HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0_Draft Minutes of September 8, 2022
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2022 REGULAR MEETING – 6:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Commissioner Lowrey III. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Lauren Kleiman, Vice Chair Curtis Ellmore, Secretary Mark Rosene, Commissioner Tristan Harris, Commissioner Lee Lowrey, Commissioner Erik Weigand
ABSENT: Commissioner Sarah Klaustermeier
Staff Present: Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis, Deputy Community Development Director Jim Campbell, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine, Principal Planner Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner David Lee, Senior Planner Chelsea Crager, and Administrative Assistant Clarivel Rodriguez, Department Assistant Savannah Martinez IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS None V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES None VI. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF JULY 21, 2022 Recommended Action: Approve and file Motion made by Commissioner Weigand and seconded by Vice Chair Ellmore to approve the minutes of the July 21, 2022, meeting. AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Klaustermeier ITEM NO. 2 GONTERMAN ENCROACHMENT (PA2022-127) Site Location: 2304 Cliff Drive Summary: A request to waive City Council Policy L-6 for proposed private improvements consisting of stairs, handrails, retaining walls, and planters that encroach up to eight (8) feet-five (5) inches into the Cliff Drive public right-of-way. The Cliff Drive parkway extends approximately 12 feet from face of curb to the property line. Council Policy L-6 (“Policy”) prohibits the proposed stairs, handrails, retaining walls and planters since structures are limited to a 1-foot projection into the right-of-way and the height of encroachments are limited to three (3) feet from the top of curb elevation.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 8, 2022
Page 2 of 9
Recommended Action: 1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15303 Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), because it has no significant effect on the environment; 2. Waive City Council Policy L-6, Encroachments in Public Rights-of-Way, for non-compliant private improvements consisting of stairs, handrails, retaining walls, and planters that encroach into the Cliff Drive public right-of-way, contingent upon all conditions of the Encroachment Permit process
being met; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-021 waiving City Council Policy L-6 and approving Encroachment Permit No. N2022-0147. Commissioners disclosed no ex parte communications.
Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Secretary Rosene to approve the recommended action.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Klaustermeier VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ITEM NO. 3 TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH PROJECT AMENDMENT (PA2021-260) Site Location: 1602 East Coast Highway Summary: An amendment to the 2012 approved Tennis Club at Newport Beach project to: 1) increase the number of future tennis courts from 7 to 8 courts, 2) increase the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms, 3) increase the gross floor area of the ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, and 4) provide 3 attached condominium units and 2 detached single family residences in-lieu of 5 detached single-family residences. The proposed changes to the 2012 approved project require the consideration of the following land use:
• General Plan Amendment: An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of Table LU2 of the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element to amend the allowable development limits for the tennis club site;
• Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment: An amendment to Local Coastal Implementation Plan Section 21.26.055.S.2 (Tennis Club of Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Coastal Zoning District Development Standards) to amend land use regulations for the tennis club site;
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment: An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan No. 47 (Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community) to amend land use regulations and development standards on the tennis club site;
• Major Site Development Review Amendment (SD2011-002): A site development review in accordance to Section 4.0 (Site Development Review) of Planned Community Development Plan No. 47 and Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) for the construction of the proposed project;
• Coastal Development Permit Amendment (CD2017-039): An amendment to Coastal Development
Permit No. CD2017-039 for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the tennis club site, and implementation of the project;
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 8, 2022
Page 3 of 9
• Tentative Vesting Tract Map Amendment (NT2005-003): An amendment to Tentative Vesting Tract Map pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code to create separate lots for the tennis club site;
• Limited Term Permit Amendment (XP2011-004): A limited term permit to allow temporary use of structures during construction pursuant to Section 20.60.015 of the Municipal Code;
• Development Agreement Amendment (DA2008-001): A second amendment to the Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to NBMC Sections 15.45 (Development Agreement), which would provide vested right to develop the proposed project while also providing
negotiated public benefits and extend the term of Agreement for additional ten years; and
• Addendum to the 2010 Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND2010-008): Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the proposed development Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find that the Proposed Project will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2010091052) for the Approved Project, and the addendum has been prepared to address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Proposed Project; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-022 recommending City Council approval of PA2021-260, which includes adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration Addendum, and approval of a General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, Major Site Development Review Amendment, Coastal Development Permit Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment, Limited Term Permit Amendment, and Development Agreement Amendment for The Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project located at 1602 East Coast Highway. Commissioner Weigand recused himself due to the Levine Act for a campaign contribution. Associate Planner Lee used a presentation to review the requested amendment to a previously approved project, project location, land use, previously approved project inclusions and site plan, 2012 approved entitlements, proposed amendment details and site plan, site plan comparisons, requested project entitlements, CEQA review, findings, an additional condition for future consideration for pickleball use, and recommended action. In response to Vice Chair Ellmore’s inquiry, Deputy Director Campbell noted that traffic, parking, and noise are focus areas for the City as pickleball courts develop and confirmed the tennis and pickleball parking ratio of four spaces to one court and 12 spaces to one court and the application is for tennis courts only. In response to Secretary Rosene’s question, Deputy Director Campbell stated that property development other than tennis courts would require future application and review. Commissioners Lowrey and Harris, Secretary Rosene, and Chair Kleiman disclosed conversations with the property owner, applicant, and consultants. Vice Chair Ellmore disclosed no ex parte communication. Chair Kleiman opened the public hearing. Robert O’Hill, managing owner of Newport Beach Country Club, used a presentation to review the modifications included in the Bungalow and Lofts Plan B amendment, project renderings, Bungalow Loft first floor and top floor drawings, a floor plan for the Clubhouse and Bungalow Spa, and photos of the pool attendant area, fitness center desk area, men’s and women’s locker rooms, massage area, and koi pond area. Mr. O’Hill estimated City gains of $1,300,000, accepted the new condition, thanked staff for their work, and agreed to abide by the conditions established by the City. In response to Chair Kleiman’s request, Mr. O’Hill agreed with the conditions as drafted and the new conditions in the staff report.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 8, 2022
Page 4 of 9
In response to Commissioner Harris’ inquiry, Mr. O’Hill reported adequate parking accommodations and noted monetary investments to resurface tennis courts for conversion to pickleball courts.
Sean Abdali, The Tennis Club owner and operator, noted Newport Beach having the first private pickleball club in the world and today the largest, relayed having formed an event company to help run events, identified the different parking needs for pickleball and tennis users and electric bikes, and explained an agreement with the Irvine Company for parking space use Monday – Friday, at Corporate Plaza West on weekends and holidays, and Newport Beach County Club operators on Mondays. Furthermore, he noted a reduction in large events to
accommodate parking availability, residential support of the plan to preserve the Club, and a reduction in noise with improved pickleball equipment in the future. Paul Christ, Granville Community Association representative, shared enthusiasm for Mr. O’Hill’s plans, concerns
for pickleball noise causing reduced property value, suggested installing a sound blanket and a restriction on amplified sound, and questioned the surface area of the tennis and pickleball courts.
Tracey Miller represented Club members who are in opposition to the project and read their statements of concern. Bret Feuerstein and Ryan Chase, 50 percent owners of The Tennis Club property, noted an arbitration in progress
to determine if Golf Realty Fund has the authority to unilaterally process the application, opposed the proposed plan, thanked staff for their work, and expressed interest in finding a solution that enables The Tennis Club to grow
and thrive, and noted a concern that there are no pickleball courts in the applicant’s plan.
Jim Mosher expressed concern for clarity in the Land Use table of the General Plan Amendment relative to the specific allowable development at the “anomaly site,” questioned the Greenlight analysis by the City, believed that
the 2012 approval was not approved by the voters, and is of the opinion that a Greenlight vote is required for the amendment.
Denys Oberman commended staff for bringing up fluid items associated with the use, particularly, impacts of
pickleball noise, events, and capacity within the City and requested the Planning Commission remand the plan to obtain a committal characterization of what is being proposed and assure compatibility with the surrounding area.
Mark Susson noted contradictions in the proposal and parking, noise, and traffic issues at The Tennis Club.
Deidre Machowski encouraged the Planning Commission to move forward with the plan.
Rogin Moore, The Tennis Club member and employee, challenged anyone claiming having received threatening
emails from Mr. Abdali, noted meetings with members and Mr. Abdali to share the plans and gain input, and relayed no known opposition.
Mr. O’Hill clarified the participants that, in his opinion, supported the approval of the General Plan Amendment
after two previous failed attempts.
Mr. Abdali addressed the noise issues. At the request of Chair Kleiman, Deputy Director Campbell indicated that City Council policy is being followed and the amendment does not require a Greenlight vote, pickleball was not examined because it was not
requested in the application and would be subject to review with the added condition if requested in the future, and special event permits are required for tournaments. Furthermore, he indicated that existing tennis court
conversion requirements are dependent on how the tennis court was originally established, private court conversion requirements are left up to the Homeowner Associations, and an analysis to identify if the conversion is consistent with the entitlements would be required for this project along with environment, traffic, parking, and noise reviews. Chair Kleiman clarified the multi-step process for approval of the project. Chair Kleiman closed the public hearing.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 8, 2022
Page 5 of 9
In response to Secretary Rosene’s question, Deputy Director Campbell agreed that the plans are conceptual and noted that a plan check took place in 2016, more detailed designs have been put forth through the building
division, and the applicant acknowledges an update to the drawings is needed to meet the new building code, indicated being comfortable moving forward with the recommendation, and assured the Commission that any deviations from standards in the drawings will be cleaned up at the plan check stage. Commissioner Lowrey expressed comfort with the findings by staff and explanations of what the General Plan calls for and noted the popularity of pickleball among all ages, honoring the General Plan, and providing
recreational facilities. Vice Chair Ellmore concurred with Commissioner Lowrey and clarified that the project is for tennis courts.
Commissioner Lowrey noted that staff will need to identify the parameter for approval relative to pickleball court development.
Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Vice Chair Ellmore to approve the recommended action and the additional condition.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, and Rosene NOES: None ABSTAIN: Weigand ABSENT: Klaustermeier ITEM NO. 4 BAY ISLAND GENERAL PLAN, ZONING CODE, LCP AMENDMENTS (PA2022-087) Site Location: Bay Island Summary: Amendments to the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning), and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code increasing the development limit specified for Bay Island from 23 dwelling units to 25 dwelling units. The amendments were initiated by the applicant who seeks to return the maximum residential density of Bay Island to 25 units, consistent with prior entitlement under Use Permit No. UP3618. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-023 (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. GP2022-001, Code Amendment No. CA2022-005, and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. LC2022-003. Senior Planner Crager used a presentation to review the Bay Island amendments, Bay Island map, introduction/background, updated General Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program maps, CEQA review, recommended action, and next steps. Commissioner Weigand disclosed an island tour with Coralee Newman, Commissioners Lowrey and Vice Chair Ellmore disclosed no ex parte communications, Commissioner Harris and Secretary Rosene disclosed having spoken with the applicant, and Chair Kleiman disclosed having received a message from the applicant’s consultant.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 8, 2022
Page 6 of 9
Chair Kleiman opened the public hearing. Coralee Newman, Principal with Government Solutions, agreed with the recommendations by staff and clarified
that every homesite has two parking spaces in the off-site parking garage and some include a third parking spot on the property for a golf cart, indicated that no additional parking will be added, and asked for Planning Commission approval. Jim Mosher questioned the status of the dwelling unit and caretaker count, issues with current parking availability, and sufficient parking to meet current zoning code standards.
Senior Planner Crager relayed that the caretaker unit is currently being used as a club house, 23 single family residences exist, 48 parking spaces in the off-site parking structure are required by the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and do not consider the caretaker residence, and new development is subject to a Coastal Development
Permit (CDP) which would include a review of parking consistency.
Chair Kleiman closed the public hearing. Motion made by Secretary Rosene and seconded by Commissioner Weigand to approve the recommended action. AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Klaustermeier ITEM NO. 5 GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE (PA2017-141) Site Location: Citywide Summary: An amendment to the Newport Beach General Plan incorporating changes to the Circulation Element. The proposed update is a comprehensive statement of the City’s transportation and mobility policies and serves as a guide for implementation of these policies. The purpose of the update is to provide new goals and policies that comply with State mandates such as Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) legislation and “Complete Streets” legislation. The updated goals and policies also reflect the community’s vision on trending transportation matters, including electric vehicles (EV) and climate change, rideshare services, public transportation, bicycle plans, telecommuting, roadway safety, as well as parking management. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this activity exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-025 recommending adoption of the General Plan Circulation Element Update to the City Council (Attachment No. PC 1).
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 8, 2022
Page 7 of 9
City Traffic Engineer Brine used a presentation to provide an update to the Circulation Element, context, background, the timelines for Planning Commission review and public involvement, an update to goals and
policies, the State Law mandates, key policies, a summary, and a recommendation. In response Commissioner Weigand’s question, City Traffic Engineer Brine indicated that the Safety Element Update will include evacuation zones and maps and be completed at the same time as the Land Use Element and staff can begin working with the fire marshal regarding evacuation plans and maps. Commissioner Weigand suggested working with landowners on potential evacuation routes and City Traffic Engineer Brine
stated the plan can potentially include hydrogen as well, at which point, Commissioner Weigand thought hydrogen should be added to reduce fossil fuel reliance. In response to Chair Kleiman’s inquiry, City Traffic Engineer Brine confirmed that the sixth lane on the Pacific
Coast Highway (PCH) is included in the City plan to be consistent with the County Master Plan and planning, indicated that funding is tied to consistency with the County Master Plan, and noted regular monitoring of traffic
signal timing. Chair Kleiman opened the public hearing.
Jim Mosher was of the opinion that the Circulation Element Update is an interim place holder document for an ultimate Circulation Element that would be part of the comprehensive General Plan Update and expressed
concern for consistency of references, policy consequences, residual details, and maps.
Chair Kleiman closed the public hearing. Motion made by Vice Chair Ellmore and seconded by Commissioner Harris to approve the recommended action. AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Klaustermeier VIII. STUDY SESSION ITEM NO. 6 RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES (PA2021-292) Site Location: Citywide Summary: An overview of the Residential Care Facilities regulations, limitations of State and Federal law, efforts of the City Council formed Residential Care Facilities Ad Hoc Committee, and an overview of proposed code amendments. Recommended Action: Receive Presentation and provide staff direction regarding proposed amendments. Principal Planner Murillo used a presentation to provide background, State and Federal law limitations, an overview of existing regulations, Residential Care Ad Hoc Committee efforts, and an overview of proposed code amendments. Furthermore, he noted the differences between licensed and unlicensed Residential Care Facilities, the Fair Housing Act and American Disabilities Act, drug and alcohol addiction as a disability, protected licensed facilities for six and fewer occupants, where the City started, the 2008 adopted City Ordinance, reasonable accommodations, the Newport Beach matrix of allowed uses, the history of Residential Care Facilities since 2008, the creation of the Ad Hoc Committee, background on Ad Hoc Committee activities, a Newport Beach and Costa Mesa permitting comparison table, distance requirements in Newport Beach
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 8, 2022
Page 8 of 9
versus Costa Mesa, the Housing Element Law GC Section 655832(c)(3), proposed zoning amendments, the Local Coastal Program (LCP) update, and next steps.
In response to Commissioner Weigand’s question, Principal Planner Murillo indicated that separation standards apply to larger facilities that meet the updated definition of a Residential Care Facility and require a hearing officer to consider compatibility with characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and proximity to parks, schools, and other conditionally permitted uses of the same or similar type. Community Development Director Jurjis stated that unlicensed facilities are prohibited by the City and are dealt with by enforcement. Assistant City Attorney Summerhill noted State legislation for a compliance review and Community
Development Director Jurjis relayed that staff will look further into an annual compliance process. Commissioner Weigand suggested creating and posting a patient bill of rights in every treatment center bathroom, posting a CUP in facilities with more than six tenants sleeping on the property, directing people to
call code enforcement with a physical address of the property if they believe their housing is more crowded than allowed, requiring businesses to provide a plan to keep people off the streets when their insurance does
not permit them to stay any longer, and creating an online education tool and website for complaints. Derek Davis expressed concerns for safety and suggested not placing Residential Care Facilities in neighborhoods with small children.
An unidentified speaker noted concern for a neighboring operator having committed various violations to the
Newport Beach building codes, 40 children in the immediate vicinity of a facility, and the types of patients staying at the homes and asked the Planning Commission to allow for plenty of time for public input of the
proposed changes, vetting, and patient protection.
Jim Mosher inquired if the posted LCP proposal will be reviewed at the next Planning Commission meeting and, if not, he requested the changed proposal be made available for public review in advance of the next
Planning Commission meeting.
Denys Oberman thought that the current ordinance was a result of a significant overconcentration attributable to the lack of regulation of Residential Care Facilities and an unaddressed loophole where business operators
leveraged integral, single, six and under licensed facilities and combined them with unlicensed facilities. Ms. Oberman asked that the Ad Hoc Committee and the public receive a chance to review the staff
recommendations and thoughtfully respond.
Bill Finster is of the opinion that the facilities need to be controlled, suggested that the facilities be investigated to identify what is happening, and described a home invasion by a person staying in a facility.
Erika Cane thanked Commissioner Weigand for his support, expressed her concern for social rehabilitation
facilities in her neighborhood with 42 children, noted four facilities of its kind to date, and asked that all that is possible be done to protect the residents and those seeking treatment.
At the request of Chair Kleiman, Principal Planner Murillo reviewed the “History of Residential Care Facilities
Since 2008” slide and stated that it reflects a combination of unlicensed and licensed facilities, new facilities in the City since 2009 are licensed for six or few occupants, and a zoning clearance and website map are being used for facility tracking. After Principal Planner Murillo confirmed the City’s purview, Chair Kleiman reminded the public that the City has no ability to deny facilities when they obtain licensing through the State. In response to Commissioner Harris’ question, Principal Planner Murillo reviewed the “Distance Requirements in Newport Beach versus Costa Mesa” slide and the licensing application and CUP processes. Commissioner Weigand expressed concern for a two-week timeline, absent public review, ideas, and open discussion, denial by a judge, sustainable solutions, and support to residents and those in treatment and thought parts are too rushed. Chair Kleiman noted that the public education component is a big part, so residents know what’s reportable to code enforcement.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 8, 2022
Page 9 of 9
Assistant City Attorney Summerhill announced that this study session is for informational purposes and the Planning Commission will provide the City Council with code amendment recommendations for consideration.
IX. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 7 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION None ITEM NO. 8 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA Deputy Community Development Director Campbell announced that the amended Housing Element will be taken
to the City Council for adoption on September 13, 2022, along with an agenda item to establish a General Plan Advisory Committee, the City is in receipt of a letter from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) indicating that the Housing Element is certifiable, and two agenda items are planned for the next Planning Commission. The next Planning Commission meeting will take place on September 22, 2022,
followed by a meeting planned for October 20, 2022. ITEM NO. 9 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES None X. ADJOURNMENT – The meeting adjourned at 9:17 P.M. The agenda for the September 8, 2022, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, September 02, 2022, at 12:45 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City’s website on Friday, September 02, 2022, at 12:15 p.m. _______________________________ Lauren Kleiman, Chair _______________________________ Mark Rosene, Secretary
October 6, 2022, Planning Commission Item 1 Comments
These comments on a Newport Beach Planning Commission agenda item are submitted by:
Jim Mosher ( jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229).
Item No. 1. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 8, 2022
Since special meetings are normally called to deal with special business, it is unusual to see a
routine item like approval of minutes on the agenda, even though this “special meeting” is being
held at the Commission’s normal, regularly-scheduled date and time.
As to this item, the passages in italics are from the draft minutes, with corrections suggested in
strikeout underline format.
Page 3 and following: The last name of the Tennis Club applicant is rendered in multiple places
as “O’Hill”. The gentleman’s name is actually “O Hill” with no apostrophe.
Page 4, paragraph 7: “Denys Oberman commended staff for bringing up fluid items associated
with the use, particularly, impacts of pickleball noise, events, and capacity within the City and
requested the Planning Commission remand the plan to obtain a committal characterization
of what is being proposed and assure compatibility with the surrounding area.” [The video
confirms this is what was said, but the meaning was more likely “a firmer characterization of”; or
“characterization” may have been offered, after a pause, as a verbal replacement for “committal”
so it should be rendered as one word or the other, but not both.]
Page 7, paragraph 2: “In response to Commissioner Weigand’s question, City Traffic Engineer
Brine indicated that the Safety Element Update will include evacuation zones and maps and be
completed at the same time as the Land Use Element and staff can begin working with the fire
marshal Fire Marshal regarding evacuation plans and maps. Commissioner Weigand
suggested working with landowners on potential evacuation routes and City Traffic Engineer
Brine stated the plan can potentially include hydrogen as well, at which point, Commissioner
Weigand thought hydrogen should be added to reduce fossil fuel reliance.”
Page 8, paragraph 5 from end: “Erika Cane Erica Keane thanked Commissioner Weigand for
his support, expressed her concern for social rehabilitation facilities in her neighborhood with 42
children, noted four facilities of its kind to date, and asked that all that is possible be done to
protect the residents and those seeking treatment.”
Planning Commission Special Meeting - October 6, 2022 Item No. 1a - Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of September 8, 2022