[00:00:03]
OKAY. GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE MARCH 1ST, 2023 MEETING OF THE CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION.
[CALL TO ORDER:]
LET'S SEE WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE. WOULD YOU LEAD THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WILL BE LED BY COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.
THANK YOU. WOULD THE MINUTES CLERK, PLEASE TAKE THE ROLL.
YES. FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY AND COMMISSIONER STINE ARE ABSENT.
STARTING ON OUR WITH COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
PRESENT. AND VICE CHAIR SABELLICO.
HERE. SO FOUR COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT WITH COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY AND COMMISSIONER STINE ABSENT.
THE NEXT ITEM FOR APPROVAL IS THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 1ST MEETING.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 1ST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING? OKAY.SEEING NONE I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. LET'S PLEASE VOTE.
OKAY. SOMEONE PUSHED THEIR BUTTON.
OKAY, THE VOTE PASSES BY 4 TO 0 WITH COMMISSIONER STINE AND COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY ABSENT.
SO THE BROWN ACT ALLOWS FOR ANY OR EXCUSE ME, DO YOU HAVE ANY?
[PUBLIC COMMENT]
WE DO HAVE A NON-AGENDA SPEAKER SLIP.IF HE COULD MAKE IT TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE.
OKAY. WELL, HE'S COMING TO THE PODIUM.
I'LL READ THE COMMENTS ON THE NON PUBLIC ITEMS. THE BROWN ACT ALLOWS ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA.
PLEASE TREAT OTHERS WITH COURTESY, RESPECT AND CIVILITY.
ALL OTHER NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE HEARD AT THE END OF THE MEETING.
IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE BROWN ACT NO ACTION CAN OCCUR ON THESE ITEMS. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD CLEARLY.
ROBERT WILKINSON REPRESENTING THE COMMUNITY GROUP, IMAGINE CARLSBAD ADDRESS 2277 CAMEO ROAD HERE IN CARLSBAD. IMAGINE CARLSBAD HAS SENT TO YOU A POSITION PAPER REGARDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD WE REFERRED TO AS OUR VILLAGE.
AND WE HOPE THAT EACH OF YOU HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ AND CONSIDER OUR PITCH IN THAT PAPER.
WITH THAT CONSIDERATION, WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL ASK THAT THIS PITCH, THIS ISSUE BE PLACED AS AN AGENDA ITEM ON YOUR NEXT MEETING.
SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A FULL DISCUSSION AND TAKE ACTION ON THIS ISSUE.
THE CURRENT VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN DOES NOT YET HAVE THE STANDARDS NEEDED TO GIVE THE PLANNING STAFF THE TOOLS TO CORRECTLY SHAPE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS IN THIS UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND AS YOU KNOW, AS OUR PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU DO NOT ALWAYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO VOTE NO.
[00:05:02]
AS IN NO CAN DO.IMAGINE CARLSBAD HAS SEEN REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS THAT ARE IN THE PIPELINE THAT SCARE THE BEJESUS OUT OF US, SCARE US BECAUSE WE SEE THEM AS VILLAGE KILLERS.
THE ACTION REQUIRED TO MOVE THIS ISSUE FORWARD ASAP.
RIGHT. IF EVERYONE WILL DIRECT THEIR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN, I'LL REVIEW THE PROCEDURES FOR THE COMMISSION WILL BE THE PROCEEDINGS WILL FOLLOW THIS EVENING'S PUBLIC HEARINGS. REQUEST TO SPEAK FORMS ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL ITEMS. REQUEST TO SPEAK FORMS MUST BE TURNED INTO THE MINUTES CLERK PRIOR TO THE ITEM COMMENCING, AND ALL SPEAKERS WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES UNLESS THAT TIME IS REDUCED BY THE CHAIRPERSON.
SO THE PROCEDURES CONTINUED SO THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN.
THERE WILL BE AN APPLICANT RESPONSE IF NECESSARY.
WE'LL THEN CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL THEN DISCUSS IT.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL VOTE AND THEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THAT WAS THE END.
[1. SDP 2021-0029 (DEV2021-0141) – IONIS LOTS 21 & 22]
SO I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE.FIRST, DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY EX PARTE DISCLOSURES ON THIS ITEM? YES. COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN? YES, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE.
I'VE DRIVEN THE SITE AND VIEWED THE SITE ON GOOGLE MAPS.
OH, PERFECT. I ACTUALLY VISITED THE SITE TWICE AND DROVE AROUND THE ENTIRE CAMPUS.
OKAY. MR. LARDY, WILL YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THE ITEM? YES, CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION BEFORE YOU IS A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE IONIS PROJECT LOTS 21 AND 22.
HERE TO GIVE THE STAFF PRESENTATION IS SENIOR PLANNER SHANNON HARKER.
THANK YOU, MR. LARDY, AND GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN MERZ AND PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
THE 414 ACRE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS PARK COMPRISES 27 LOTS, INCLUDING 23 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL LOTS AND FOUR OPEN SPACE LOTS TOTALING 135 ACRES.
A MAJORITY OF THE BUSINESS PARK HAS BEEN DEVELOPED.
HOWEVER, A FEW LOTS REMAIN VACANT.
THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFIED THE EIR AND APPROVED THE PERMITS IN 2002.
SO HERE'S AN AERIAL OF THE 8.37 ACRE PROPERTY.
DUE TO THE VARYING TOPOGRAPHY THROUGHOUT THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA.
SO THE PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTS OF A APPROXIMATELY 165,000 SQUARE FOOT, 48 FOOT TALL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BUILDING FOR IONIS, AS WELL AS A THREE LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE SITE AND A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE ACROSS WHIPTAIL LOOP.
WHILE A MAJORITY OF THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS PARK HAS BEEN DEVELOPED WITH MINOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS WHICH ARE ADMINISTRATIVE OR CITY PLANNER LEVEL DECISIONS BECAUSE THE PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEEDS 45FT, THE PROJECT REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AS HIGHLIGHTED BY THE BLUE STARS ON THIS SLIDE, TWO ACCESS DRIVEWAYS ARE PROPOSED OFF WHIPTAIL LOOP.
[00:10:05]
THE ORANGE STARS ON THIS SLIDE IDENTIFY THE ACCESS POINTS INTO AND OUT OF THE PARKING STRUCTURE.SO HERE'S A RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED R&D BUILDING AS VIEWED FROM THE SOUTH AND WEST.
I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE PROPOSED BUILDING ON THIS SLIDE TO DEMONSTRATE HOW THE HEIGHT CHANGES ALONG THE FRONT ELEVATION AND TO IDENTIFY THE AREA OF THE BUILDING WHICH EXCEEDS THE 45 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT, THUS TRIGGERING THE REQUIREMENT FOR APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IN ADDITION, THE INCREASED BUILDING HEIGHT WILL NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES DUE TO THE STEP TOPOGRAPHY ALONG WHIPTAIL LOOP AND THE SIGNIFICANT DISTANCE THE BUILDING IS SET BACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINES.
AND FINALLY, THE BUILDING IS NOT DISPROPORTIONAL TO OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE AREA.
SINCE THERE IS A 411,000 SQUARE FOOT, 38 FOOT TALL BUILDING ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT SITE TO THE WEST, WHICH IS ALSO HAD TO INCREASE SETBACKS SINCE IT EXCEEDED A HEIGHT OF 35FT. SO HERE'S A RENDERING OF THE FRONT AND SIDE ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDING, LOOKING NORTH AND WEST ACROSS THE SITE.
THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING INCLUDES THE SAME MATERIALS AND COLOR PALETTE OF THE EXISTING IONIS BUILDINGS TO THE SOUTH AND COMPLIES WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN.
SO THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE PARKING STRUCTURE LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.
VIEWS OF THE STRUCTURE FROM THE OPEN SPACE AREA TO THE NORTH HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED THROUGH THE GRADING DESIGN AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER, WHICH SCREENS THE LOWER PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROPOSING A GREEN SCREEN AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER, WHICH ALLOWS FOR VINES TO GROW UP A METAL TRELLIS TO SOFTEN THE VIEWS.
AND THEN FINALLY, HERE'S A RENDERING OF THE BRIDGE PROPOSED OVER WHIPTAIL LOOP, WHICH WILL PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING EXISTING CAMPUS BUILDINGS TO THE SOUTH. THE BRIDGE IS DESIGNED WITH MATERIALS AND COLORS THAT WILL COMPLEMENT THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE IONIS BUILDINGS.
THE PROJECT HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS, INCLUDING THE OAKS NORTH BUSINESS PARK SPECIFIC PLAN, THE GENERAL PLAN ZONING CODE, AS WELL AS THE MCCLELLAN PALOMAR AIRPORT LAND USE CONSISTENCY PLAN.
IN PURSUANT TO EXHIBIT FIVE ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT THE PROPOSED PROJECT ALSO FALLS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE EIR PREPARED FOR THE BUSINESS PARK AND THAT THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TO DEVELOP THE SITE HAVE ALREADY BEEN ANALYZED AND THERE ARE NO NEW IMPACTS BEYOND THOSE ORIGINALLY STUDIED AND MITIGATED FOR.
THUS, NO CHANGES ARE NEEDED TO THE EIR TO IMPLEMENT THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15162 AND 15168 NO ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. AND ALSO THE TWO NOTES THAT WE DID RECEIVE TWO LETTERS ON THE PROJECT WHICH HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO THE COMMISSIONERS, BOTH BY EMAIL AND ALSO IN HARD COPY TONIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF STAFF? COMMISSIONER MEENES.
YES. QUESTION FOR MR. LARDY. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC, COULD YOU EXPAND AND PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN REGARD TO THE PARKING STUDY AND THE REDUCTION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY PLANNER MAKING THE DECISION REGARDING THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES, AS WELL AS THE REDUCED AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES PER THE CITY PLANNERS DECISION? SURE. THANK YOU.
THROUGH THE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER MEENES.
SO THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE 2144 020 DELEGATES AUTHORITY.
[00:15:08]
HISTORICALLY, HOW WE'VE APPLIED THIS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD IS, SINCE THE PARKING STANDARDS ESTABLISHED ARE BASIC STANDARDS PER LAND USE AND CATEGORY.IF THERE IS SOMETHING LIKE A LARGER COMPLEX THAT MIGHT HAVE A MIX OF USES AND DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THAT THE STANDARD DESIGNATIONS DON'T APPLY TO PROVIDE, SUBMIT EVIDENCE TO US THAT IT WOULD NOT HAVE IMPACT ON THE CIRCULATION OF THE SITE OR THE BROADER COMMUNITY.
IN THIS CASE, A PARKING STUDY WAS SUBMITTED TO US.
A COUPLE OF THINGS ADDING INTO THAT IS THE CONTEXT OF THE LOCATION REALLY MATTERS.
AND SO THIS IS A LARGE CAMPUS IN AN INDUSTRIAL AREA WHERE IT IS ABLE TO BE SELF-ENCLOSED AS WELL AS THE DIFFERENT USES WORKING TOGETHER AND SUPPLEMENTING EACH OTHER.
AND SO THAT FINDING IS REALLY BASED ON IS IT GOING TO IMPACT THE BROADER NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY? IS THERE GOING TO BE SPILLOVER EFFECTS ESSENTIALLY? AND BASED ON THE PARKING STUDY AND THE LOCATION OF THAT, THAT'S HOW I WAS ABLE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
OH, I'M SORRY. COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN? YES. THANK YOU.
MS. HARKER, DO YOU WANT TO COMMENT AT ALL REGARDING THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED TODAY? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE A SUMMARY.
SO THE FIRST LETTER THAT WE'VE RECEIVED IS FROM THE CENTERS FOR LAND MANAGEMENT.
SO THESE IMPACTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN STUDIED.
WHEN THE ORIGINAL SPECIFIC PLAN WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE EIR.
AND SO MOST OF THE IMPACTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MITIGATED.
THOSE THAT REMAIN OUTSTANDING, SUCH AS THE ADDITION OF A FENCE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO NEED ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, WILL BE I WILL BE CHECKING AS PART OF THE GRADING PLAN AND BUILDING PLANS.
SO AS FAR AS THE LIGHT POLLUTION, THERE IS A SHEET WITHIN YOUR PLANS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION THAT COMPLIES WITH THE MITIGATION MEASURES. SO I WORK CLOSELY WITH THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT LIGHT PRESSURE, SODIUM LIGHTS WERE USED AND THAT THERE WERE SHIELDS ON THE LIGHTS TO PREVENT SPILLOVER INTO THE OPEN SPACE. SO IN GENERAL, WE STAFF DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THIS LETTER AND FEEL THAT IT'S ALL THESE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED.
AS FAR AS THE SECOND LETTER THAT WE JUST RECEIVED TODAY, THERE'S A COMMENT.
IT'S FROM LET'S SEE, IT'S FROM LASUR DRURY.
AND THEY FEEL THAT IT'S OUT OF DATE AND THEY'RE REQUESTING A PROJECT SPECIFIC EIR BE PREPARED.
AND AND WE DISAGREE WITH THAT COMMENT WHOLEHEARTEDLY.
AND YOU KNOW, THE IMPACTS FOR THIS PROJECT HAVE ALREADY BEEN STUDIED.
IT'S A FULLY GRADED PAD AND MOST OF THE INDUSTRIAL PARK HAS ALREADY BEEN DEVELOPED.
ALL THE MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE MOST PART HAVE BEEN SATISFIED.
SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THIS LETTER.
AND IF I COULD JUST ADD ON, SO CEQA GUIDELINES 15162 3156168 ESTABLISH THE PROCEDURES OF TEARING OFF OF AN EIR AND IT SAYS WHEN AN EIR CAN BE REQUIRED AND BASED ON THOSE FINDINGS AND THE EVIDENCE WE'VE PUT IN THE RECORD, WE DO NOT SEE THAT AN EIR IS NEEDED, NOR COULD WE HAVE REQUIRED AN EIR BASED ON THAT STANDARD.
IT IS APPROXIMATELY 20 YEARS, BUT IT STILL WAS STUDIED AND MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF CEQA TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? DID A GREAT JOB.
WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
WERE THERE ANY SPEAKER SLIPS ON THIS? CHAIR THERE IS NOT. OKAY, GREAT.
OKAY. SO WE'LL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF? OKAY. SEEING NONE WE'LL NOW OPEN FOR COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
[00:20:02]
ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST? I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PLAN.I WAS A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PARKING UNTIL MR. LARDY EXPLAINED THAT.
THE OTHER CONCERN I HAD WAS THE HEIGHT.
AND THE FACT THAT WE MIGHT BE SETTING SOME SORT OF PRECEDENT.
I MEAN, THE LAST THING I WANT IS TO SEE 10, 12, 13 STORY BUILDINGS IN MY CITY.
BUT YOU FILED THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, SO.
THANK YOU. I THINK THE PROJECT IS AN EXCELLENT PROJECT.
I THINK ONE, I COMMEND IONIS TO WANT TO CONTINUE TO EXPAND IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ADDING TO THEIR CAMPUS. I THINK WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE, THEY'RE CURRENTLY DEVELOPED AND THEN WITH THIS ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET, ALONG WITH THE BRIDGE, I THINK ONE I KNOW MYSELF, I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT IONIS IS WANTING TO STAY HERE IN CARLSBAD.
AND I THINK THAT THE PROJECT IS AN EXCELLENT PROJECT.
I THINK ARCHITECTURALLY, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE SETBACKS OF THE BUILDING, THE THE BRIDGE, THE LANDSCAPING, THE TRELLISES ON THE PARKING STRUCTURE, ETCETERA, I THINK YOU'VE GONE BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
SO THEREFORE, I THINK THE PROJECT IS AN EXCELLENT PROJECT AND I SUPPORT IT.
YEAH, I JUST HAVE ONE COMMENT.
I'VE TALKED AT LENGTH WITH MR. LARDY AND DURING THE BRIEFING AND ALL THAT, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE AND I ON UNDER FINDINGS OF THE RESOLUTION NUMBER ONE ON PAGE 16 OF OUR PACKET AND I JUST TALKED TO MR. LARDY ABOUT THIS, THE SENTENCE.
LET'S SEE. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR.
BUT IT'S INTERESTING, THE RESOLUTION ALSO SAYS THAT WE KIND OF MAKE THAT FINDING.
SO, I MEAN, I TRUST THE CITY PLANNER'S DECISION ON THAT.
BUT I GUESS THE PART WHERE IT SAYS DUE TO THE [INAUDIBLE] SPECIAL CONDITIONS ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE END, I WOULD RATHER WE TOOK THAT OUT JUST BECAUSE I DON'T REALLY MAKE THAT FINDING. BUT AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT DOESN'T REALLY AFFECT THE RESOLUTION.
IS THAT CORRECT? CHAIR MERZ, YES, IT DOESN'T REALLY RESPECT THE TECHNICAL COMPONENTS OF THE RESOLUTION.
I WILL SAY ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK ABOUT WHEN WE LOOK AT RESOLUTIONS IS, AS I'VE DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH, IS THINKING ABOUT PLANNERS IN THE FUTURE AND SPECIFICALLY HAVING THIS INFORMATION MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR PLANNERS IN THE FUTURE ON SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS FOR IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO ADD? OKAY THAT'S HELPFUL. WELL, THE ONLY COMMENT I WOULD HAVE MADE IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT YOU SAID.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS MAKING THE FINDING.
SO IT'S KIND OF A REPORTING OUT MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.
UNDERSTOOD. OKAY. I'M FINE. THANK YOU.
THAT'S A VERY HELPFUL EXPLANATION.
SO I'M FINE. WE DON'T [INAUDIBLE] THAT.
OKAY. AND I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THE PROJECT, SO.
OKAY. SO SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, MAY WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE ITEM? COMMISSIONER MEENES. YES, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? I'LL SECOND. OKAY.
SO, MINUTES CLERK WILL YOU PREPARE THE VOTE.
DON'T TOUCH THEIR BUTTONS RIGHT NOW AND.
OKAY. READY? OKAY. PLEASE VOTE.
OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES 4 TO 0.
WE WILL NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
AND CONGRATULATIONS TO THE APPLICANT ON IT.
[2. UPDATE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TEMPLATE (CONTINUED FROM FEB. 1, 2023 MEETING]
LARDY, WILL YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE ITEM NUMBER TWO? YES. THANK YOU.SO THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE FEBRUARY 1ST MEETING TO PROVIDE DIRECTION.
FOR THE RECORD, JEFF MURPHY, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.
[00:25:03]
SO THIS WAS AN ITEM AGAIN CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 1ST WITH THE INTENT TO HAVE AT THE TIME PLANNING COMMISSIONER LUNA MAKE COMMENTS ON ON THE TEMPLATE AS PRESENTED AND THEN PROVIDE DIRECTION ON ITS IMPLEMENTATION.NOW THAT COMMISSIONER LUNA IS NOW COUNCIL MEMBER LUNA WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING IS THAT WE THAT THE COMMISSION GO FORWARD WITH THE TEMPLATE AS PROPOSED WE'LL ADD SOME OF THE ADDITIONS, INCLUDING THE ACRONYMS ON THE SECOND PAGE AND LOOK AT IT, INCLUDING THE CASE NUMBERS ON THE ON THE FIRST PAGE, BUT WITH THE INTENT THAT AS WE IMPLEMENT IT, IF THERE ARE CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS OR ADDITIONS THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE TEMPLATE, WE CAN EASILY MAKE THOSE AS WE AS WE PROGRESS.
SO THAT WOULD BE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
SO I'LL PUT IT BACK TO THE TO THE CHAIR.
YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? OH, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.
AND NOW SHE OBVIOUSLY WILL NOT.
I THINK WE CAN JUST GO AHEAD AND HAVE A VERY BRIEF DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM.
[LAUGHTER] SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH ALL THE COMMITMENTS THAT MR. MURPHY MADE AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
I WILL SECOND. I SEE NO REASON FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF MY PERCEPTION.
AND JUST SO I KNOW, THIS IS MY LITTLE SCRIPT SHEET HERE IS WE DO NEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
I DON'T DOUBT WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ONE? NO, WE DO NOT. WE DO NOT.
OKAY. THAT'S IT FOR THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
OKAY. SO, OKAY, SO I THINK WE'RE RIGHT TO THE MOTION, SO I'D LIKE TO SPEAK.
SORRY, COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN, I DIDN'T SEE YOUR THING ON THERE.
GO AHEAD, PLEASE. NICE TO SEE.
WHEN WE MET LAST TIME, WE DISCUSSED FOR THE BETTER PART OF AN HOUR SUGGESTIONS.
AND YOU CAN IMAGINE MY SURPRISE WHEN I GOT THIS, AND IT WAS LIKE DEJA VU.
SO THE DIRECTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE LAST MEETING WAS TO CONTINUE THE ITEM.
JUST TO. WELL, I APPRECIATE THAT POINT, COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
MY MOTION WAS TO ADOPT WITH THE COMMITMENTS THAT MR. MURPHY MADE AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
I UNDERSTAND. BUT I DON'T WANT TO BUY A PIG IN A POKE.
I MEAN, I JUST LIKE TO SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING.
COMMISSIONER SABELLICO HAS MADE A MOTION.
I GUESS WE DON'T HAVE A SECOND.
I WAS JUST GOING TO WEIGH IN ON VOTING.
THE WAY THE COUNCIL RULES READ IS IF THE COMMISSION WAS GOING TO BE ADOPTING SOMETHING BY RESOLUTION, WHICH I DO NOT BELIEVE IS HAPPENING HERE, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A UNANIMOUS VOTE BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A QUORUM OF THE BODY, WHICH WOULD BE FOUR.
BUT SINCE THIS IS JUST A VOICE VOTE, YOU JUST NEED A MAJORITY OF THE QUORUM TO PASS THE MOTION.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR KEMP.
SO WOULD YOU PREPARE THE VOTE, PLEASE.
[00:30:15]
KAMENJARIN IS NOT SHOWING UP.DID YOU LOCK YOUR VOTE? YOU DIDN'T LOCK IT. I'LL VOTE AGAIN.
OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES BY MOTION OF 3 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN VOTING NO.
ALL RIGHT. THAT CONCLUDES THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF TONIGHT'S MEETING.
[PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS]
ARE THERE ANY IS THERE A REPORT FROM ANY COMMISSIONERS TONIGHT? OKAY. I HAVE A POINT OF INFORMATION.MAYBE PERHAPS YOU CAN ANSWER THIS.
WHEN WILL THE APPLICATIONS BE DEADLINED FOR THE REPLACEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER LUNA? AND TWO HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY APPLICATIONS TO DATE? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
I BELIEVE THE APPLICATION DEADLINE IS WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.
I CAN TRY TO CHECK THAT ONLINE.
I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY APPLICATIONS RECEIVED.
THE CITY CLERK TAKES THEM, COMPILES THEM AND SENDS THEM TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
BUT I'LL CHECK THE DEADLINE REAL QUICK.
I MEAN, IF YOU KNOW, SIR, IS THERE A DEADLINE WHEN WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE SOMEONE ON THE COMMISSION? THERE IS NOT A SPECIFIC DEADLINE OF WHEN WE NEED TO HAVE SOMEONE.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS.
OKAY, GOOD. IS THERE A REPORT FROM THE CITY PLANNER?
[CITY PLANNER REPORT]
MY ONLY REAL REPORT IS THE DEADLINE IS NOON ON MARCH 20TH FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION VACANCY.I GUESS THE OTHER THING I'LL ADD IS WE DO HAVE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FOR THE MARCH 15TH, APRIL 5TH AND APRIL 19TH ITEMS. AND SO WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF PROJECTS COMING FORWARD.
BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY SCHEDULE ISSUES WITH THOSE, PLEASE JUST LET US KNOW.
OKAY. IS THERE A REPORT FROM OUR ATTORNEY? NO, SIR. OKAY.
WITH THAT, WE WILL ADJOURN TONIGHT'S MEETING.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.