BRIEFINGS.

I THINK MOST OF US HAVE BEEN IN BRIEFINGS.

SO WE GET A LOT OF THE INFORMATION THERE.

SO ON THE FIRST ITEM HERE, I SAY KUDOS TO STAFF.

I THINK THIS WOULD BE A STEP FORWARD.

ON THE OTHER ITEM.

I'M OLD FASHIONED. MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE OF MY AGE OR GENERATION OR WHATEVER.

I LIKE TO SEE HARD COPIES.

AND MY RECOLLECTION, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY, WAS EVEN DURING THE PANDEMIC, WHEN WE WERE HAVING ZOOM MEETINGS, WE HAD HARD COPIES, SO WE NEVER HAD TO RELY UPON THEM.

COMMISSIONER SABELLICO IS ON A DIFFERENT GENERATION WHERE HE'S MORE USED TO THOSE TYPES, MAYBE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.

BUT I THINK THE REST OF US ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE ADVANCED IN OUR AGES.

I'LL SPEAK FOR MYSELF ANYHOW, SO I LIKE THE PAPER COPY.

NOW, IF IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO STAFF AND THE DRIVING AROUNDS A HASSLE.

PERSONALLY, I'M FINE WITH GOING OVER TO THE FARADAY BUILDING AND PICKING IT UP AND I'M SAYING THAT BECAUSE I'M REALLY CLOSE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT IF THAT WOULD BE A SAVINGS TO STAFF, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO PROBABLY TWO MILES FROM FARADAY BUILDING TO MY OFFICE, THAT'S FINE.

LET ME KNOW WHEN IT'S READY AND I'LL DROP ON BY.

I COULD EVEN WALK OVER THERE.

I'M THAT CLOSE.

SO I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

BUT I DO LIKE THE HARD COPIES.

I DO USE THAT IN MY PREPARATION.

I DO MARK THE HARD COPIES.

SO SIMPLY HAVING IT ONLINE AND QUITE FRANKLY, I DON'T WANT TO USE MY LAPTOP HERE.

I LEAVE MY LAPTOP IN MY OFFICE AND I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE, AS I'VE OPERATED FOR NOW ALMOST FOUR YEARS WITH THE HARD COPIES, MAKING NOTES AND USING LITTLE CLIPS.

I USE PAPER CLIPS ON THE SIDES ON MINE FOR SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO BRING UP.

THAT TO ME IS THE MOST USEFUL WAY.

THE MOST HELPFUL WAY. SO I SAY YES, KEEP THE PAPER COPIES, DISTRIBUTE THEM OR PICK UP.

AND AGAIN, I'M GLAD TO PICK MINE UP ACTUALLY, BECAUSE I'M SO CLOSE.

I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY ON THAT.

AND, BUT HAVING CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS ON NON CONTROVERSIAL PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS, I THINK IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

COMMISSIONER MERZ. YEAH.

AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY MAKES A GOOD POINT, TOO.

IT'S JUST THE COST OF THOSE PLANS.

IT IS. I GET THAT WE'RE DOING A PROJECT RIGHT NOW, AND I KNOW, YOU KNOW, GETTING FULL PLANS IS EXPENSIVE, BUT I MEAN, EVEN LIKE AN 11 BY 17 OF JUST CERTAIN SELECT SHEETS, SOMETHING THAT IS JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN HOLD YOUR HAND WHEN YOU'RE ON THE SITE AND ORIENT YOURSELF TO THE OVERALL PROJECT.

SO I CERTAINLY DON'T GO THROUGH ALL THE PLANS ON THERE.

BUT LOOK AT JUST MAYBE A FEW SELECT SHEETS AND EVEN AN 11 X 17 WOULD BE SUFFICIENT.

SO, YEAH. COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.

ACTUALLY, THAT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION.

DO WE HAVE OR DO WE REQUIRE A STANDARD SIZE SET, WHEN THESE PLANS ARE BEING DISTRIBUTED? BECAUSE IF YOU ACTUALLY HAD THEM PRESENT EVERYTHING IN 22 X 34, THEY WOULD IMMEDIATELY BE HALF SIZE.

IT'S 11 X 17, WHICH WOULD BE MORE LEGIBLE.

[01:20:04]

RIGHT. IS IT 24 X 36? YEAH. SO THAT WOULD KILL THE 20, THAT WOULD KILL THE 11 X 17 DIRECT HALF SIZE.

IF I COULD SPEAK TO THIS, THERE'S ACTUALLY A COUPLE OF MOVING PARTS.

AND FIRST, I'LL RESPOND TO THE QUESTION.

SO OUR APPLICATION FORMS FOR INTAKE DO SPECIFY THE MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS FOR IT IN TERMS OF READABILITY, CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS THAT HAVE THE TOPOGRAPHY LINES.

YOU REALLY DO NEED TO HAVE THE E SHEET OR THE LARGER PLAN SETS REALLY EVALUATE CERTAIN CIVIL IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SITE.

ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS, THE SAME.

IF IT'S A LARGE, MASSIVE BUILDING, YOU PROBABLY NEED A LARGER SET TO REALLY SEE THE NUANCES OF THE BUILDING'S DESIGN.

SO THE APPLICATION FORMS THAT WE REQUIRE FOR INTAKE DO SPECIFY THOSE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.

ONE ELEMENT THAT I WANT TO SHARE AND THIS DOESN'T REALLY HAVE ANY BEARING ON THIS GROUP'S DISCUSSION, IS THE CITY IS MOVING TO AN ELECTRONIC FORMAT OF PLAN, REVIEW AND EXAMINATION. THE CITY HAS ALREADY LAUNCHED ITS CSS.

IT'S THE CUSTOMER SERVICE PORTAL FOR PLANS EXAMINATION.

SO IN THE FUTURE WE WILL BE MOVING TO 100% ELECTRONIC INTAKE OF APPLICATION FORMS. AND ALL THAT SIMPLY MEANS IS WHEN THE APPLICATION IS READY FOR DECISION MAKING, WE'D ASK THE APPLICANT TO BRING IN THE HARD COPY SETS FOR DISTRIBUTION.

SO I DON'T THINK THAT HAS ANY BEARING ON THIS GROUP'S DISCUSSION.

I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT THAT POINT.

AND FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM IT IS DISCUSSION AND NO ACTION IS NECESSARY FOR A MOTION.

BUT TO SUMMARIZE THE BROAD CONSENSUS OF WHAT WAS HEARD, IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE WAS INTEREST IN MOVING TO A CONSENT CALENDAR FORMAT OR AS SUPPLEMENTED TONIGHT WITH AN ABBREVIATED AGENDAS FOR SOME OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. IF THEY ARE NON-CONTROVERSIAL.

AND THE DEFAULT OPTION IS TO STAY AS HARDCOPY.

AND FOR THOSE INDIVIDUAL COMMISSION MEMBERS THAT DO WANT TO HAVE ELECTRONIC DISTRIBUTION, WE WILL ACCOMMODATE THAT.

AND IF THAT CHANGES IN THE FUTURE, EITHER SOMEONE WANTS TO SWITCH ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, WE CAN HANDLE THAT ON AN AD HOC BASIS.

SO THAT WAS KIND OF WHAT WAS HEARD.

IF IT'S DIFFERENT, YOU CAN LET ME KNOW AFTER THE MEETING.

MR. [INAUDIBLE], DID YOU WANT TO CHIME IN AS A CITY, NO.

YOU MOVED UP TO THE FRONT HERE.

I THOUGHT YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING.

ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S A FAIR SUMMARY OF WHAT WE HEARD IS.

SO YOU DON'T NEED SPECIFIC MOTION ON THIS? THERE'S A COUPLE OF AREAS THAT YOU NEED FURTHER CHECKING ON, AND THAT'S THE NEW CITY ATTORNEY'S POLICY WITH REGARD TO ELECTRONIC LAPTOPS AND SO FORTH AT THE DAIS.

FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT NEED TO BE ACCOMMODATED WITH POTENTIAL ELECTRONIC DISTRIBUTION, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WILL EVALUATE THE FEASIBILITY AND LOGISTICS OF ITS IMPLEMENTATION.

SO WE'RE GOING TO STAY WITH THE DISTRIBUTION OF HARD COPIES THEN, CORRECT? FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION, CORRECT.

STAFF NEED ANY ADDITIONAL DIRECTION ON THAT ITEM.

NO. THANK YOU. FINE.

LET'S MOVE ON TO A FINAL DO WE WANT A POLL SO MR. STRONG DOESN'T HAVE TO THINK HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT HARD COPIES? RAISE YOUR HAND. HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT ELECTRONIC VERSIONS SENT TO THEM? RAISE YOUR HAND. THERE.

NO, IT SAYS IF YOU WANT TO, GO, YOU CAN GET ELECTRONIC VERSION ON.

MICHELLE SENDS IT OUT AND IN THE BODY IT SAYS IF YOU WANT THE ELECTRONIC RECORDS, YOU CAN.

DO YOU WANT A HARD COPY? OKAY, SO, MIKE, EVERYBODY WANTS A HARD COPY.

6-1. EXCEPT.

YES, I UNDERSTAND.

SIX COMMISSIONERS WANT A HARD COPY, AND COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN SAYS I DON'T NEED IT.

AND YOU'LL GO WITH ELECTRONIC.

IS THAT RIGHT, COMMISSIONER SABELLICO? I'M SORRY. [LAUGHTER] OH, GOD, NO.

YOU JUST GAVE HIM A HEART ATTACK.

OK. COMMISSIONER MERZ.

YOU KNOW, AS MR. LAFFERTY CORRECTLY SAID, THERE IS A REAL COST TO THE DEVELOPER TO PRINT ALL THOSE SHEETS ON THE PLANS.

I MEAN, IS THERE AN OPENNESS TO LIKE REDUCING THE TOTAL, I MEAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO STILL GET A HARD COPY, I MEAN, WE DON'T NEED LIKE 30 SHEETS ON A PLAN.

I MEAN, TO GET AN IDEA ON THE SITE WHAT IT IS, YOU KNOW, JUST I MEAN, JUST TO MAKE THINGS A LITTLE BIT EASIER ON THE APPLICANT, I MEAN, LIKE A SITE PLAN, MAYBE THREE OR FOUR SHEETS OR SOMETHING, BASIC STUFF LIKE THAT.

OR IS THAT JUST A NONSTARTER BECAUSE IT'S ALL OR NOTHING, I GUESS? THE COMMISSION RECEIVES A REDUCED APPROVED PLANS, A PLAN SET AS PART OF EITHER THE RESOLUTION OR THE STAFF REPORT, WHICH IS PART OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO IN TERMS OF THE RECORD OF ACTION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD BE TAKING, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE ADOPTING THE FULL PLAN SET AS SUBMITTED.

IN TERMS OF SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION THAT'S DISTRIBUTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE CAN EVALUATE WHAT INFORMATION IS INCLUDED, BUT WE DON'T WANT OMIT IMPERTINENT INFORMATION THAT INFORMS THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS.

SO I'M GUESSING THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING WE'D HAVE TO CAREFULLY SCRUTINIZE.

[01:25:03]

[PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS]

WE'LL GO DOWN THE LINE. ANY COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO ADJOURN NOW.

LET'S GO.

COMMISSIONER MEENES, ANYTHING? MR. SABELLICO.

COMMISSIONER MERZ.

COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.

WE WERE, THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARD MEETING WILL BE OCTOBER 25TH, AND THE NEXT HISTORIC PRESERVATION MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 14TH.

THANK YOU. AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, THE NEXT MEETING IS NOVEMBER 30TH AND WE'RE MOVING FROM INTAKING INFORMATION TO STARTING TO MAKE SOME, GIVE SOME DIRECTION AND MAKE SOME DECISIONS.

MR. STRONG. YES, JUST A QUICK REMINDER THAT OCTOBER 25TH IS THE CELEBRATORY EVENT FOR ALL THE CITY VOLUNTEERS, INCLUDING THE PLANNING

[CITY PLANNER REPORT: ]

AT THE LAST OCTOBER 5TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, I NOTED THAT WAS A JOINT MEETING WITH THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION.

THAT HAS SINCE BEEN SEPARATED.

IT IS STILL A SPECIAL MEETING FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT WE WILL BE MEETING HERE AT 1 P.M.

AND THAT STAFF REPORT IS FORTHCOMING.

AT LAST NIGHT'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED TWO ORDINANCES OF INTEREST TO THIS GROUP.

I WILL NOT GO INTO MANY MUCH OF ITS DETAIL HERE THIS EVENING, BUT IT DID INCLUDE ADOPTION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, WHICH WILL BE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST OF 2023, AND ALSO AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE 22, WHICH IS A HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, WHICH INCLUDES THE NEW BENEFIT AND INCENTIVE TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION CALLED THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM.

SO IF YOU NEED ANY MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT, PLEASE REFER TO THE AGENDA REPORTS OR CONTACT ME AFTER THE MEETING.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR.

[CITY ATTORNEY REPORT:]