[Call To Order]
          [00:00:12]
          NOW LIKE. I WOULD NOW LIKE TO START. ORDER OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF COACHELLA. PLANNING COMMISSION OF MAY 6TH, 2026. THE TIME IS 604. COMMISSIONER, MAY YOU WANT TO LEAD US TO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE? READY? BEGIN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ORDORICA. OKAY. MAY WE HAVE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? CHAIRPERSON LAURA HERE, VICE CHAIRPERSON TORRES HERE. COMMISSIONER FONSECA HERE. COMMISSIONER DORKA PRESENT AND COMMISSIONER MURILLO ABSENT. OKAY, SO NOW WE MOVE TO THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. AT THIS TIME, 
          [Approval of Agenda]
COMMISSIONERS MAY ANNOUNCE ANY ITEMS BEING PULLED FROM THE AGENDA, CONTINUE TO ANOTHER DATE OR REQUEST A MOVING OF AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA. I MOTION TO APPROVE TODAY'S AGENDA. SECOND. 
          OOPS. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER DORICA. YES. COMMISSIONER FONSECA. YES. VICE CHAIRPERSON. 
          TORRES. YES. AND CHAIRPERSON. LAURA. YES. MOTION PASSES. THE NEXT ITEM IS APPROVAL OF THE 
          [Approval Of The Minutes]
MINUTES FOR THE FOR THE MARCH 18TH, 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE CORRECTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES? NO. OKAY. MAY I PLEASE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I SECOND. CHAIR. COMMISSIONER. YES. COMMISSIONER. FONSECA. YES. 
          VICE CHAIRPERSON. TORRES. YES. AND. CHAIRPERSON. LAURA. YES. MOTION PASSES. ALL RIGHT. THE 
          [Written Communications]
NEXT ITEM IS WRITTEN. COMMUNICATIONS. DO WE HAVE ANY WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS AT THIS TIME? WE DID RECEIVE COMMENT LETTERS FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR. AND THOSE HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT THE BACK OF COUNCIL CHAMBERS. OKAY. OKAY. SO NOW WE'RE MOVING INTO PUBLIC COMMENTS. I. SO MEMBERS OF THE 
          [Public Comments (Non-Agenda Items)]
PUBLIC MAY ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON ANY MATTERS WITHIN ITS SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION THAT IS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER. THIS MEETING WILL FOCUS ON THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, AND COMMISSIONERS WILL DIRECT THEIR ATTENTION TO THOSE ITEMS. IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THE COMMISSIONER COMMISSION IS PROHIBITED BY LAW FROM DISCUSSING OR TAKING ACTION ON ITEMS THAT ARE NOT LISTED ON TODAY'S AGENDA. SO I OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. AT 607, WE DID RECEIVE TWO REQUESTS TO SPEAK. THE FIRST SPEAKER IS JAMES RODRIGUEZ. GOOD EVENING COMMISSION. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE BEEN ABLE TO SPEAK WITH YOU IN PERSON. I THINK I'VE DONE A COUPLE OF ZOOM COMMENTS BEFORE. ALSO, CONGRATULATIONS TO WHOMEVER IS NEW. I KNOW THAT WE HAD AN OPEN SEAT FOR A LITTLE BIT THERE. NOT SURE IF THAT'S WHO IS MISSING OR NOT, BUT EITHER WAY, CONGRATULATIONS TO THAT PERSON. AND I'M HERE TO ADDRESS THE SYSTEMIC FINANCIAL DEFAULTS THAT UNDERMINE THE LEGALITY OF THIS COMMISSION'S DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS. THE THE FIRST PROBLEM IS THE FINANCIAL DEFAULT. AND ACCORDING TO THE CALIFORNIA STATE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, THE CITY OF COACHELLA IS CURRENTLY LISTED AS A DELINQUENT IN ITS FINANCIAL REPORTING UNDER THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 66006, THE CITY IS MANDATED TO PRODUCE A TRANSPARENT ANNUAL ACCOUNTING OF THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. WITHOUT THIS VERIFIED LEDGER, THE PUBLIC CANNOT CONFIRM IF INFRASTRUCTURE FEES ARE BEING CALCULATED, COLLECTED OR SPENT APPROPRIATELY. YOU ARE EFFECTIVELY MAKING LAND USE DECISIONS ON A SHADOW BUDGET. 
          SECOND, WE ARE SEEING A PUSH FOR A MUNICIPAL ELECTRICAL UTILITY. THIS IS PRIMARILY TO SUPPORT A MASSIVE INDUSTRIAL EXPANSION. SPECIFICALLY TO BEGIN WITH, A 240 ACRE 
          [00:05:06]
TECHNOLOGY CAMPUS, WHICH REQUIRES A FIVE NINES RELIABILITY STANDARD. THAT MEANS 99.999% UPTIME. THIS LEVEL OF UPTIME IS MECHANICALLY UNNECESSARY FOR RESIDENTIAL NEEDS, BUT REQUIRES MASSIVE, MASSIVE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS FROM THESE RESIDENTS. BY OVERBUILDING. FOR HIGH INTENSITY INDUSTRIAL NODES, YOU ARE CREATING A SYSTEM WHERE RESIDENTIAL RATEPAYERS WILL EVENTUALLY SUBSIDIZE THE HIGH VOLTAGE INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRED BY PRIVATE DEVELOPERS. I AM REQUESTING A MORATORIUM ON ALL DISCRETIONARY LAND USE APPROVALS UNTIL A CPA LED AUDIT OF THE DIF LEDGER IS RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC, I WILL HAVE OTHER COMMENTS ON THE OTHER AGENDA ITEMS. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? THERE IS ANOTHER REQUEST TO SPEAK FROM MISS JOANNE LLAMAS. HELLO, MY NAME IS JOANNE LLAMAS. 
          THIS IS ALSO MY FIRST TIME GETTING TO ADDRESS YOU. SO NICE TO MEET ALL OF YOU. I'M A COACHELLA VALLEY RESIDENT AND I'M HERE AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN ABOUT THE PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY CAMPUS AND THE POSSIBLE BUILDING OF 12 DATA CENTERS OUT HERE IN OUR BEAUTIFUL COACHELLA VALLEY. I'M SURE YOU'VE ALL BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE COMMUNITY'S UPSET AND DISAPPOINTMENT AT THE COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ATTEMPTING TO DO SOMETHING SO SHADY AND DISTASTEFUL THAT WILL ULTIMATELY HARM THE ENTIRE VALLEY. NOT JUST COACHELLA, NOT EVEN JUST THE COACHELLA VALLEY, BUT ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE SOUTHERN STATE, THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE STATE. NORMALLY I COME WITH A SPEECH PREPARED AND I'M LIKE, REALLY GOING AT IT, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO TALK TO YOU AS NORMAL PEOPLE HERE AND TRY TO GET YOU TO SEE SOME HUMANITY AND SOME COMMON SENSE ON WHY WE WOULD PUT GIANT WATER WASTING DATA CENTERS IN THE MIDDLE OF A DESERT. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING THESE CONVERSATIONS AND HOPEFULLY DISINVEST DIVEST FROM STRONGHOLD POWER. AND NOT JUST A MORATORIUM, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COMPLETE BAN ON DATA CENTERS IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY AND SPECIFICALLY COACHELLA. 
          THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? NOT FOR NON AGENDA ITEMS. THE REMAINDER OF THE COMMENTS ARE FOR AGENDIZED ITEMS. OKAY PERFECT. SO MOVING ON. NEXT WE HAVE REPORTS AND REQUEST CHAIRPERSON PLEASE CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT. SO SORRY. SO I CLOSED THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AT 611. THERE ARE NO REPORTS AND REQUESTS. OKAY, SO NOW MOVING 
          [Public Hearing Calendar (Quasi-Judicial)]
ON TO PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. SO WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH ITEM NUMBER TWO. THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER PC202614 REGARDING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN 85 FOOT WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY DESIGNED AS A MONOPOLE. 
          LOCATED AT 496 40 OATES LANE. MAY WE HAVE THE STAFF REPORT, PLEASE? HELLO. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. ANA FERNANDEZ DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MANAGEMENT ANALYST I'LL BE PRESENTING ON CUP NUMBER 389 FOR THE AP APEC TOWERS PROJECT. 
          SO THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PROJECT IS HPC TOWERS. IT IS LOCATED AT 496 40 OATES LANE. 
          THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION IS INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WITH THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF MANUFACTURING SERVICE. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING A WAIVER FOR THE PROPOSED HEIGHT OF 85FT FOR THE WIRELESS FACILITY. A BIT OF BACKGROUND. HPC TOWERS IS CURRENTLY CO-LOCATED ON AN EXISTING WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY THAT IS LOCATED ON THE ADJACENT NORTHERN PARCEL. THE EXISTING FACILITY MUST BE DECOMMISSIONED AND REMOVED, REQUIRING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW MODEL FARM IN CLOSE PROXIMITY AND AT SIMILAR HEIGHT. TO MAINTAIN EXISTING COVERAGE LEVELS, THE APPLICANT CONDUCTED A CO-LOCATION ANALYSIS, AND NO EXISTING WIRELESS TOWERS OR STRUCTURES CAN ACCOMMODATE THE EQUIPMENT AT THE REQUIRED HEIGHT, CONFIGURATION OR LOCATION. THE PROPOSED PROJECT SITE IS WITHIN AN EXISTING TRUCK STORAGE YARD THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED UNDER AR NUMBER 1604 IN 2016. HERE ARE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE SITE. SO THE PROPOSED SITE DOES HAVE EXISTING CODE VIOLATIONS RELATED TO UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES AND COMPLETED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. CONDITION NUMBER 38 OF THE CUP WILL REQUIRE THE APPLICANT AND OR THE PROPERTY OWNER TO ADDRESS ANY EXISTING CODE VIOLATIONS ON THE PROPERTY AND REMOVE OR LEGALIZE ALL UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES AND COMPLETE THE REQUIRED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. HERE IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN FOR THE PROJECT, SO THE PROJECT WILL BE LOCATED WITHIN 2500FT■!S LEASED AREA WITHIN THE EXISTING TRUCK 
          [00:10:04]
STORAGE YARD. THEY ARE PROPOSING A SIX FOOT TALL SPLIT BLOCK BLOCK WALL TO BE INSTALLED TO SCREEN THE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT AND FOR LANDSCAPING. THEY ARE PROPOSING TO DATE PALM TREES, WHICH WOULD BE LOCATED HERE, AS WELL AS CRUSHED ROCK GROUNDCOVER AND SHRUBS ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE BLOCK WALL. HERE ARE THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS FOR THE PROJECT. SO THE THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A PALM TREE STYLE MONO PALM, WHICH IS HENCE THE NAME MONO PALM FOR THE PROJECT, WHICH WILL PROVIDE SOME STEALTHING FOR THE CELL TOWER. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY WILL HAVE THE SIX FOOT BLOCK WALL TO SCREEN THE EXISTING OR THE PROPOSED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, AND THE COLOR WILL MATCH THAT OF A PALM TREE AS WELL. JUST TO SUMMARIZE THE FINDINGS FOR THIS PROJECT, FOR FINDING ONE, THE PROJECT WILL INCREASE EXISTING COMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND EXPAND SERVICE WIRELESS SERVICE FOR CUSTOMERS IN THE VICINITY. IT DOES ALIGN WITH THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE GENERAL PLAN RELATED TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES GENERAL PLAN ELEMENT FOR FINDING NUMBER TWO, THE PALM WILL BE DESIGNED TO HAVE A STEALTHING SOLUTION THAT WILL INTEGRATE THE FACILITY INTO THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT. FOR FINDING NUMBER THREE, THE PROJECT IS NOT PROPOSING ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION OR MODIFICATION TO WHAT IS ALREADY EXISTING ON SITE, SO NO ADDITIONAL POINTS OF ACCESS WILL BE ADDED TO THE PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE FOURTH FINDING. 
          FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THE FACILITY AGAIN WILL PROVIDE ESSENTIAL PUBLIC UTILITY FUNCTION. THE APPLICANT DID CONDUCT A RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS COMPLIANCE REPORT, AND IT DOES SHOW THAT THE PROJECT WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION'S RADIO FREQUENCY EXPOSURE STANDARDS AND FOR FINDING NUMBER FIVE. THE PROPOSED USE WILL INCLUDE ONLY LIMITED LIMITED VEHICULAR ACCESS ASSOCIATED WITH MAINTENANCE AND SERVICING OF THE WIRELESS FACILITY FOR THE WAIVER REQUEST, WHICH IS FOR THE HEIGHT OF THE PROJECT. ACCORDING TO COACHELLA MUNICIPAL CODE, THE APPLICANT CAN SUBMIT A WAIVER REQUEST. THE APPLICANT DID SUBMIT THIS REQUEST BACK IN OCTOBER OF 2025. 
          THE APPLICANT DID MENTION THAT THE HEIGHT LIMITATION WOULD BE A BURDEN, DEMONSTRATING THAT THE WAIVER IS NECESSARY PURSUANT TO SECTION 17.86.090. THE APPLICANT DOES CLAIM THAT THE PROPOSED 85 FOOT WIRELESS FACILITY IS NECESSARY TO ENSURE ADEQUATE WIRELESS COVERAGE AND CAPACITY WITHIN THE SERVICE AREA. THE APPLICANT DID SUBMIT THE RADIO FREQUENCY PROPAGATION MAP, WHICH IS PART OF THE ATTACHMENT FOUR OF YOUR STAFF REPORT THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE 85FT SIGNIFICANTLY PROVIDES WIDER COVERAGE AND RELIABILITY COMPARED TO THE FACILITY AT 55FT. SO HERE ARE SOME IMAGES COMPARING THE COVERAGE COMPARED FROM 45FT TO 80FT. SO TO THE LEFT YOU'LL SEE THAT AT 45FT, THE COVERAGE IS SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER THAN AT THE PROPOSED 80FT. SO THE 80FT DOES PROVIDE A WIDER COVERAGE TO THE NORTH, EAST AND WEST OF THE CITY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM SEQUA PURSUANT TO SECTION 15 303 FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION OF SMALL STRUCTURES, AND SECTION 15332 AS AN INFILL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FOR RECOMMENDATION STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-14, WHICH APPROVES THE UP NUMBER 399, DETERMINING THAT THE PROJECT IS COMPLIANT WITH SECTION 15, 332 AND SECTION 315 303 OF SEQUA GUIDELINES. HERE ARE SOME ALTERNATIVES THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN MAKE A MOTION ON AS WELL. AND THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. BEFORE OPENING TO THE PUBLIC ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION FOR FOR THEIR PROJECT. AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS ON ZOOM. YES. HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. YES. HI. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TODAY. I HAVE NOTHING MORE TO ADD TO THAT GREAT PRESENTATION, BUT I AM HERE TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. ALL RIGHT. PERFECT. THANK YOU. SO NOW I WILL NOW OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AT 618. WE DID RECEIVE ONE REQUEST TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM, SO MR. JAMES RODRIGUEZ COULD PROVIDE HIS COMMENT. GOOD EVENING AGAIN. 
          COMMISSION. SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS BASED ON THAT. I DON'T ACTUALLY OPPOSE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS, BUT AT THIS TIME, I FEEL LIKE BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER FOR THE REQUIREMENT AND THAT IS ALREADY SET FORTH IN OUR MUNICIPAL CODE IN SECTION 17.86.090. THIS COMMISSION MUST ASK IF THE STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT AND DESIGN WERE CODIFIED TO 
          [00:15:03]
PROTECT THE COMMUNITY'S ESTHETIC AND SAFETY, THEN WHY IS A WAIVER BEING GRANTED TO A PRIVATE ENTITY WITHOUT A DOCUMENTED HARDSHIP THAT ISN'T PURELY FINANCIAL? ESSENTIALLY, THE LOSS OF COVERAGE, LESS CUSTOMERS OR POTENTIAL SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS, MEANING IT DOESN'T WORK AT THE RULES THAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW. IF THAT IS SO, THERE IS A PROCESS TO CHANGE THAT MUNICIPAL CODE. YOU SHOULD CHANGE THAT CODE BEFORE YOU START GRANTING ALL OF THESE WAIVERS. IF THAT IS WHAT YOU INTEND TO DO, TO WAIVE EVERYTHING FROM HERE FORWARD BECAUSE OF NECESSITY, THEN CHANGE THE RULES, BRING THAT TO THE TABLE. SECONDLY, WE SHOULD NOT BE IN THAT BUSINESS OF WAIVING THESE TYPES OF LAWS TO SUIT A CORPORATE CONVENIENCE, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE FROM THE COVERAGE MAP, IT'S REALLY ONLY MEANT TO PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR THAT EAST SIDE THAT ISN'T EVEN BUILT YET. IT'S ONLY MEANT TO BE FOR THAT DATA CENTER AND THAT SURROUNDING FUTURE ANNEXATION PROJECT, WHICH WILL PROVIDE ONLY MORE SERVICEABILITY TO THOSE RESIDENTS OR THOSE INDUSTRY OWNERS OR THOSE LANDOWNERS ON THAT SIDE. SO EVEN IF THEY DO GET THE CONDITION TO GO 85FT, IT STILL DOESN'T PROVIDE VERY MUCH MORE COVERAGE TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTS. IT'S STILL A FUTURE PLAN. AND WE GOT TO STOP DOING THESE FUTURE PLANS. WE WE GOT TO WORK WITH WHAT WE HAVE AND WHO WE HAVE HERE RIGHT NOW, AND STOP TRYING TO BRING IN INDUSTRY CHANGES TO COLLECTIVELY, POSSIBLY BRING IN MORE COVERAGE. THAT'S NOT OUR ECONOMIC FUTURE. THAT'S NOT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? THERE ARE NONE THAT WE RECEIVED. SPEAKER FORM REQUEST FORMS FOR. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY ON ZOOM? NO HANDS RAISED ONLINE. ALL RIGHT. SO I CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AT 6:21 P.M. ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO THIS PROJECT? COMMISSIONER ORDORICA. NOT AT THIS TIME, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER FONSECA NO, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER TORRES, CAN I JUST SEE THE MAP ONE MORE TIME OF THE COVERAGE AREA? SO IT WOULD BE THE GREEN AS WELL AS THE YELLOW. SO THE GREEN WOULD PROVIDE GOOD COVERAGE AND THE YELLOW WOULD BE FAIR COVERAGE. GOT IT. OH, I DID SEE THIS. ALL RIGHT. OKAY, SO I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO I DO HAVE QUESTIONS. SO IN REGARDS TO THAT WAIVER, I KNOW IT'S 17.86.090. I DIDN'T SEE ON THE STAFF REPORT WHAT EXACTLY WAS WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS FOR THE WAIVERS AND. WHAT ARE WHAT DO THEY MEET. BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE THOSE. SO THAT WOULD BE THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO PROVE THAT THERE WOULD BE A HARDSHIP WITHOUT THE WAIVER REQUEST. AND THE APPLICANT IS MENTIONING THAT IT WOULD INTERRUPT SERVICE IF THE WAIVER IS NOT GRANTED, WHICH IS THEIR REASONING AS TO WHY THEY'RE APPLYING FOR THE WAIVER. OKAY. 
          AND ON THIS SECTION, DOES IT SAY THAT? COVERAGE IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THEY CAN ASK FOR A WAIVER. SO, CHAIR, MAY I JUMP IN REALLY QUICK. SO PURSUANT TO SECTION 17.86090 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AND IN ORDER TO FOR A REQUEST FOR A WAIVER, THE APPLICANT HAS THE BURDEN OF PROVING THAT THE REGULATIONS IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE HAVE THE EFFECT OF ESSENTIALLY PROHIBITING WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS UNDER THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS ACT. 
          RIGHT. SO THEY DID SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION, WHICH I BELIEVE STAFF HAS, THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE RANGE AND THIS IS ALL THAT. AND THEY'RE CLAIMING THAT THIS HAS THE EFFECT. THE CODE OF THE CITY HAS THE EFFECT OF PROHIBITING WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS UNDER THE ACT AS IT IS TODAY. AND SO THAT'S WHY THIS WAIVER IS BEING I GUESS IT'S BEFORE THE COMMISSION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THAT WAS YOUR QUESTION. HOPEFULLY I'M 
          [00:20:02]
ADDRESSING IT. SO HOW WHAT DOES HOW DOES THIS SECTION READ. THAT'S MY QUESTION. SO THE SECTION IS PRETTY BROAD AND IT IT'S MEANT TO, LIKE I SAID, PUT THE BURDEN ON THE APPLICANT. SO THE SECTION SAYS A WAIVER REQUEST WHERE THE APPLICANT DEMONSTRATES THAT SUCH RESTRICTION OR REQUIREMENT EITHER PROHIBITS OR HAS THE EFFECT OF PROHIBITING THE PROVISION OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SERVICES. PURSUANT TO THE UNITED STATES TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996, OR IT UNREASONABLY DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE APPLICANT WHEN COMPARED TO OTHER PROVIDERS WITHIN THE CITY WHO ARE PROVIDING FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SERVICES. PURSUANT TO THE UNITED STATES TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996. AND THAT'S WHERE I WOULD DEFER TO CITY STAFF. IF THERE ARE OTHER TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES THAT ARE ALREADY AT THIS HEIGHT OR NOT, AND IF THEY'VE BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST, THEN WE WOULD BE DISCRIMINATING AGAINST THIS APPLICANT. RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER ONES THAT 55 OR ABOVE? YEAH WE DO. I'M SORRY, AM I STILL ON THERE? I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. SORRY. THERE IS WE ARE COMING OFF OF THE EXISTING 150 FOOT TOWER FOR REASONS THAT ARE OUT OF THE CONTROL OF A VERIZON, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE REQUESTING FOR THE HEIGHT. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING HEIGHT THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY PROVIDING SERVICE AT. AND SO WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR MORE THAN JUST TO REPLICATE THE EXISTING COVERAGE. JUST TO CLARIFY. OKAY, WHERE'S THAT 55 OR ABOVE? YES. AND THOSE WERE INITIALLY APPROVED A FEW YEARS AGO, PROBABLY BEFORE THIS NEW CODE WAS UPDATED FOR WIRELESS FACILITIES. SO IN TERMS OF THE SITE THAT IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE, WHAT IS COMING FIRST, THE INSTALLATION OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY OR THEM BRINGING EVERYTHING UNDER COMPLIANCE, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A FEW YEARS. I KNOW THAT YOU'VE HAD THIS FOR FOUR YEARS NOW. SO WHEN WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO BRING IT TO COMPLIANCE? YEAH. 
          SO BEFORE WE CAN ISSUE ANY BUILDING PERMITS FOR THE WIRELESS FACILITY, WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER SO THAT THEY CAN SUBMIT THEIR PLANS TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT'S REQUIRED AS PART OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW ENTITLEMENT. OKAY, PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. SO THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. SO LET'S MOVE FORWARD TO BEFORE YOU GO, IF I MAY. AND I JUST WANT TO ALSO REITERATE, WHEN IT COMES TO THE CELL TOWER AND GREAT PRESENTATION, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK. A COUPLE YEARS AGO, WE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT VARIOUS OTHER TOWERS IN OUR IN OUR CITY. AND SO SOME OF THOSE TOWERS CAME UP TO PAR. I REMEMBER THERE WAS 1 OR 2 TOWERS THAT AT A CERTAIN POINT A LETTER WAS SENT OUT. AND OBVIOUSLY LIFE HAPPENS. AND WE ALL KNOW IT'S BEEN HAPPENING IN OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY, RIGHT? THOSE CONVERSATIONS WENT TO THE SIDE. SO WHEN APPROPRIATE IN THE NEXT, YOU KNOW, COUPLE OF WEEKS, I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE WHO ARE HERE WITH THEIR NEW TITLES TO KIND OF KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT IN REGARDS TO THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW SOME OF THOSE TOWERS WENT UP TO PAR RIGHT AWAY, BUT THOSE I THINK SOME OF THEM COULDN'T BE IN A LANDSCAPE AGREEMENT OR IN A CODE ENFORCEMENT AGREEMENT, AS WE ALL KNOW. BUT I FEEL THAT THIS PARTICULAR TOWER, I THINK IT WOULD BECOME A BEST PRACTICE MOVING FORWARD. AS WE ALL KNOW, WITH KEEPING UP THINGS UP TO PAR. BUT THEN SOME OF THOSE THAT WERE UP TO PAR AT THAT POINT, YOU KNOW, HAVE NOT BEEN MAINTAINED. RIGHT. AND SO I WANT TO KNOW IF THERE'S A POSSIBILITY TO GET A REFRESHER WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT. GOING BACK TO THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO DO, MOVING FORWARD WITH THE CITY'S THINGS THAT WE DO HAVE CONTROL, WHAT OTHER THINGS ALL OF US ARE GOING TO MAKE DECISIONS, HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, WITH THIS ITEM. SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF IT WAS IF THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF GETTING AN UPDATE, NOT JUST THIS PARTICULAR TOWER, BUT THE OTHER TOWERS, THAT SHOULD BE UP TO PAR AS OF RIGHT NOW. YEAH, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE THAT TOO. I LIKE TO HAVE AN UPDATE ON, ON ALL OF THOSE TOWERS THAT I KNOW NEEDED TO BE BROUGHT TO COMPLIANCE. WITH THAT. AT THIS TIME. YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? YEAH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. AND THEN I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. 
          [00:25:08]
COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE. YES. COMMISSIONER FONSECA. YES. VICE CHAIRPERSON. TORRES. YES. 
          CHAIRPERSON. LAURA. YES. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU, AND I THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER PT202616. REGARDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NUMBER 401 TO ALLOW LIQUOR SALES A, B, C TYPE 40 SALE BEER WITHIN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL SUITE LOCATED AT 915 CESAR CHAVEZ STREET. SO I'LL ALSO BE GIVING A PRESENTATION ON THE PROJECT FOR A TYPE LIQUOR LICENSE. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PROJECT IS SALVADOR ISLAS. THE CITY RECEIVED THE APPLICATION ON FEBRUARY 17TH, 2026. THIS IS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO AUTHORIZE A SALE OF BEER, A TYPE 40 ABC LICENSE. 
          THE SITE IS PROPOSED ON 49915 CESAR CHAVEZ STREET WITHIN THE GENERAL PLAN. DESIGNATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER AND ZONING DESIGNATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE NINE 404 CENSUS TRACT, SO THE PROPOSED LOCATION IS WITHIN A VACANT COMMERCIAL TENANT SPACE WITHIN THE COACHELLA SHOPPING CENTER. THE TENANT SPACE WAS PREVIOUSLY OCCUPIED BY A FURNITURE RETAILER. CALIFORNIA FURNITURE A C P IS REQUIRED FOR ANY ESTABLISHMENT ENGAGING IN THE SALE OF ALCOHOL PURSUANT TO SECTION 17.7, 4.015 OF THE COACHELLA MUNICIPAL CODE AND C P FINDINGS ARE REQUIRED TO BE MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THIS PROJECT. FOR CENSUS TRACT 9404, THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 6242 RESIDENTS, 4611 ARE 21 YEARS, AND OVER WITHIN THAT SAME CENSUS TRACT, THERE ARE EXISTING 18 ON SALE LIQUOR LICENSES WHERE ABC ONLY ALLOWS FOR A MAXIMUM OF SIX. AS YOU CAN SEE, SOME OF THESE ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY'S JURISDICTION, AND NONE OF THESE ARE A TYPE 40 ALCOHOL LICENSE. 
          WITHIN THE SAME CENSUS TRACT. THERE ARE 15 EXISTING LIQUOR LICENSES WHERE ABC ALLOWS FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE. SO THAT'S THE LIST FOR SALE. HERE IS A MAP OF THE CENSUS TRACT. AS YOU CAN SEE, A LOT OF THE ON SALE AND OFF SALE LIQUOR LICENSES ARE CONCENTRATED TOWARDS THE SELF, BUT THE ONLY BUSINESSES THAT ARE WITHIN 700FT THAT HAVE AN ONSITE LIQUOR LICENSE OR ASADERO LOS CORRALES AND TAQUERIA ALLENDE, WHICH ARE WITHIN THE SAME SHOPPING CENTER. 
          THE SUBJECT SITE IS WITHIN 700FT OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY THAT'S WITHIN THE SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONE, AND THE SUBJECT SITE IS NOT WITHIN 700FT OF ANY SCHOOLS. SO FOR ON SALE ESTABLISHMENTS, THEY MAY NOT FALL 700FT FROM SENSITIVE USES THAT INCLUDE SCHOOLS, PARKS, RESIDENTIAL USES FOR ON SALE ESTABLISHMENTS. THEY MAY NOT FALL WITHIN 700FT OF AN EXISTING LIQUOR LICENSE ON SALE, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY FIND THAT THE PUBLIC BENEFIT OUTWEIGHS THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS AND, UPON ADDITIONAL FINDINGS, THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT PROVIDES A SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT TO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD NOT PROVIDED BY ANY OTHER ESTABLISHMENT WITHIN THE RESTRICTED DISTANCE AND NOT GREATER THAN 5% OF THE SALES FLOOR AREA, OR 1000FT■!S, WHICHEVER IS LESS, SHALL BE USED FOR THE DISPLAY OF ALCOHOL BEVERAGES. FOR THIS PROPOSED PROJECT, THE ALCOHOL DISPLAY AND STORAGE IS WITHIN A STORAGE ROOM AND BEHIND A SERVICE COUNTER AND NOT WITHIN THE SALES FLOOR AREA. THE ESTABLISHMENT IS PROPOSING TO UTILIZE 73FT■!S FOR ALCOHOL STORAGE AND DOES NOT EXCEED THE 5% MAXIMUM SALES FLOOR AREA. 
          THE ESTABLISHMENT WILL NOT HAVE ANY ALCOHOL DISPLAYED, AND THE TOTAL TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR DISPLAY, REFRIGERATION AND STORAGE DOES NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM 20% OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA FOR STORAGE SALES. DISPLAY OF ALCOHOL. ALCOHOL SALES IS CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, LAND USE AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION. THE 43 SPORTS BAR DOES MEET THE COACHELLA MUNICIPAL CODE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM SEQUA PURSUANT TO SECTION 15 301 EXISTING FACILITIES, AND THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE HAD NO CONCERNS OR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH AND AND INTENDED TO IMPLEMENT THE VISION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER GENERAL PLAN BY PROVIDING CONVENIENT ACCESS TO NEIGHBORHOOD DINING, ESTABLISHMENT AND COMMUNITY GATHERING OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEARBY RESIDENTS. THE PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THE SPORTS BAR ARE MONDAY TO THURSDAY FROM 10 A.M. TO 9 P.M. AND FRIDAY TO SUNDAY FROM 10 A.M. TO 11 P.M. SO STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER PC2026-16, WHICH APPROVES CUP NUMBER 401, AND DETERMINING THAT THE PROJECT IS COMPLYING WITH CEQA GUIDELINES. 
          SECTION 15 301. HERE ARE SOME OTHER ALTERNATIVES. AND THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION. 
          HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE IN PERSON TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WITH THE APPLICANT LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS AT THIS POINT TO THE 
          [00:30:08]
COMMISSION. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW WE MOVE ON TO PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS. I WILL OPEN AT 634. WE DID RECEIVE ONE REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM ON THIS ITEM. AND MR. JAMES RODRIGUEZ, PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR COMMENT. ALRIGHTY. GOOD EVENING AGAIN. COMMISSION. SO AGAIN, I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS. I AM OPPOSED TO SIDESTEPPING SOME OF THE RULES. AND WHY DO WE HAVE SO MANY THAT ARE NOT WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY TWO, THREE, FOUR TIMES THE AMOUNT THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE AVAILABLE ACCORDING TO OUR LIQUOR LICENSE LAWS, IF WE ARE AVAILABLE TO BE EXEMPT BECAUSE THEY'RE OUT OF THAT AREA AND THEY ARE PURPOSELY BUILDING THEM OUT OF THAT AREA, THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE LOOKING INTO AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, IS TO SEE WHY DO WE GET TO APPROVE THESE AND WHY ARE THEY EXEMPT. ALSO, THE SAME THING IS MAYBE FIVE YEARS AGO OR SO WHEN THEY WERE TRYING TO PUT IN A LIQUOR STORE, IT WAS EITHER THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE CITY COUNCIL DIDN'T APPROVE IT BECAUSE IT WAS RIGHT NEXT TO A COMMUNITY CENTER THAT HAD A PARK. WELL, THAT SAME AREA IS RIGHT WITHIN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND A PARK. SO IF IT APPLIED FOR ONE, WHY DOESN'T IT APPLY FOR THIS NEXT ONE? SO THAT'S THE THING. WE REALLY NEED TO FOCUS ON OUR RULES AND FIGURE OUT THE CONSTRAINTS OF THEM SO THAT WE'RE OPERATING WITHIN THEM OR CHANGING THEM TO THE DESIGN THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO BE CHANGED TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE TO APPROVE THOSE, INSTEAD OF JUST CONDITIONAL WAIVERS, USE PERMITD THOSE CONDITIONS ARE ALWAYS WILL TURN THE OTHER CHEEK LAWS OR RULES THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY BEING BROKEN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE WERE NO ADDITIONAL REQUESTS TO SPEAK. ALL RIGHT. 
          IF ANYONE ON ZOOM WANTS TO RAISE THEIR HAND. NO, NO. HANDS RAISED. ALL RIGHT. SO I CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS AT 636. ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS TO STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? I DO HAVE A QUESTION. SO IT WAS MENTIONED THAT FIVE YEARS AGO, THERE WAS A PROJECT, SIMILAR PROJECT THAT WAS BROUGHT UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR TO THE COUNCIL, AND THAT WE HAVE WE HAVE DENIED SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE PAST. IS IT JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, IS IN THE SAME AREA OR LIKE, COULD I GET MORE BACKGROUND? THERE HAVE BEEN PROJECTS THAT HAVE GONE ON IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE CITY THAT ARE SEEKING THE SAME TYPE OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW FOR LIQUOR LICENSES WITHIN SPECIFIC CENSUS TRACTS THAT ARE EXCEEDING THE ALLOWED LIMITS. 
          AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES A DETERMINATION IF THAT IS ALLOWABLE OR NOT. PREVIOUSLY, STAFF HAS MADE REQUESTS FOR APPROVAL ■ON THE REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THEIR OWN FINDINGS TO NOT APPROVE THESE IF THEY SEE FIT. OKAY, OKAY, OKAY. COMMISSIONER FONSECA, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER ORDORICA. CAN. IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THIS IS EXEMPT FROM SEQUA. CAN YOU GO OVER THE. HOW IT'S EXEMPT FROM SEQUA SO I CAN UNDERSTAND A LITTLE WHAT SECTION IT APPLIES TO. WELL, IT'S NOT PROPOSING ANY EXPANSION OF THE EXTERIOR. IT'S ALREADY AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL TENANT SPACE, WHICH IS WHY IT WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM SEQUA FOR THIS PARTICULAR SECTION. IT'S JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE OBTAINING A LICENSE, AND IT'S NOT RESULTING IN ANY CONSTRUCTION OR ACTIVITY RELATED TO THAT. IT'S JUST FOR PERMITTING COMMISSION. THANK YOU. I'M TERRIBLE WITH LOCATIONS AND EVERYTHING. IS THIS THE THE AREA WHERE THE PAVEMENT JUST GOT REDONE IN THE SHOPPING CENTER? YES. OKAY. WELL THANK GOD BECAUSE THAT IT LOOKS TEN TIMES BETTER. SO I'M GLAD THAT THE SMALL BUSINESS IS OPENING IN A LOCATION WHERE IT'S EASILY ACCESSIBLE TO CUSTOMERS AND THE COMMUNITY. SO IT'S, IT LOOKS A LOT BETTER, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR ME. THANK YOU. OKAY. I SORRY, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. SO OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHY WOULD THE A, B, C LIKE WHY WOULD A, B, C LIKE SAY ONLY MAXIMUM DISLOCATION? AND IN THAT SENSE, LIKE WHY IS THERE A MAXIMUM NUMBER? THEIR ORGANIZATION JUST SETS THRESHOLDS FOR THE DIFFERENT CENSUS TRACTS. OKAY. 
          [00:35:02]
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? I DO HAVE A QUESTION. MY QUESTION IS, WHICH ARE THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES THAT ARE NEAR AND DON'T MEET THE BUFFER? WOULD IT BE THE COMMUNITY TO THE WEST? SO BEHIND THE COMMERCIAL CENTER THERE IS A RIGHT. SHOULD I DO THIS ONE? CAN'T REALLY TELL, BUT THE PROJECT IS PROPOSED ON THAT RED STAR. SO IT WOULD BE THE COMMUNITIES TO THE WEST OF THAT WHICH WOULD BE NEAR THE CESAR CHAVEZ SCHOOL. EVEN THOUGH THE CESAR CHAVEZ SCHOOL IS STILL ABOVE THE 700FT DISTANCE. OKAY, SO I SEE THAT IT'S TWO COMMUNITIES. WHICH ONE IS THE OTHER ONE? SO THE OTHER ONE WOULD BE TO THE SOUTH. IT'S A LITTLE BIT FURTHER OUT. THEY DON'T HAVE COMMUNITY NAMES, BUT IT WOULD BE THE ONES NEAR THE LIKE CARDENAS LOCATION. BUT THOSE WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER OUT THAN THE WESTERN ONES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. SO I'M MOVING THIS TO MOTION. ANYONE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED. COMMISSIONER. JUST A REMINDER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY. I THINK I DID, DIDN'T I? NO. WELL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE IT AGAIN. ALL RIGHT. I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS AT 640. AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TO AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER. YES. COMMISSIONER. FONSECA. YES. 
          VICE CHAIRPERSON. TORRES. YES. CHAIRPERSON. LAURA. YES. MOTION PASSES. OKAY, SO NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER PC202609. REGARDING REQUEST ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED COACHELLA AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK PROJECT, INCLUDING A CHANGE OF ZONE, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR APPROXIMATELY 43 ACRES. LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD AND STATE ROUTE 86. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE READY FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. 
          MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. MY NAME IS NICOLE CRIST. I'M A CONSULTING PLANNER TO THE CITY, AND I HAVE BEEN ASSISTING IN THE PROCESSING OF THIS APPLICATION. THIS IS A COMPLEX PROJECT, SO THIS WILL TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO REVIEW. WE HAVE A PROPOSAL THIS EVENING FOR 43, JUST UNDER 43 ACRES OF LAND THAT WILL THAT WILL RESULT IN 624,500FT■!S OF MIXED USE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SPACE. LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD AND STATE ROUTE 86 THAT IS SHOWN ON THIS MAP. IT IS. IT ABUTS THE INTERCHANGE AT AIRPORT AND. AND WOULD BE EXPECTED TO. TO USE AIRPORT BOULEVARD FOR. FOR TRIPS IN AND OUT THE OTHER WAY. 
          AS I SAID, THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A MIXED USE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROJECT. SO IT INCLUDES 4000FT■!S FOR A CONVENIENCE CENTER, CONVENIENCE STORE AND SIX PUMPS WITH 12 STATIONS, AS WELL AS 4650 SQUARE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL. DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT IN ON 2.2 ACRES AT THE SOUTH END OF THE SITE, WHICH IS SHOWN AS PARCEL SEVEN ON THE PARCEL MAP. IT ALSO INCLUDES 81,000 PLUS OR MINUS SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE BUSINESS PARK SPACE IN 18 BUILDINGS IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THAT AREA. I THINK IT WILL BE ACTUALLY BENEFICIAL TO LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN. IS THIS A POINTER? NO, THIS IS NOT A POINTER. SO FROM 
          [00:40:02]
GOING FROM RIGHT TO LEFT I JUST MENTIONED THE THE COMMERCIAL SPACE THAT'S ON THE FAR RIGHT SIDE OF THE SCREEN. THE OFFICE AND BUSINESS PARK BUILDINGS ARE THE SMALLER BUILDINGS THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY TO THE LEFT AND UP AGAINST THE FREEWAY. THERE ARE 76,800 SQUARE OF AUTO STORAGE SPACE, WHICH IS WHICH ARE THE BUILDINGS THAT SURROUND THE OPEN AREA, THE SQUARE IN THE MIDDLE, IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THAT IS 128,600FT■!S OF SELF STORAGE SPACE IN 17 INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS. AND TO THE LEFT OF THAT IS 233,100FT■!S OF LARGER WAREHOUSE SPACE. THAT CONSTITUTES THE EASTERN END OF THE SITE. THE WHITE SPACE TO THE LEFT OF THAT IS FOR A FUTURE SUBSTATION FOR IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT, WHICH WAS STUDIED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT BUT IS NOT PART OF YOUR DISCUSSION THIS EVENING. THOSE APPROVALS WILL COME SEPARATELY. AND FINALLY, ALONG THE TOP OF THE SCREEN ADJACENT TO STATE HIGHWAY 86 IS APPROXIMATELY 96,000FT■!S OF SMALL WAREHOUSE SPACE IN FIVE BUILDINGS. THE. THE PROJECT IS PROPOSED TO BE PHASED AND THE PHASING. AS SHOWN IN THIS SCREEN AND MORE CLEARLY SHOWN IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. THE COLORS ARE MORE DISTINCTIVE IN THE STAFF REPORT. PHASE ONE INCLUDES ALL OF THE BACKBONE, INFRASTRUCTURE AND ROADWAYS AND PARTS OF ALL OF THE DIFFERENT BUSINESSES AND. AND PHASE TWO AND PHASE THREE ARE SHOWN. AND THOSE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE HAS BEEN ESTIMATED OVER A PERIOD OF A NUMBER OF YEARS AND WILL BE MARKET DRIVEN. AS I MENTIONED, THERE ARE SEVERAL APPLICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT. SO THERE IS A CHANGE OF ZONE WHICH WILL CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THE NORTHERLY 40.8 ACRES FROM HEAVY INDUSTRIAL TO MANUFACTURING SERVICE, AND 2.2 ACRES AT THE SOUTH END OF THE SITE FOR THE COMMERCIAL FACILITIES FROM THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL, THERE IS A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP THAT SUBDIVIDES THE ENTIRE SITE INTO PARCELS FOR DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THE LAND USES THAT I DESCRIBED. THERE ARE THREE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. THE FIRST 324 ALLOWS WOULD ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL CANNABIS USES ON THE 40 ACRES TO THE NORTH. CUP325 ALLOWS FOR THE DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT ON THE 2.2 ACRES TO THE SOUTH AND QP326 IS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SERVICE STATION AND CONVENIENCE STORE. ALSO ON THE SOUTHERLY 2.2 ACRES, THERE IS AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPLICATION AND THE PLAN SET IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKAGE FOR ALL OF THE BUILDING THEMES AND TYPES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO PROVIDE AND ASSURE A HIGH QUALITY, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, AS WELL AS TO ALLOW AN ELECTRONIC BILLBOARD ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY ROUGHLY IN THE MIDDLE. THAT WOULD THAT WOULD FACE THE 86 HIGHWAY 86 RIGHT OF WAY. AND THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHICH DEFINES THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT IN TERMS OF THE LONG TERM DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE. AND FINALLY, WE HAVE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, WHICH HAS BEEN CIRCULATED AS REQUIRED BY LAW AND TO WHICH THE CITY RECEIVED COMMENTS AND MADE RESPONSES. AND YOU HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BOTH THE DRAFT AND THE FINAL EIR. AND IN ADDITION, WE HAVE RECEIVED THREE LETTERS, WELL, TWO AND A HALF LETTERS THAT HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO YOU. I SAY TWO AND A HALF BECAUSE THE LETTER FROM ADAMS BROADWELL IS THE SAME LETTER FIRST SENT BEFORE YOUR LAST MEETING WAS SCHEDULED 
          [00:45:05]
FOR THIS ITEM SENT AGAIN TODAY. IN TERMS OF ANALYSIS FOR THE VARIOUS APPLICATIONS, THE PROJECT CHANGE OF ZONE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT THAT HAS BEEN APPLIED TO THIS PART OF THE CITY IS INTENDED TO BE FOR ECONOMIC AND JOB DEVELOPMENT OVER OVER TIME AND. AND THE CHANGE FROM HEAVY INDUSTRIAL TO SERVICE INDUSTRIAL FITS WITHIN THE GENERAL PLAN. AND THEREFORE NO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT IS REQUIRED. SIMILARLY, THE. THE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION ALLOWS FOR SUPPORTIVE COMMERCIAL USES ASSOCIATED WITH. WITH A BUSINESS PARK ENVIRONMENT AND SO IS CONSIDERED CONSISTENT WITH THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. AS I SAID, THE. THE ZONE CHANGE WILL AFFECT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, BUT ONLY 2.2 ACRES OF THE SITE WILL GO TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND 40.8 WILL GO TO TO THE MANUFACTURING SERVICE. THE MANUFACTURING SERVICE ALSO ALLOWS. WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THE. THE USE OF THE SITE FOR COMMERCIAL CANNABIS USES. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC USES PROPOSED ON THIS PROJECT. IT WOULD SIMPLY ALLOW THE USE IN THE FUTURE AS THE APPLICANT MARKETS AND DEVELOPS THE PROPERTY. THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. AS I SAID, THERE ARE THREE OF THEM. THE FIRST IS FOR COMMERCIAL CANNABIS MEETS THE INTENT OF THE CODE INSOFAR AS IT ISOLATES THE DEVELOPMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL AREAS. THIS SITE IS PHYSICALLY ISOLATED BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION BETWEEN THE HIGHWAY AND THE STORM, STORMWATER CHANNEL AND AIRPORT BOULEVARD, AND THE COMMERCIAL WILL ACT AS EXTRA BUFFER FOR THE FOR CANNABIS, SHOULD IT OCCUR. UP. 325 AND 326. PROVIDE FOR. FOR SUPPORTIVE COMMERCIAL SERVICES FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THE TRAVELING PUBLIC THAT WILL BE COMING DOWN THE HIGHWAY IN AN AREA OF THE CITY WHERE, WHERE COMMERCIAL SERVICES ARE LIMITED. AS I MENTIONED, THERE IS A COMPREHENSIVE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PROGRAM THAT AND ALL OF THE ELEVATIONS ARE PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKET. WE HAVE SOME EXAMPLES HERE. THE COMMERCIAL AND MOST OF THE INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS WILL BE 24 TO 28FT IN HEIGHT. THE LARGE WAREHOUSES ARE PROPOSED TO GO TO 50FT IN HEIGHT. THE SITE IS DIVIDED, AS YOU SAW IN THE SITE. PLAN INTO MULTIPLE BUILDINGS TO PREVENT MONOTONY IN THE ARCHITECTURE, AND THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED ARCHITECTURE THAT FINISHES THE BUILDINGS ON ALL SIDES, WHICH IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT IN THIS CASE GIVEN THE EXPOSURE TO HIGHWAY 86. THIS PROVIDES YOU SOME EXAMPLES. ON THE TOP IS THE THE SMALL WAREHOUSE OR SMALL BUSINESS BUILDINGS, THE MIDDLE AND THE BOTTOM ARE THE LARGE WAREHOUSE ELEVATIONS ON TWO SIDES. AND AS YOU WILL SEE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE HAS BEEN ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL APPLIED THROUGHOUT. THE SITE ALSO PROVIDES FOR. FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT INCLUDES LANDSCAPING AROUND THE ENTIRE PERIMETER AND IN ALL OF THE PARKING AREAS. 
          THOSE WILL BE DEVELOPED. THOSE WILL BE CONSTRUCTED AS THE BACKBONE INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THE AND THE VARIOUS PHASES ARE CONSTRUCTED. THE ELECTRONIC BILLBOARD IS ALLOWED BY CODE. 
          IF IT DOES NOT EXCEED 40FT FROM THE GRADE OF THE ADJACENT ROADWAY. IN THIS CASE, THE SITE IS PROPOSED TO BE ABOUT TWO FEET BELOW GRADE OF THE HIGHWAY 86 RIGHT OF WAY, AND THE SIGN IS PROPOSED TO BE A TOTAL OF 42FT. SO IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF CODE. IT'S ALSO UNDER THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR SIGN FACES, WHICH IS 700FT■!S. AND IN THIS CASE, THEY ARE PROPOSING 672FT■!S PER FACE PER FACE. THE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP IS THE SIMPLEST PART 
          [00:50:03]
OF THIS APPLICATION. IT. IT SUBDIVIDES THE PROPERTY INTO EIGHT PARCELS, WHICH ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE VARIOUS TYPES OF USES THAT ARE PROPOSED HERE. IT ALSO PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR CONDOMINIUM LOTS. IF THE APPLICANT WISHED TO SELL PART PORTIONS OR ALL OF THE PROPERTY, AND IT WILL ALSO REQUIRE AND IS CONDITIONED TO PROVIDE A PROPERTY OWNER'S ASSOCIATION TO ASSURE THAT THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT IS MAINTAINED AND AND DEVELOPED IN THE AND AND EQUIVALENT MANNER THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. PRIMARY ISSUES ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PHASING OF THE PROJECT AND ALLOWING FOR THAT PHASING AND PRESERVING APPROVALS FOR THE FOR TO ALLOW FOR THAT PHASING. IT ALSO ESTABLISHES RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ID SUBSTATION, WHICH WILL PROVIDE POWER FOR THE PROJECT, BUT ALSO WILL PROVIDE SOME REGIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR POWER, BOTH WITH ITS CONSTRUCTION AND IN THE FUTURE. IT. IT PROVIDES AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF WATER BY KV DE. IN THE INTERIM, UNTIL THE CITY'S FACILITIES ARE AVAILABLE TO SERVE. AND IT ALSO PROVIDES FOR EXPEDITED PLAN PLAN REVIEWS TO FACILITATE THE PROJECT AS IT MOVES FORWARD. THE PROJECT, AS I MENTIONED, WAS REVIEWED UNDER SEQUA WITH AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. THE COMMENT PERIOD WAS THE REQUIRED 45 DAYS FROM JULY 1ST TO SEPTEMBER 3RD OF. THAT'S A TYPO 2025. THE. THE EIR FOUND THAT ALL IMPACTS COULD BE MITIGATED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED, WHICH IS REFERRED TO AS VMT. UNDER SEQUA, THE CITY HAS THE ABILITY TO CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT THE IMPACTS OF A PROJECT OUT ARE OUTWEIGHED BY THE BENEFITS, WHICH INCLUDE ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, TECHNOLOGICAL AND OTHER BENEFITS. IN THIS CASE, THIS PROJECT WILL BRING SUBSTANTIAL EMPLOYMENT BOTH DURING CONSTRUCTION AND DURING OPERATION, AS WELL AS BRINGING TAX REVENUE TO THE CITY AND, AND IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN SUPPORT THE PREPARATION OF A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND THE ASSOCIATED FINDINGS TO BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          THE FINDINGS FOR THIS PROJECT ARE EXTENSIVE AND ARE INCLUDED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. THEY'VE BEEN PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE APPLICATIONS. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THIS EVENING IS THAT YOU APPROVE THE RESOLUTION, WHICH WOULD RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ALL OF THE APPLICATIONS AND CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY STAFF REPORT, AND I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU NICOLE. 
          THANK YOU. ARE YOU REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT AS WELL? NO, MA'AM. THAT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE. ALL RIGHT. SO IF THE APPLICANT HAS ANY COMMENTS THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I WOULD. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, CHAIRWOMAN AND COMMISSIONERS. 
          MY NAME IS CHRIS FAHEY. I WORK FOR THE HAGAN COMPANY. THEY ARE THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY AND THE APPLICANT FOR THIS WITH US TONIGHT IS THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, DON KELLY OF THE HAGAN COMPANY, AS WELL AS OUR CONSULTANT TEAM AND OUR LEGAL COUNSEL, SO THAT WE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT, THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS TO IT. IT'S A BIG PROJECT. THE MOVING PARTS WERE REALLY CREATED BECAUSE OF THE TYPES OF USES THAT WE ARE TRYING TO BRING INTO THIS SITE, IN THIS LOCATION, AND OUR GOAL REALLY WAS TO CREATE KIND OF A ONE STOP, IF YOU WILL, INDUSTRIAL PARK WITH ALL THE VARIOUS TYPES OF USES THAT GO WITH THAT, THOSE TYPE OF USES. AS MISS CHRIS EXPLAINED TO YOU, WE'VE SEGMENTED THE PROJECT INTO DIFFERENT TYPES OF BUILDINGS, DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES THAT WILL TARGET FOR THOSE SPACES AND A COUPLE OF KEY. SHE DID A GREAT JOB OF EXPLAINING WHAT THEY ARE. A COUPLE OF THE KEY POINTS REGARDING THOSE USES IS THAT THE OFFICE PARK THAT'S DESCRIBED, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE SERVICE STATION 
          [00:55:04]
AND CONVENIENCE CENTER, AND, AND THE REFERENCE TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP IS SO THAT WE CAN MAKE THE GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SMALL BUSINESSES TO ACTUALLY OWN THEIR OWN BUILDINGS, ACTUALLY OWN THEIR OWN PROPERTY, RATHER THAN JUST LEASING IT FROM A, FROM A MASTER LANDLORD, SIMILAR TO A RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM, THEY WOULD OWN THEIR OWN PREMISES AND BE PART OF A HOMEOWNERS GROUP, IF YOU WILL, FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS. SO IT JUST GIVES A CHANCE FOR SMALL BUSINESSES THAT START DEVELOPING EQUITY IN THEIR BUSINESSES AS THEY'RE STARTING OUT, RATHER THAN HAVING TO JUST, YOU KNOW, PAY RENT TO A LANDLORD ALL THE TIME, SIMILAR TO THE BUSINESSES ON THE ALONG THE HIGHWAY 86. WE CALL THIS A SMALL WAREHOUSE ON YOUR SITE PLAN. AND THE INTENT FOR THOSE IS TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, SMALL BUSINESSES, THE PLUMBING SUPPLY, ELECTRICAL SUPPLY, THE CABINETMAKERS, THE POOL, THE SPA SALES, YOU'VE SEEN THOSE, THOSE, THOSE DEVELOPMENTS ALONG THE FREEWAYS AROUND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. THE KEY WITH, WITH THIS LOCATION IS THAT THESE BUSINESSES, BESIDES HAVING A LOCATION TO GO TO AND TO, TO LEASE AND TO OWN IS THAT THEY HAVE SIGNAGE ALONG THE FREEWAY. AND THAT JUST HELPS THEIR VISIBILITY HELPS THE BUSINESS. AND SO THAT'S THE REASON WE PUT THAT THOSE USES AT THAT SITE. ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT IS THE ISOLATION OF THIS SITE AND WHY WE THINK IT'S A PRIME LOCATION FOR WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THAT IT'S ADJACENT TO THE FREEWAY. SO THE TRAFFIC THAT'S GOING TO BE GENERATED BY THIS, FOR THE MOST PART, IS COMING ON AND OFF THE FREEWAY AND NOT GOING THROUGH THE ARTERIAL ROADS AND THE STREET ROADS AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS. SO FROM AN INDUSTRIAL PARK STANDPOINT AND A TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL DESIGN, THAT WORKS VERY WELL. SECONDLY, IT'S ISOLATED FROM ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OTHER THAN THE TRAILER PARK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD, WE'RE BORDERED BY THE FREEWAY ON ONE SIDE AND THE WHITE WATER CHANNEL ON THE OTHER. SO FROM FROM A BUFFER FOR INDUSTRIAL USES FOR INDUSTRIAL PARENTS, YOU DON'T GET MUCH BETTER THAN THIS. THE SAME THING GOES FOR THE CANNABIS USE AS. AS. MISS CHRIS EXPLAINED, WE DON'T HAVE ANY USERS IN MIND RIGHT NOW. WE REALLY HAVEN'T MARKETED THIS SITE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAVEN'T HAD THE SITE APPROVALS AND THE ZONING APPROVALS TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. SO IT IS DOES FIT WITHIN THE CITY'S CODE, THE GENERAL PLAN. THEY HAVE CANNABIS CULTIVATION THERE. WE JUST WANTED THAT OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO LEASE OR SELL A PORTION OF THE SITE TO, TO SUCH A USER. OH, THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS FROM AN ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT, AGAIN, AS MISS CHRIS MENTIONED, THERE WILL BE A A CARRIES FOR THE PROPERTY AND A OVERALL HOMEOWNERS OR PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION TO CONTROL THE ARCHITECTURE. THIS PROJECT IS IS VERY LARGE AND IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE BUILT OUT FOR 20, 25 YEARS. YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE'RE LUCKY, IT'LL BE A MARKET DEMAND. IF THE DEMAND GETS GETS HIGHER, IT'LL LEASE OUT QUICKER. 
          OUR ANTICIPATION IS, IS THAT IT'S GOING TO BE 20 TO 25 YEARS BEFORE THIS THING IS COMPLETELY BUILT OUT. SO THAT'S WHY WE'VE CREATED THAT PHASING PLAN. THAT'S OUR CRYSTAL BALL RIGHT NOW ABOUT THE THE THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDINGS AND THOSE TYPES OF USES THAT WE'LL BUILD WITHIN THOSE TIME PERIODS. THAT'S IN THE PHASING PLAN, A FIVE YEAR, TEN YEAR, 15 YEARS OUT. AND THEN THE OTHER POINT I WANTED TO MAKE FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT IS WE'VE TRANSITIONED THE HEIGHTS OF THE BUILDINGS FROM THE LOWEST HEIGHT BUILDINGS ON AIRPORT BOULEVARD BACK TO THE TALLEST BUILDINGS AT THE NORTH END OF THE SITE. AND THOSE ARE THE WAREHOUSE STRUCTURES. THE REASON THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR 50FT IS BECAUSE THESE DAYS FOR FOR WAREHOUSE STORAGE, MOST, YOU KNOW, LARGE WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS GO TO THE HIGH PILE SYSTEM WHERE THEY STACK THE PALLETS ALL THE WAY UP TO THE CEILING. AND THE HIGHER THEY CAN GET, THE BETTER THEY ARE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY IT'S 50FT OF IT GETS YOU JUST MORE STACKING, MORE VERTICAL STACKING MORE, MORE VOLUME TO HELP THE BUSINESSES BE MORE EFFICIENT. THE LAST THING ABOUT THE I'LL BRING UP THE CUP WE'RE REQUESTING FOR THE CONVENIENCE STORE AND THE SERVICE STATION. AGAIN, THESE ARE TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT YOU'VE SEEN AROUND TOWN WHERE IT'S KIND OF A COMBINED. GAS STATION WITH A CONVENIENCE STORE ASSOCIATED WITH IT, DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT ADJACENT TO IT, AND IT'S KIND OF A ONE STOP, YOU KNOW, TRAVELER SHOPPING, IF YOU WILL. AND AGAIN, IT MAKES ALL THE SENSE TO HAVE IT RIGHT OFF THE FREEWAY, OFF THE HIGHWAY 86. WE'RE AT THE SOUTHERN END OF TOWN. WE'RE PROBABLY THE 
          [01:00:04]
SOUTHERN END OF THE SERVICE DISTRICT FOR FUEL AND FOR CONVENIENCE STORE. AND THAT'S WHY WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD USE FOR THIS. AND THEN ONE KIND OF A LITTLE ONE LITTLE FUN PROJECT THAT WE'VE INCLUDED IN THIS IS WHAT WE CALLED THE BRICKYARD. AND MISS CHRIS DESCRIBED IT AS VEHICLE STORAGE. AGAIN, IT'S A IT'S KIND OF A WISH LIST. WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO MARKET IT, BUT AT. THE THOUGHT IS THAT THIS IS A. AND WE'VE CREATED THIS CENTRAL PLAZA WITHIN IT IS THAT THIS IS AN OVERFLOW AREA FOR THE HIGH END VEHICLE STORAGE FOR SOME OF THE OWNERS AND THE PARTICIPANTS AND MEMBERS OF THE THERMAL RACEWAY, AS WELL AS THE WEALTHIER, YOU KNOW, HOMEOWNERS TO THE WEST WITHIN THE VALLEY TO HAVE AN AREA WHERE THEY CAN STORE THEIR THEIR CLASSIC CARS, THEIR VEHICLES HAVE A GATHERING PLACE WHERE THEY CAN MEET AND, AND KIND OF ENJOY CAMARADERIE WITH THE, WITH, WITH THE SIMILAR SOULS. WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO FLY, BUT IT'S SOMETHING FUN. WE WANTED TO INTRODUCE INTO THE PROJECT. IT WOULD BE SECURED, IT WOULD HAVE SECURED GATES. SO AND IT WOULD HAVE CLIMATE CONTROLLED BUILDINGS. SO IT JUST IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY. AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T MARKETED IT FULLY, BUT WE'D LIKE TO. THE OTHER THINGS. I THINK THAT WAS ABOUT TOUCH IS MOST OF IT SEPARATION FROM THE COMMUNITY, ISOLATION, THE PROXIMITY TO THE FREEWAY, AIRPORT BOULEVARD, A GREAT TRANSITION STREET TO THE AIRPORT TO HELP WITH BUSINESSES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE AIRPORT. WE'RE HOPING TO WORK WITH THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY TO THE EAST AND TO THE SOUTH OF US, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE LARGEST IN THE COUNTRY, CERTAINLY IN CALIFORNIA, OF TYPES OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY. WE JUST THINK IT'S A NATURAL. AND SO THE ONLY OTHER THING I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST IS THAT WE HAVE THE AVAILABILITY TO GET UP AND RESPOND TO ANY COMMENTS, CLARIFY ANY COMMENTS THAT MIGHT COME UP IN PUBLIC COMMENTS IF YOU AND OR IF YOU NEED ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION FROM US. SO WE'RE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. LIKE I SAY, I GOT THE WHOLE TEAM HERE. SO ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE. AWESOME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AT 706. THE FIRST SPEAKER IS JAMES RODRIGUEZ. GOOD EVENING AGAIN. COMMISSION. 
          NO OFFENSE TO THE DEVELOPERS. I'M SURE IT'S A GREAT TEAM AND I DO APOLOGIZE FOR IF THIS SOUNDS TARGETED. IT ISN'T. IT SEEMS TO ME WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT MAP, THEY SAW THAT ID AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE COACHELLA ELECTRICAL FINANCE AUTHORITY AND THE CITY OF COACHELLA ARE PLANNING SUBSTATIONS FOR THE EASTERN PART OF THE AREA. SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO BUILD, IMPROVE, POSSIBLY RETURN COSTS THAT WERE PUT INTO THAT PROPERTY AND THEN PIECEMEAL IT OUT WITH THE OPTION AS CONDOMINIUMS OR, YOU KNOW, SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS ARE ABLE TO BUY THEIR SLOT. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT THEN YOU HAVE ALL OF THAT LIABILITY AS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, AND THAT MIGHT NOT BE SOMETHING THAT A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER UNDERSTANDS OR IS ABLE TO TAKE ON. SO APART FROM THAT, YOU HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, STATEMENTS MULTIPLE TIMES. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING WITH CANNABIS RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS. WE AREN'T EVEN ADVERTISING. BUT THAT IS THE OPTION. AND THIS ENTIRE PROJECT IS SORT OF A IF YOU BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME. AND AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. WE SHOULD BE PLANNING. FOR THOSE THAT ARE ALREADY HERE. 
          WE SHOULD BE PLANNING TO BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY. WE SHOULD BE PLANNING. IF YOU GUYS WANTED A, YOU KNOW, A GROCERY MARKET DOWN BY SOMEWHERE AND APPROVE IT. BUT IT ALSO HAS TO BE, YOU KNOW, A BEER MARKET AT THE SAME TIME. THEN WHY IS THE BENEFIT GOING TO BE HAVE TO BE OUTWEIGHED BY THE NEGATIVE BENEFITS, WHICH SHOULD ALSO BE TALKED ABOUT BECAUSE THAT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT STATED IT, THE MILES TRAVELED IS UNAVOIDABLE, WHICH MEANS YOU CAN PUT HOWEVER MANY TREES YOU WANT TO. BUT HIGH INDUSTRY VEHICLES GOING THROUGH WITH WHATEVER THOSE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES END UP WITH, THEY NEED TO BE LOADED. THEY NEED TO BE UNLOADED. THAT'S PARTICULATE MATTER THAT IS GOING INTO THE AIR BY THOSE LARGE 18 WHEELERS, BY THE MULTIPLE PEOPLE THAT MIGHT BE BRINGING THEIR CARS TO THAT STORAGE FACILITY, OR THE 
          [01:05:06]
HOW ABOUT THE FACT THAT A INDUSTRIAL CANNABIS FACILITY WILL USE ELECTRICITY AND WATER, JUST LIKE WE HAVE BEEN DEBATING AGAINST THE DATA CENTERS ON TOP OF THAT, I MENTIONED IT EARLIER THAT SUBSTATION, THERE ARE VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS THAT ARE BEING GIVEN TO THEM, WHICH MEANS WHEN THAT SUBSTATION GETS BUILT ON OUR MONEY, WITH OUR BONDS, THEY GET TO BE THE VESTED OWNERS OF THAT, WHICH MEANS THEY DON'T GET THE SAME RATE HIKES AS WE DO. THINGS WILL BE ASKEW, WHICH AGAIN, DOESN'T HELP THE COMMUNITY. WHY ARE YOU GUYS APPROVING THESE THINGS WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THEM? WHY CAN'T YOU PUT IT INTO PLAIN LANGUAGE FOR US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MEANS TO US, TO OUR AIR IN AN ALREADY ASTHMATIC COMMUNITY? THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS TO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. WE HAVE ONE HAND RAISED ONLINE. OH, ONE MORE SPEAKER. I'M SO SORRY. SEVERAL MORE. YEAH, SEVERAL. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS? YES. THE THE NEXT SPEAKER IS LOUIE LOPEZ. I WAS LEFT NO. 
          GOOD EVENING. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF COMMUNITY. MY NAME IS LOUIS LOPEZ. I'M A BUSINESS AGENT FOR THE IRONWORKERS LOCAL. 433 AND I'VE GOT MEMBERS HERE THAT ARE LOCALLY. GOT A LOT OF CONCERNS WITH THIS PROJECT. FIRST, STARTING OFF WITH I DON'T HEAR ANY COMMUNITY BENEFIT AND ANY, ANY COMMUNITY BENEFITS A PROJECT THIS LARGE. THERE'S NO ROAD EXPANSIONS, THERE'S NO EXTRA LIGHTS. ONE THING I DO HEAR IS FOR THE WEALTHIER, A LITTLE SPACE TO STORE HOT WHEELS AND BE ABLE TO CONGREGATE LIKE MINDED, WEALTHY PEOPLE. BUT WHERE'S THE PARK FOR THE KIDS? WHERE'S THE PET PARK? WHERE'S THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THIS? WHERE'S THE REVENUE GETTING KICKED BACK TO THE CITY OF TAX REVENUE? WHERE ARE THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS? WHERE'S THE PROMISE OF A LABOR AGREEMENT THAT THAT PROMISES LOCAL HIRE? I CHALLENGE ANYBODY IN THIS ROOM TO GO SOME OF THESE PROJECTS, SOME OF THESE BIGGER PROJECTS AND WALK IN THE PARKING LOT OF THOSE THAT ARE BUILDING IT. I GUARANTEE YOU MOST OF THOSE LICENSE PLATES ARE GOING TO BE FROM OUT OF STATE. WHY? BECAUSE THEY THEY HIRE LOW WAGE WORKERS FROM OUT OF STATE TO COME IN AND BUILD. 
          WHY SHOULDN'T THERE BE A BENEFIT, A LABOR AGREEMENT THAT STATES THERE WILL BE LOCAL HIRE WORKING THERE, NOT ONLY JUST LOCAL HIRE, BUT A SKILLED AND TRAINED WORKFORCE ACCREDITED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I THINK ANYBODY HERE, IF YOU'RE BUYING A HOME OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, YOU WANT TO BUILD TO THE BEST, TO THE BEST OF ITS TO TO THE BEST DELIVERED TO YOU BY A SKILLED AND TRAINED WORKFORCE. THAT'S WHY MY MEMBERS ARE HERE WITH A COUPLE OF OTHER LABOR GROUPS. WE WANT WE WANT TO SEE THAT COMMITMENT. WE WANT TO SEE THE PROFIT NOT JUST TO THE DEVELOPER, BUT TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITY. THAT'S WHERE THE REAL PROFIT SHOULD BE. MORTGAGE PAYING WAGES AND BENEFITS FOR THE LOCAL PEOPLE ALLOW THEM, THEY SAID 20 TO 25 YEAR PROJECT. 
          WE GET MEN AND WOMEN TO DO THEIR WHOLE CAREER AT THAT ONE PROJECT THAT LIVE HERE. AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY WHEN THEY EARN THOSE WAGES, WHERE DOES IT GO BACK INTO? RIGHT BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY, RIGHT BACK INTO THE SMALL BUSINESSES, RIGHT BACK INTO TAXES AS THEY BUY HOMES AND MORE SCHOOLS BEING BUILT THERE, THERE. I URGE THIS PLANNING COMMISSION TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO STEP BACK AND SEE WHAT ELSE THEY CAN PUT ON THE TABLE, BECAUSE THE LAND OF THIS RICH COMMUNITY OF CITY OF COACHELLA, IT'S GOING TO BE SOLD SHORT. AND THAT'S NOT FAIR TO THE COMMUNITY. I GOT MEN AND WOMEN COMING BACK FROM THE FROM SERVING THEIR COUNTRY LIKE I DID IN THE MARINE CORPS. THEY NEED THOSE JOBS, AND WE HAVE THAT ABILITY TO OFFER THOSE JOBS THROUGH HELMETS TO HARDHATS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS AMY SMITH. HI. GOOD EVENING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS AMY SMITH, AND I'M A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CALIFORNIANS ALLIED FOR A RESPONSIBLE ECONOMY, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS CARE CALIFORNIA. WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO SHOW OUR OPPOSITION OF THIS PROJECT AND TO ASK FOR YOU TO 
          [01:10:02]
VOTE NO. OUR GROUP WORKS TO ASSURE THAT THE THAT EACH PROJECT THAT COMES TO A COMMUNITY WILL BE BOTH AN ASSET AND A POSITIVE CHANGE FOR THE FUTURE. WITH THIS PROJECT, THE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS THAT THE COMMUNITY WILL FACE IN REGARDS TO BOTH AIR QUALITY AND OVERALL HEALTH RISKS HAS NOT BEEN FULLY ANALYZED BY THE CITY, AND YET IT CLAIMS THAT THE IMPACTS WILL BE NOT SIGNIFICANT AND ARE BEING MADE WITH ANY PROJECT, ESPECIALLY THE ONE THIS LARGE. 
          THERE ARE HEALTH RISKS AND THE IMPACTS THAT ON AN ALREADY POLLUTION BURDENED COMMUNITY COULD BE GREAT. IT'S ALREADY COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT SUCH IMPACTS OCCUR, AND YET THEY'RE NOT BEING ACKNOWLEDGED. THE LEAST YOU CAN BE DOING IS TO HAVE FURTHER ANALYSIS TO BE DONE, AND MITIGATION TO BE PUT IN PLACE TO REDUCE EMISSIONS AND LESSEN THE BURDEN TO THE COMMUNITIES AND PEOPLE. PLEASE CONSIDER THE LONG TERM IMPACTS ON THE COMMUNITY WHEN YOU'RE VOTING TODAY. THESE RESIDENTS DESERVE BETTER AND YOU COULD BE THAT VOICE FOR THE BETTER. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE WE STILL DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE WITH PUBLIC COMMENTS OR DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? NO. DO I CLOSE? DO WE HAVE ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS? YES. OKAY. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JOHN SISSY. 
          SICILY. SISSY. SICILY. HI, I'M JOHN SICILY. I REPRESENT THE UNION PLUMBERS, PIPE FITTERS AND REFRIGERATION FOR SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES. I'M ALSO A DELEGATE TO THE BUILDING TRADES COMMISSION AND THE INLAND EMPIRE LABOR COUNCIL. ONE OF THE THINGS I DO AND I'M TASKED WITH IS TO HELP SET UP COMMUNITY BENEFITS AGREEMENTS, RIGHT? SO A DEVELOPER COMES INTO AN AREA LIKE COACHELLA, WE GET WITH THAT DEVELOPER, SAY DEVELOPER, AND WE SAY, HEY, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE BACK A STREET LIGHT, MAKE AN ON AN OFF RAMP, MAYBE WIDEN THE STREET SO YOUR TRUCKS AREN'T THERE. PUT A BACK ROAD TO KEEP AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTS. ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT IDEAS, RIGHT? AND OF COURSE, WE WANT SUSTAINABLE WAGES AND BENEFITS FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS. THAT AGREEMENT HAS A LOCAL HIGHER CAVEAT, WHICH STATES THAT WE HAVE TO START LOCAL HIRING AND THEN WORK OUR WAY OUT FROM THERE. THIS PUTS THAT MONEY BACK IN THE HANDS OF COACHELLA. THEY'RE GOING TO BUY THE GROCERIES RIGHT HERE. SUPPORT YOUR SMALL BUSINESSES. THAT'S WHAT WE DO AS UNIONS AND LABOR GROUPS FOR COMMUNITIES LIKE THIS. SINCE I WAS A LITTLE KID AROUND HERE, THIS HAS BEEN AN IMPOVERISHED AREA AND IT'S TIME WE CAME UP. WE NEED TO QUIT GIVING OUR STUFF AWAY TO SHYSTER DEVELOPERS WHO ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE COMMUNITY. WE'VE APPROACHED THEM. WE'VE TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THIS BENEFIT. THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED. THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN YOU OR THIS COMMUNITY AT ALL. PLEASE DO NOT DON'T LET ANYBODY BUILD HERE WITHOUT A COMMUNITY BENEFITS AGREEMENT MOVING FORWARD. STAND YOUR GROUND. HELP ME TELL THEM NOT HERE UNLESS YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THE COMMUNITY. OKAY? THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS JOANNE LLAMAS. HI, EVERYONE. JOANNE LLAMAS AGAIN. AND I WANT YOU GUYS TO ALL TAKE A LOOK AT ME. I'M THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU SAY DOESN'T EXIST THERE. I LIVE ON AIRPORT BOULEVARD. I TAKE MY 90 YEAR OLD GRANDMOTHER ON THAT STREET. AND YOU GUYS ARE ALL SAYING WE DON'T EXIST OUT THERE. 
          SO IT'S A LITTLE DISRESPECTFUL AND DISTASTEFUL. SO I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR THE COUNCIL OR FOR THE COMMISSION. HOW MANY OF YOU READ ALL OF THE ATTACHMENTS ON THIS ITEM? IT'S 834 PAGES OF HERETOFORE. AND WHERE TWO ENDS AND MALARKEY AND ACRONYMS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. I READ ALL 834 PAGES. I HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO DO IN MY LIFE, OBVIOUSLY, AND I JUST FEEL LIKE THERE'S NO WAY THAT YOU SHOULD LET THIS PASS TO CITY TO CITY COUNCIL. I'D LIKE TO THANK ALL OF THE UNION WORKERS FOR SHOWING UP. I'M A DAUGHTER OF A LOCAL 12 UNION MAN, AND I UNDERSTAND THE BENEFITS THAT THEY HAVE AND THAT THEY PROVIDE FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THEIR CHILDREN. AND I HAD A WHOLE SPEECH, BUT LIKE, EVERYONE WAS JUST DOING SO GOOD. I WANTED TO GO OFF OF THEM. A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. SO I LIVE OFF AIRPORT BOULEVARD, AND I NOTICED TODAY THAT THERE'S A FENCE UP AROUND THIS LOT ALREADY, AND IT'S ALREADY BEING GRADED DOWN. SO ACCORDING TO THE EIR THAT IS IN THE ATTACHMENTS THAT ANY OF THAT GRADING DOWN ISN'T SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN UNLESS THERE'S BEEN PRE INSPECTIONS FOR SOME OF THE WILDLIFE THAT ARE OUT THERE, THE GROUND OWLS, THE BURROWING SQUIRRELS, SOME BATS AND SOME OTHER ANIMALS HAVE. WAS ANY OF THAT DONE OR ARE WE ACTING IN BAD FAITH ALREADY? ARE THINGS ALREADY HAPPENING WITHOUT OVERSIGHT OR CONCERN FOR OUR ENVIRONMENT? WE'VE GONE OFF THE 
          [01:15:11]
RAILS FROM WHAT I WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO SAY. IN CONCLUSION, THIS PROJECT IS SKIRTING RULES AND REGULATIONS ON TECHNICALITIES TO PUSH THROUGH AN EIR THAT DOESN'T MEET MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND FAILS TO KEEP RESIDENTS AND NATIVE WILDLIFE SAFE. I BELIEVE THIS PROJECT IS ANOTHER ATTEMPT BY AN OUT OF TOWN CORPORATION TO PROFIT OFF OUR VALLEY. I'M URGING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY RESOLUTION 262026-09. THIS PROJECT IS JUST ANOTHER MONEY GRAB BY AN OUT OF TOWN ENTITY THAT WILL POISON OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS AIDEN MARSHALL. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ADAM MARSHALL. I'M ALSO SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF CARE. CALIFORNIA CARE CALIFORNIA IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION WHICH ADVOCATES FOR BOTH WORKFORCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS. MANY CARE CALIFORNIA MEMBERS, AS YOU'VE HEARD, LIVE AND WORK IN THE CITY OF COACHELLA. WE SUBMITTED COMMENTS ON THIS PROJECT BACK IN SEPTEMBER 2025, AS WELL AS MORE RECENTLY ON THE FINAL EIR IN APRIL, IDENTIFYING SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACTS THAT VIOLATE SEQUA. THESE ISSUES HAVE STILL NOT BEEN RESOLVED IN THE FINAL EIR OR THE STAFF REPORTS FOR THE APRIL 1ST HEARING OR THIS HEARING, WE ARE REQUESTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT. REGARDLESS ON YOUR VIEWS, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY WHERE THIS PROJECT SHOULD END UP BECAUSE THE IMPACTS HAVE NOT BEEN RESOLVED IN A RECIRCULATED EIR. 
          SO ONE MAJOR ISSUE I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS IS THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD LOCATE MAJOR INDUSTRIAL USES RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. THIS IS 50 TO 70FT AWAY, AND THIS HAS BEEN COMPLETELY GLOSSED OVER IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE EIR. THE PROJECT'S EMISSIONS WOULD INCREASE CANCER RISKS IN AN ALREADY POLLUTION BURDENED COMMUNITY. AS YOU'VE HEARD, THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD CALLS FOR A 1000 FOOT BUFFER BETWEEN DISTRIBUTION CENTERS, GENERATING MORE THAN 100 TRUCKS PER DAY. THIS PROJECT WOULD GENERATE TEN TIMES THAT 1342 DAILY. TO BE SPECIFIC, THIS MEANS THAT EMISSIONS FROM THESE TRUCKS OF DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER WOULD EXPOSE RESIDENTS TO SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF POLLUTANTS. THE EIR MUST BE REVISED TO RECOGNIZE THIS IMPACT AND ADOPT MITIGATION, AND THERE IS MITIGATION THAT IS FEASIBLE. A RELATED ISSUE IS THAT THE PROJECT'S INCOMPATIBILITY WITH THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES CONFLICTS WITH SEVERAL FINDINGS THE COMMISSION MUST MAKE IN ORDER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT'S ENTITLEMENTS. TO IMPROVE THE ENTITLEMENTS, THE CITY MUST FIND THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH GENERAL PLAN POLICY. 11.3 IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR, THIS REQUIRES A 500 FOOT BUFFER BETWEEN LAND USES THAT ADVERSELY AFFECT EXISTING SENSITIVE RECEPTORS, JUST LIKE THE FOLKS LIVING ACROSS AIRPORT BOULEVARD, THE STAFF REPORT IS CLAIMING THAT THE PROJECT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THIS BECAUSE, QUOTE, THE PROJECT ISOLATE LOCATION IS ISOLATED FROM RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT THIS IS PLAINLY INCORRECT. HOMES ARE LOCATED 50 TO 70FT AWAY FROM A PROPOSED FUEL CENTER. FOR THESE REASONS, AND FRANKLY, MANY OTHERS RAISED IN OUR WRITTEN COMMENTS, THE COMMISSION CANNOT MAKE THE NECESSARY APPROVAL FINDINGS. WE REQUEST THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONTINUE THIS HEARING AND REQUIRE A LEGALLY COMPLIANT EIR TO BE PREPARED. I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          THANK YOU. THAT WAS THE REMAINDER OF PUBLIC COMMENT LETTERS WE RECEIVED IN PERSON. 
          IS THERE ANYONE ON ZOOM? YES, WE HAVE ONE. HENRY'S. HALEY. GO AHEAD. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS HALEY UNO. I AM A LAW CLERK FROM LOZEAU DRURY LLP HERE ON BEHALF OF SUPPORTERS ALLIANCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY OR SAFER, SAFER. RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU DENY APPROVAL OF THE COACHELLA AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK PROJECT. BECAUSE THE PROJECT EIR HAS FAILED TO PROPERLY ADDRESS AND MITIGATE THE PROJECT'S SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ON BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, THE CITY MUST INSTEAD REVISE AND RECIRCULATE THE AIR. THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, OR SEQUA, REQUIRES AN EIR TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT DETAIL FOR DECISION MAKERS AND THE PUBLIC TO MEANINGFULLY UNDERSTAND A PROJECT'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS. IF THIS ANALYSIS IS INCOMPLETE, THEN THE EIR FAILS. AS AN INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENT. HERE, THE EIR HAS FAILED TO 
          [01:20:02]
ACCURATELY DESCRIBE THE PROJECT SITE'S ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING. EXPERT WILDLIFE ECOLOGIST DOCTOR SEAN SMALLWOOD FOUND THAT THE PROJECT SITE IS VALUABLE HABITAT FOR A DIVERSITY OF WILDLIFE, INCLUDING AT LEAST SIX SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES. COMBINED WITH THE AYERS OWN STUDIES, AT LEAST EIGHT SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES USE THE SITE AS HABITAT. DOCTOR SMALLWOOD CONCLUDED THAT THE PROJECT SITE SUPPORTS A FAR RICHER WILDLIFE COMMUNITY THAN DISCLOSED IN THE IR. HOWEVER, THIS BASELINE WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE EIR AND THAT UNDERMINES ITS ENTIRE ANALYSIS. SECOND, THE EIR DID NOT ADEQUATELY ANALYZE THE PROJECT'S SEVERE IMPACTS ON WILDLIFE. FOR EXAMPLE, THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL HABITAT LOSS. DOCTOR SMALLWOOD FOUND THAT THE PROJECT WOULD CAUSE THE LOSS OF 170 BIRD NEST SITES PER YEAR, LEADING TO THE LOSS OF 836 BIRDS ANNUALLY. THE IR ALSO FAILED TO ADDRESS THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. THE AYERS CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS IS ALSO FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED BECAUSE THE PROJECT SITE, THE. THE EIR FAILED TO DISCUSS THE PROJECT'S INCREMENTAL IMPACTS IN RELATION WITH OTHER PAST, PRESENT OR FUTURE IMPACTS. THIRD, THE PROJECT. THE PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES ARE INADEQUATE. MANY OF THE MEASURES RELY ON PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS THAT ARE UNLIKELY TO DETECT ALL SPECIES, LACK ENFORCEABLE STANDARDS, OR PROVIDE ONLY MINIMAL BENEFITS. OTHERS ARE VAGUE AND UNENFORCEABLE, UNENFORCEABLE OR FAIL TO ADDRESS PERMANENT HABITAT LOSS OR LONG TERM IMPACTS. FINALLY, THE CITY HAS FAILED TO SUFFICIENTLY RESPOND TO EXPERT AND AGENCY COMMENTS. BOTH THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE RAISED SERIOUS CONCERNS REGARDING THE EIR METHODOLOGY AND MITIGATION MEASURES. THE CITY FAILED TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS. THESE COMMENTS WITH MEANINGFUL REVISIONS AND INSTEAD SUMMARILY REPEATED THE CONCLUSIONS WITHOUT FURTHER ANALYSIS. FOR THESE REASONS, SAFER RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE EIR BE REVISED AND RECIRCULATED. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS? NO OTHER COMMENTS ONLINE. MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY, I AND I'M SURE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS AS WELL. I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE A FEW CLARIFICATIONS. THE SUB SUBSTATION THAT'S BEING PROPOSED WILL NOT BE OWNED BY THE DEVELOPER. IT'LL BE OWNED BY ID, IT'LL BE BUILT BY THE DEVELOPER, BUT IT WILL BE OWNED, TRANSFERRED TO ID. YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET A NUMBER OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT LIST A NUMBER OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS, WATER IMPROVEMENTS, SEWER IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE ALL THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS PROJECT, THAT THOSE COMMUNITY BENEFITS ARE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROJECT, AND THE PROJECT CANNOT GO AHEAD WITHOUT THEM. THE. AND INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE OUT OF TOWN DEVELOPER, THE. THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE IS A LOCAL LANDOWNER WHO HAS HAD A PRESENCE IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY FOR DECADES, AND THIS IS NOT AN OUT OF TOWN DEVELOPER AS IT RELATES TO THE COMMENTS MADE REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, THE CITY HAS PREPARED A COMPREHENSIVE EIR AND A COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSE TO COMMENTS. THE. THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE HERE ARE REPEATS OF THE. THE COMMENTS ADDRESSED IN THE FINAL EIR, AND WE BELIEVE THAT THOSE COMMENTS ARE ACCURATE AND CORRECT. THAT IS ALL. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NICOLE. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS TO THE APPLICANTS OR, YOU KNOW, IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO. YES. THANK YOU. 
          GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JAMES VAUGHN AND I'M THE LAND USE COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT AND THE PROJECT. I REALLY CAN'T ADD A LOT TO WHAT MISS CHRIS JUST PROVIDED IN RESPONSES, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO JUST TOUCH ON THREE QUICK AREAS. ONE IS THE THOROUGHNESS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW THAT OCCURRED HERE. THIS WAS A NEARLY THREE YEAR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. THIS WAS NOT GIVEN SHORT SHRIFT AND NOTICE OF PREPARATION, WHICH STARTS THE PROCESS WAS PROVIDED IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER OF 2023. THE DRAFT EIR WAS, AS MISS CHRIS POINTED OUT, WAS CIRCULATED FOR A 45 DAY PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD IN JULY THROUGH EARLY SEPTEMBER OF 2025 AND THE FINAL EIR, WHICH INCLUDED BOTH INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES TO EVERY 
          [01:25:03]
SINGLE COMMENT RECEIVED, INCLUDING FROM THE AGENCIES THAT WERE, WERE REFERENCED. 
          CALIFORNIA FISH AND WILDLIFE AND U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE, AS WELL AS FURTHER TECHNICAL STUDIES THAT WERE PREPARED. THAT'S WHY IT TOOK ANOTHER EIGHT MONTHS TO GET. THE FINAL YARD COMPLETION WAS WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE. AND THE CITY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED WERE, IN FACT, FULLY STUDIED. AND THEY WERE JUST A TOUCH ON A COUPLE WITH RESPECT TO THE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES IMPACTS THAT WERE RAISED. THOSE WERE FULLY ADDRESSED IN THE FINAL IR, AND THERE WAS A FURTHER TECHNOLOGICAL ANALYSIS FROM THE BIOLOGIST ADDRESSING ALL OF THOSE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED, NOT JUST BY THE DRURY FIRM, BUT ALSO FROM CALIFORNIA FISH AND WILDLIFE AND US FISH AND WILDLIFE. AND THOSE AGENCIES WERE PROVIDED WITH THOSE RESPONSES AND HAVE NOT PROVIDED ANY FURTHER OBJECTIONS OR COMMENTS. SO WE FEEL THOSE WERE CLEARLY SATISFACTORY. THE ISSUE OF HEALTH RISKS TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTS WAS RAISED. THAT WAS FULLY STUDIED IN THE EIR. EVERY CONCEIVABLE IMPACT TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENCES WERE STUDIED AND DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OR HEALTH RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT. 
          AS YOU SAW FROM THE SITE PLAN, THE USES THAT ARE CLOSEST TO AIRPORT BOULEVARD AND THUS CLOSEST TO THE EXISTING RESIDENCES ARE A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE THRU AND A TYPICAL FREEWAY ADJACENT SERVICE STATION AND CONVENIENCE MART, WHICH YOU SEE IN NEARLY EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD. THE MORE INTENSE INDUSTRIAL USES ARE HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF FEET AWAY, IF NOT THOUSANDS OF FEET AWAY AT THE BACK OF THE SITE AS FAR AS POSSIBLE FROM THOSE ADJACENT RESIDENTS. SO ALL OF THAT WAS WAS GIVEN THOUGHT IN THIS PROJECT DESIGN. SO AGAIN, THE EIR AGAIN, THREE YEAR OR MORE PROCESS, VERY THOROUGH AND ADDRESSED ALL THE ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE LABOR UNIONS AND THE DESIRE FOR A LABOR AGREEMENT. THAT'S JUST PREMATURE AT THIS POINT. THE PROJECT APPLICANT HAS NO OBJECTION TO USING UNION LABOR, BUT THE TIME HAS NOT COME YET TO SIGN ANY CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENTS, SO THE APPLICANT REMAINS OPEN TO THOSE DISCUSSIONS. WE'LL HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS WHEN THE RIGHT TIME COMES, BUT THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT TIME. WE'RE STILL AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND ENTITLEMENT STAGE. LASTLY, I JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE PUBLIC BENEFITS BECAUSE THEY ARE SIGNIFICANT. IN THIS CASE, A FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS WAS PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT. IT SHOWED THAT THE ANNUAL REVENUES TO THE CITY FROM THE TAXES, PROPERTY TAXES, SALES TAXES, ETC. IS FIVE TIMES THE THE AMOUNT OF COSTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT PUBLIC COSTS. SO IT'S A SIGNIFICANT NET FISCAL BENEFIT TO THE CITY TO HAVE A PROJECT LIKE THIS. AND AS YOU SEE, IT'S LOCATED IN AN EXCELLENT LOCATION FOR THIS TYPE OF USE, ISOLATED ON TWO SIDES, THREE SIDES REALLY, AND IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGHWAY. IN ADDITION TO THAT, YOU HEARD ABOUT THE JOBS, BOTH LONG TERM CONSTRUCTION JOBS AND LONG TERM OPERATION JOBS, AS WELL AS SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE AIRPORT BOULEVARD AREA, PARTICULARLY BETWEEN THE BRIDGE THAT IS GOING TO BE EXPANDED BY THE COUNTY AND THE FREEWAY ITSELF. SO THAT'S REALLY THE THREE THINGS I WANTED TO COVER. 
          I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE OTHERWISE. I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANYONE ELSE FROM THE APPLICANT WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? NO. ALL RIGHT. SO I CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS AT 732. ALL RIGHT. SO ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER FONSECA. AND THEN I'M GONNA START WITH ME. SO FIRST AND FOREMOST, THANK YOU FOR THE FOR THE PRESENTATION. I THINK AT THIS POINT. BOTH SIDES ARE EXTREMELY VALID. EVERYBODY HAS THEIR PERSPECTIVE. BUT AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT IS INTERESTED AND, AND VESTED IN THE NEW, THE NEW COACHELLA THAT I KNOW WE ALL WANT AND I WANT TO TAKE THE LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN USED. YOU CAN TALK ABOUT AND, AND CONVERSE ABOUT THE PUBLIC BENEFITS THAT THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE. BUT ONE OF THE PUBLIC BENEFITS THAT OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS IS POWER, RIGHT? AND WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF OUR WATER. AND AS IRONIC THAT THE LAST PHASE OF THAT IS THE LAST THING YOU GUYS ARE EVEN INTERESTED IN BUILDING, THEY'RE INTERESTED IN BUILDING. AND I ALSO WANT TO ASK A QUESTION BECAUSE I, I DON'T WANT TO MAKE ASSUMPTIONS. THERE WAS A COMMENT, NICOLE, THAT YOU SAID ID IS GOING TO OWN THE BUILDING. 
          SO ID IS AN ACRONYM. WHEN YOU SAY ID, IS THAT IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT OR IS THAT AN ACRONYM FOR THE CITY FOR THE OWNERSHIP? I WANT TO MAKE VERY HONEST BECAUSE AGAIN, AND I'M 
          [01:30:04]
AN EDUCATION ACRONYM IS ALL OVER THE PLACE. SO YOU SAY ID, I'M THINKING IMPERIAL DISTRICT IS GOING TO OWN THIS. SO. SO WHAT IS I STAND FOR ID STANDS FOR IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT, SIR. AND THE SUBSTATION WILL NEED TO BE BUILT FIRST. THERE IS THERE IS NO POWER TO SERVE THIS PROJECT. SO THE THE SUBSTATION WILL BE BUILT AND TRANSFERRED TO IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT FOR THEIR OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION. FOR WHOSE OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION IDS OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION. BUT IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, AND I COULD HAVE LISTENED INCORRECTLY WHEN YOU WERE ON YOUR DEVELOPING YOUR REPORT, YOU COMMENTED THAT THE STATION WAS GOING TO BE BUILT AT THE END. NO, IT IS LOCATED AT THE END OF THE SITE. I'M SORRY IF I MISS AND AGAIN, I, I MUST HAVE NOT HEARD CORRECTLY. SO SO SO THE THE POWER IS IS BUILT IN CONJUNCTION. POWER COMES WITH THE FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. NOW THE OTHER THING TOO, AND THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. I TAKE FULL, FULL RESPONSIBILITY OF THAT. AND SO I MISHEARD YOU. THE OTHER THING TOO IS, IS ANOTHER POINT IS WE GOT CANNABIS, WE GOT ALL THESE OTHER THINGS, BUT YET YOU MADE THE COMMENT, THESE ARE JUST PHASES IN THE DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, HOW DID THE DEVELOPERS COME WITH THOSE PARTICULAR INDUSTRIES, RIGHT? THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD OR THEY WANT TO ADJUST THE CODE? WHERE, WHERE DOES THAT LOGIC COME FROM? RIGHT. I MEAN, WE'RE ALL, YOU KNOW, WE LIVE IN A CAPITALISTIC SYSTEM, BUT I WANT TO I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHY THOSE INDUSTRIES, RIGHT? WHY WHAT, WHAT IS THE VALUE IN THOSE PARTICULAR INDUSTRIES THAT THEY'RE MINDFUL OF? ARE YOU REFERRING SPECIFICALLY TO CANNABIS? I'M SAYING CANNABIS AND, AND THE STORAGES, I MEAN, EVERYTHING HAS A CAMPUS BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE IT'S A, IT'S A WALMART OF LIKE MANY DIFFERENT TYPE OF, OF, OF AREAS, RIGHT? I'M JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE. RIGHT? WHY THOSE AREAS? I WANT TO, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHY THOSE PARTICULAR AREAS FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, SIR, THAT THAT IS THE, THE APPLICANT'S CHOICE. THEY CAN PROPOSE ANYTHING IF YOU WOULD, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY. THE APPLICANT IS BETTER VERSED AT RESPONDING TO THAT QUESTION, BECAUSE I FELT THAT YOU WERE VERY QUICK TO RESPOND FOR CERTAIN THINGS, BUT NOT NECESSARILY FOR THAT. SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO RESPOND TO IN TERMS OF THE MARKET, SIR, I, I CAN'T WE DID NOT THE CITY DID NOT CONDUCT MARKET ANALYSIS. THE APPLICANT, I'M SURE, HAS. AND THEY'VE CONDUCTED FISCAL ANALYSIS. AND SO THEY MAY BE ABLE TO IF THE CHAIR WISHES TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, THEY MAY BE ABLE TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION. YEAH, I GOT A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. SO AT THAT POINT WE'LL I'M EARMARKING THAT QUESTION. THE OTHER ONE TOO, IS THIS IS A MASSIVE PROJECT, RIGHT? IT'S MASSIVE PROJECT. I WILL BE HONEST WITH THE COMMENTS THAT EVERYBODY WAS SAYING, I DID NOT. I READ ITEM, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND SAY THAT I READ ALL 800 PAGES BECAUSE I DIDN'T. RIGHT. I, I, I NEED TO BE MORE MINDFUL OF THAT. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CONTINUOUSLY HAS HAPPENED IN MY TENURE IN THIS, IN THIS, IN THIS, IN THIS COMMISSION IS WHERE CONTINUOUSLY FOR PROFIT ENTITIES NEVER GO BACK TO HOW THEY'RE GOING TO. YES. HOW ARE THEY GOING TO BENEFIT THEIR BUSINESS? BUT HOW ARE THEY GOING TO BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY? RIGHT. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I FEEL THAT THAT I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO GO BACK AND HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND REALLY EARMARK, RIGHT, HOW WE'RE GOING TO WORK TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY, RIGHT? AND HOW POTENTIALLY RIGHT WE CAN WORK TOGETHER, RIGHT AND IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE LABORERS AND, AND OUR COMMUNITY THAT NEEDS THIS. I FEEL THAT AT THE MOMENT, WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THOSE, THOSE IMPORTANCE AND THOSE PERSPECTIVES IN ORDER FOR US TO BE MINDFUL OF, OF HOW THIS IS GOING TO IMPACT OUR AREA. MY OTHER THING TOO IS THAT 20 TO 25 YEARS, I MEAN, I SAW ACRISURE ARENA BEING BUILT IN 18 MONTHS, RIGHT? AND THEY TOLD US THAT IT WAS GOING TO BUILD AND BE BUILT IN FIVE YEARS, RIGHT? WHERE THERE'S MONEY, THEY'LL, THEY'LL FIGURE OUT HOW TO BUILD THIS, RIGHT? MY THING IS, IS THAT OUR COMMUNITY AT THE MOMENT. IS NOT CONDUCIVE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, FOR EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S GOING ON. RIGHT. I APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, BOTH SIDES. I THINK AT THIS 
          [01:35:03]
POINT, EVERYBODY HAS THE WILLINGNESS TO VOICE THEIR PERSPECTIVE. BUT I THINK AS A COMMISSION, WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS MATTER. AND I WILL YIELD MY TIME. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER FONSECA. COMMISSIONER ORDORICA, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? YEAH. THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR ALL THE PRESENTATIONS AND COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATIONS. VERY HELPFUL. IT IS A LARGE PROJECT, SO IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK TO GET IT EVEN THIS FAR ALONG. IT'S A LENGTHY PROCESS. SO I APPRECIATE THE ALL THE WORK THAT'S GONE INTO IT THUS FAR. I DO HAVE TO AGREE OR JUST STATING THAT HIGHWAY 86 RIGHT NOW IS ALREADY SUCH A MESS. IT'S ALREADY SO TRAFFIC HEAVY AND, AND IT'S I USE IT EVERY DAY, YOU KNOW, AS I KNOW I LIVE IN COACHELLA, BUT A LOT OF LIKE JOBS AND, AND POSITIONS ARE ACROSS THE WAY IN THE VALLEY. SO A LOT OF, OF, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS COMMUTE THE OPPOSITE WAY FOR, FOR WORK. AND IT'S, IT'S ALREADY BACKED UP AS IT IS. AND I'M JUST A LITTLE HESITANT ABOUT THE LAND USE FOR THIS. EVEN I, AND I UNDERSTAND NOT GETTING GOING FURTHER INTO THE CITY TO AVOID TRAFFIC DELAYS AND MORE FURTHER INTO THE CITY. AND HAVING IT OFF THE HIGHWAY IS MORE CONVENIENT, AND IT WILL ATTRACT TRAVELERS. AND YOU KNOW, ALL OF THOSE THINGS. AND WITH THE ESPECIALLY WITH THE DIGITAL SIGNAGE, I CAN, YOU KNOW, I CAN UNDERSTAND THOSE PERSPECTIVES. 
          BUT IF THE HIGHWAY 86 IS GOING TO REMAIN THE SAME AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, I DON'T THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK FOR THE LOCALS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU'RE STANDING OR GOING TO OR USE THIS FACILITY TO GO SHOPPING AND TO GO SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESSES OR GOING TO JUST BE OR GOING TO GROW TO BE FRUSTRATED WITH THE, WITH THE, THE LOCATION AND THE, THE USE FOR SUCH A LARGE PROJECT THIS WAY. I DON'T REALLY AGREE WITH USING, I DON'T KNOW THE TERM THAT WAS USED GARAGES OR THINGS LIKE THAT FOR VEHICLES. I DON'T REALLY IT TO ME THAT'S NOT A COMMUNITY BENEFIT BECAUSE ESPECIALLY THAT SIDE OF THE VALLEY, IT'S NOT IT'S NOT USEFUL. I I'LL JUST BE HONEST FOR, FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. SO I'M NOT REALLY IN FAVOR OF, OF THAT PART OF THE PROJECT. I'M CURIOUS THOUGH, WHAT WERE THE, HOW ARE THE COMMUNITY PARTNERS WITH KVIE AND THE COUNTY ON, ON THIS PROJECT, CONSIDERING IT'S ALL IN THE SAME THAT THIS PROJECT IS ANTICIPATED TO BE WITHIN THEIR SAME LOCATIONS, AND IF THEY HAD ANY COMMENTS OR ADJUSTMENTS TO THIS PROJECT, THE. THE COUNTY MADE NO COMMENT ON THE PROJECT. THE COUNTY IS WORKING ON THE BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR AIRPORT BOULEVARD AT THE FREEWAY. AND SO THIS PROJECT. THE CITY. SEVERAL OTHER CITY PROJECTS ARE WORKING TOGETHER WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ON THE BRIDGE. IMPROVEMENTS CVD AS, AS I'M SURE YOU KNOW, HAS A VERY CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY AND AND SERVES AREAS OF THE CITY THAT THE CITY CANNOT SERVE FOR BOTH WATER AND SEWER AND, AND FOR THE SHORT TERM, BECAUSE THEY HAVE FACILITIES AND THE CITY DOES NOT THE CVD HAS AGREED TO SERVE THIS PROJECT FOR WATER DEMAND. THANK YOU FOR FOR CLARIFYING. YEAH, I THINK THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS AT THIS AT THIS POINT. BUT YEAH, IT'S I COULD I DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WILL CREATE JOBS AND REVENUE FOR THE CITY, AND I CAN APPRECIATE THAT. 
          BUT IT'S. YEAH, I'M KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE WITH IT AT THIS POINT UNTIL I HEAR WE CAN DISCUSS FURTHER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER TORRES. SO FIRST OF ALL, WITH THE SUBSTATIONS AND LIKE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG HERE, BUT THE RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO GET THE FEE WHEN THE SUBSTATION IS BUILT. CORRECT? OR AM I OR IS IT LIKE, HOW DOES THAT WORK? DOES THE RESIDENT, THE RESIDENTS GET A FEE WHEN THE SUBSTATION IS BUILT FOR LIKE ELECTRICITY AND ANY OF THAT LIKE, IS THERE ARE PRICES GOING TO GO UP IF THE IF THE SERVICE IS USED, YOU GET BILLED BY ID, THE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STATION IS 
          [01:40:02]
AT DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE. GOT IT. OKAY. AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION WAS THE CITY WAS IN THE CITY REACHED OUT TO THESE MOBILE HOME. THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THESE MOBILE HOMES OR DID THE COUNTY REACH OUT TO THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE MOBILE HOMES REGARDING WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS WERE? THE CITY. THE CITY STAFF DID NOT. AGAIN, IF YOU'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN, YOU CAN ASK THE DEVELOPER IF THEY HAVE MET WITH THE MOBILE HOME PARK. OKAY. AND THEN HONESTLY, THOSE WERE MY TWO BIGGEST QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER TORRES. I DO HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. I WASN'T ABLE TO SEE. I'M SORRY. IT MIGHT IT WAS ME. WHICH STREET IMPROVEMENTS ARE THEY DOING FOR THIS PROJECT? THE THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR. WELL, THEY'RE PARTICIPATING IN THE BRIDGE. OKAY. THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE ROUTE 86. SOUTHBOUND OFF RAMPS TO THE SATISFACTION OF CALTRANS AND THE CITY ENGINEER. WHY WON'T THIS SCROLL. OKAY. INCLUDING AN EMERGENCY ACCESS ON THE SOUTHBOUND OFF RAMP FOR THE PROPERTY. THAT WAS A REQUIREMENT OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT THE SOUTHBOUND AND ON AND OFF RAMPS AS AS PROVIDED IN THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS. DEDICATION OF LAND ALONG SOUTHBOUND LANE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD. WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS. STREET IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THAT ALL OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD ALONG THE PROJECT LIMITS, ALONG WITH APPROPRIATE TAPERS. TO TO CONNECT TO EXISTING FACILITIES BEYOND. THAT'S THE DRIVEWAY, SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER LANDSCAPE. MEDIAN ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD. ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN PROJECT LIMITS INCLUDING ADA RAMPS, STREET LIGHTS, LANDSCAPING, TRAFFIC CONTROL, STRIPING, TRAFFIC SIGNS, ETC. 
          ARE THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS. THEY'LL HAVE TO. THEY'LL HAVE TO MILL AND MATCH, WHICH IS TO CONNECT THEIR. THE NEW IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS. AND. THEN THERE ARE FAIR SHARE IMPROVEMENTS WHICH. WHICH ARE ALL TIED TO EITHER OUR DIFF FEES OR FEES FOR THE INTERSECTION AT AVENUE 54 AND GRAPEFRUIT TYLER AND GRAPEFRUIT, PALM AND GRAPEFRUIT, GRAPEFRUIT. PALM. GRAPEFRUIT, PALM TO AVENUE 54 TO WIDEN. THAT'S THAT'S WIDENING THE PAVEMENT. GRAPEFRUIT AVENUE 54 TO TYLER, ALSO WIDENING THE PAVEMENT. AIRPORT AND FILLMORE SIGNAL SIGNALIZATION OF THE INTERSECTION AND A SOUTHBOUND EXIT LANE ON THE SOUTHBOUND ON AND OFF RAMPS. AND THAT'S FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS. I CAN GO GET INTO WATER AND SEWER TOO, IF YOU'D LIKE. WOULD YOU ALL LIKE TO HEAR WATER AND SEWER? OKAY. OR ANY LIGHTING? IS THERE ANY LIGHTING UP OVER IT? STREETLIGHTS ARE PART OF THE PLANS. YES, SIR. BUT. BUT WITHIN THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF THEIR PROJECT, NOT. NOT ANYTHING ADDITIONAL TO THAT. NO. 
          WITH WITH THE STREET IMPROVEMENTS COME CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK, STREET LIGHTS ON TO MEET CITY STANDARDS. BUT. BUT TO CONFIRM WHAT I'M WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS ALL THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ARE WITHIN THE AREA OF WHERE THEIR THE THE, THE NEW DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE AT. THERE'S NO OTHER EXPANSION ANYWHERE ELSE OR IMPROVEMENT OF OTHER STREETS. 
          THERE ARE BECAUSE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF US HAVE, YOU KNOW, YOU DRIVE THROUGH THAT 
          [01:45:04]
BEAUTIFUL STREET AND THEN THREE MILES LATER, YOU GOT THE SPEED BUMP OR THE POTHOLE. RIGHT. BUT AGAIN, NOT THAT THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT, BUT I'M JUST THINKING OUT LOUD, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST WITHIN THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF THE PROJECT THAT THEY'RE MAKING THESE IMPROVEMENTS ON AIRPORT BOULEVARD. THAT IS TRUE. OKAY. ON THE SURROUNDING STREETS WHERE THEY'RE PARTICIPATING THROUGH DIFF AND FEES. OKAY. THAT EXTENDS, AS I SAID, TO AVENUE 54 AND GRAPEFRUIT, TYLER AND GRAPEFRUIT, PALM STREET AND GRAPEFRUIT. THOSE ARE ALL SIGNALING ENHANCEMENTS. GRAPEFRUIT BOULEVARD, PALM TO AVENUE 54 IS IS WIDENING TO SIX LANES. GRAPEFRUIT BOULEVARD, AVENUE 54 TO TYLER IS WIDENING TO SIX LANES AIRPORT, AIRPORT BOULEVARD AND FILLMORE, WHICH IS BEYOND THE PROJECT LIMITS, IS FOR SIGNALIZATION OF THE INTERSECTION. AND AGAIN, THE SOUTHBOUND EXIT LANE IS ON HIGHWAY 86 FOR BOTH THE ON AND OFF RAMPS. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH, NICOLE. ANOTHER, ANOTHER, I GUESS, CONCERN THAT I HAVE. SO IS THIS GOING TO BE MANUFACTURING DISTRIBUTION OF THE CANNABIS OR WHAT TYPE OF CANNABIS BUSINESS IS THIS GOING TO BE THAT THE THERE IS NO SPECIFIC PROPOSAL FOR A CANNABIS BUSINESS. THE CUP APPLIES TO THE SITE AND THEN PERMITS WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR ANY BUSINESS THAT COMES FORWARD. I SEE IN THE FUTURE TO ALL OF THE CITY AND STATE STANDARDS I SEE, I SEE, OKAY, SO IT'S GOING TO BE LEASED, EITHER LEASED OR PURCHASED AS AS THE APPLICANT INDICATED. AND I INDICATED IN MY STAFF REPORT, RIGHT, THE CONDOMINIUM MAP WILL ALLOW BUILDINGS TO BE SOLD RIGHT ALONG WITH THE PARTICIPATION IN THE PROPERTY. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. JUST MY CONCERN IS THE ODOR, LIKE YOU WALK AROUND COACHELLA AND WE SMELL IT ON THE WEEKENDS AND IT'S, IT'S, IT'S SOME PEOPLE DO HAVE ALLERGIES. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A BIG CONCERN FOR ME. IT'S JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THE CANNABIS COMPONENT THEY DO GO THROUGH TO JUST BE MORE AWARE OF THE ODOR FROM COMING OUT OF THESE FACILITIES. 
          MY OTHER QUESTION, SEE, I HAVE I WROTE A LOT. SO. I THINK I SAW ON THE FACING THAT THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT WILL BE ON PHASE TWO. CORRECT? LET ME THERE'S THE PHASING MAP THAT DOES NOT COME UP AS CLEARLY AS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. SO YOU MAY WANT TO REFER TO YOUR STAFF REPORT AND THERE, THERE, THERE ARE THREE PHASES. THE THE GREEN IS INFRASTRUCTURE AS WELL AS THE SOUTH END AND THE MIDDLE. THE SECOND PHASE IS THE YELLOW, WHICH IS MORE OF THE PERIMETER USES. AND PHASE THREE IS THE RED. OKAY. AND WHERE WHERE DOES THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT LIES IN WHICH PHASE? THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IS PHASE ONE. OKAY. THE YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE TO THE GAS STATION AND GAS STATION. RETAIL RESTAURANT. OKAY, PERFECT. AND WITH THIS, IT'S GOING TO BE LIKE WHAT YOU SAID, ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE, INCLUDING THE ID SUBSTATION, THE STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND ALL OF THAT. CORRECT. PHASE ONE. PERFECT. SO WILL THERE BE ANY TRUCKS LIKE SEMI TRUCKS COMING INTO THIS PROPERTY? IT WAS IT WAS STUDIED IN THE EIR TO ASSUME SEMI TRUCKS. YES. ALL RIGHT. FOR PRIMARILY FOR THE. WELL THERE'S TWO TYPES OF TRUCKS FOR THE LARGE WAREHOUSES. THOSE WERE STUDIED AS AS WAREHOUSE USES THAT HAVE SEMI TRUCKS AS PART OF THE BUSINESS. AND THEY'LL ALSO BE SEMI TRUCKS DELIVERING TO THE BUSINESSES OBVIOUSLY ON A LOWER LEVEL. BUT AS PART OF THE BUSINESSES THAT OPERATE WITHIN THE PROJECT. AND SO HOW MANY SEMI TRUCKS DO YOU BELIEVE ARE GOING TO BE COMING IN ON A DAILY BASIS? ONCE THIS 
          [01:50:05]
IS ALL BUILT OUT? I CAN LOOK THAT UP, MA'AM, BUT IT'LL TAKE ME A MINUTE. YEAH, SURE. 527 TRUCKS. 527 DAILY TRIPS. OKAY. AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THIS OR IN THE STREETS ALL ALLOW FOR THIS, RIGHT? FOR FOR THIS MANY TRUCKS PER DAY WITHIN THE SITE, MA'AM. WITHIN THE SITE, THE THE DRIVEWAYS ALL HAVE TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO FIRE DEPARTMENT STANDARDS, WHICH ARE ACTUALLY MORE STRINGENT THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR SEMI TRUCKS. PERFECT. OKAY. AND I BELIEVE MY OTHER QUESTION IS IN REGARDS TO THE BILLBOARD. I KNOW THAT OTHER CITIES HAVE ALREADY KIND OF GONE THROUGH ORDINANCES TO ELIMINATE BILLBOARDS FROM THEIR CITIES. AND SO I WAS WONDERING, IS COACHELLA GOING TO DO THE SAME? AT THIS TIME? THIS HAS NOT BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH, WORKING WITH OUR CITY MANAGER ON, BUT I CAN MEET WITH HIM TOMORROW TO DISCUSS THAT. OKAY. I JUST BRING IT UP BECAUSE I KNOW OTHER CITIES ARE REALLY FIGHTING TO NOT HAVE BILLBOARDS. AND HERE WE ARE WITH BILLBOARD. SO THAT'S ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS. THIS HUGE BILLBOARD ON 86, AND WE HAVE BEAUTIFUL SCENERY AND IT'S GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A HUGE BILLBOARD NOW ON HIGHWAY 86, WHICH WE ALREADY HAVE A BUNCH. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I'M CONCERNED. LET'S SEE. ALL RIGHT. AND I DON'T KNOW IF. 
          ONE OF MY COMMENTS WOULD ALSO BE FOR, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT TO REACH OUT TO THE LABOR UNIONS TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT WITH THEM AND BE ABLE TO WORK WITH THEM. MY OTHER. COMMENT IS, LET'S SEE. SO IN REGARDS TO EMPLOYMENT, ARE YOU ARE YOU THE APPLICANT? INTENDING TO, TO HIRE CITY PEOPLE FROM CITY OF COACHELLA? WE DO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE WHO DO CONSTRUCTION, THINGS LIKE THAT. IF YOU'D LIKE TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT, THEY CAN COME BACK AND COMMENT ON ON THAT AND ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT COMMISSIONER FONSECA HAD AS WELL. ALL RIGHT. SO I WILL REOPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT AT 757. TO YOUR QUESTION, REGARDING THE EMPLOYMENT OF LOCAL COACHELLA RESIDENTS IS TYPICALLY. AS FOR CONSTRUCTION STANDPOINT, WE GENERALLY DO A LOCAL HIRING PROGRAM WITH OUR CONTRACTORS WHEN WE. WHENEVER WE WORK IN A LOCAL COMMUNITY, WE'VE BUILT SHOPPING CENTERS AND A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION IN OVER THE LAST 50 YEARS IN MANY AREAS. AND WE'RE HAPPY TO REACH OUT TO LOCAL AND KIND OF CREATE A JOB MARKET OR JOB FARM FOR THEM TO, TO INVOLVE THEM IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. AS FAR AS HIRING LOCAL POPULATION FOR THE BUSINESSES, THAT'S REALLY UP TO THE BUSINESS OWNERS. WE CAN'T DICTATE THAT TO THE BUSINESSES. THE, THE VMT ANALYSIS, WHEN THEY DO THAT ON THESE PROJECTS, ANALYZES WHERE THE, WHERE THE, THE LOGICAL PLACES WHERE THE EMPLOYEES WOULD COME FROM. AND THEY FOCUS MOST ON THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES FOR THE EMPLOYEES AND THEN REACH OUT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THEIR FORMULAS ARE TO DETERMINE HOW MANY, HOW MANY MILES THESE, THESE PEOPLE NEED TO DRIVE TO GET TO WORK. AND THE SHOPPING CENTER. THAT'S PART OF WHAT MAKES UP THE THE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED FORMULA. BUT AS FAR AS PRIORITIZING, AGAIN, WE'VE GOT THE WAY THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED. IT'S MOSTLY SMALL BUSINESSES. SO THE SMALL BUSINESSES WILL REALLY BE HIRING. AGAIN, NO GUARANTEES. THE LOGIC IS THAT THEY'D WANT TO HIRE LOCAL LOCAL CITIZENS BECAUSE IT'S AN EASIER, MORE CONVENIENT FOR THEM TO GET TO 
          [01:55:06]
WORK. BUT AGAIN, NO GUARANTEES. ALL RIGHT. I DO HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. I BELIEVE THAT ONE OF OUR COMMISSIONERS ASKED THIS QUESTION. IF I KNOW YOU SENT OUT A LETTER FOR THE RADIUS, AND I BELIEVE THAT MAYBE THE MOBILE HOME PROBABLY RECEIVED THIS LETTER, DID YOU RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE MOBILE HOME? WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DID THE APPLICANT REACH OUT TO THE MOBILE HOME? NO, WE DID NOT REACH OUT TO THEM. PART OF THE PART OF THE CONSIDERATION AND PART OF THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CITY WAS TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS WITH THE INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR THE MOBILE HOME PARK. BUT NO, WE DID NOT GO OUT. WE DID NOT PERSONALLY REACH OUT TO THEM, BUT THEY DIDN'T COMMENT ON ANYTHING. RIGHT. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS FROM FROM ANYONE IN THE MOBILE HOME PARK. ALL RIGHT. AND LET'S SEE. I BELIEVE IN TERMS OF MY QUESTIONS. I'M I'M DONE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IF THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT AND THEN WE'LL MOVE KNOW FOR THE APPLICANT, JUST FYI, JUST FOR THE COMMISSION. SO WHEN THERE'S A WHEN THE COMMISSION IS DELIBERATING AND ANSWERING ASKING QUESTIONS FROM STAFF OR THE APPLICANT, YOU DON'T NEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT. AGAIN, WE CAN JUST GO BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE STAFF OR CONSULTANT AND THE APPLICANT, BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO COME UP TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. AND SO THE PUBLIC COMMENT DID NOT NEED TO BE OPEN. WE DID OPEN IT, BUT IT'S OKAY THAT WE OPENED IT, BUT WE DO NOT NEED TO GIVE ADDITIONAL TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. 
          QUESTION. WHAT IF THERE'S A COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT WOULD LIKE TO TALK? ARE THEY ALLOWED THROUGH THE PROCESSES TO TO MAKE A COMMENT? I DEFER TO THE THE CHAIR IF THE CHAIR WOULD LIKE TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT. HOWEVER, IT'S NOT REQUIRED UNDER THE BROWN ACT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE I CAN RESPOND TO? OKAY. AND I WILL ALLOW FOR ONE PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU CHAIR. ONCE AGAIN, LUIS LOPEZ, BUSINESS AGENT FOR THE IRONWORKERS LOCAL 433. SO MYSELF AND JOHN LEE OUT HERE WITH THE PLUMBERS AND PIPEFITTERS, 100% OF OUR PROJECTS BEFORE THEY COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE LABOR AGREEMENTS. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT FOR, FOR STAFF AND FOR THE COMMISSION TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YES, IT ALLOWS US TO, ESPECIALLY IN AN AREA LIKE COACHELLA. SO WE WORK WITH THE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD. WE CAN COMB SOME OF THE HIGH SCHOOLS LOCALLY, DO CAREER DAYS, AND GET WITH THE VETERAN. DIFFERENT VETERANS ASSOCIATIONS LIKE HELMETS OR HARDHATS, AND START PREPARING FOR THIS LOCAL HIRE. SO IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT, YES, THERE ARE PARTICULARLY THE LABOR AGREEMENTS ALREADY DONE BEFORE THEY COME INTO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND IT'S JUST LIKE, IT'S JUST LIKE AN AGREEMENT. LIKE IF YOU WERE TO BUY A HOME, YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES ARE, WHAT THE BUILDER'S RESPONSIBILITY, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE, YOU KNOW, IT'S AN AGREEMENT. IT'S, IT HOLDS ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EVERYBODY. SO YES, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, LABOR AGREEMENTS CAN BE MADE BEFORE THE PROJECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IF YOU ENTERTAIN ANOTHER PUBLIC COMMENT, NOT AT THIS TIME. I'M SORRY, COUNCILWOMAN MELISSA. YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO GIVE THEM ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. WHAT DO YOU ALL LIKE TO HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. YOU KNOW WHAT? THIS IS A HUGE PROJECT. I WILL NOT NOT NOT WANT TO HEAR IT. YEAH, YEAH. I WOULD LIKE TO. YEAH. IT'S AT YOUR DISCRETION, CHAIR. SO ALTHOUGH YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO UNDER THE BROWN ACT, IT'S AT YOUR DISCRETION. YOU HAVE THE DISCRETION TO DO THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR. OKAY. WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR HER COMMENT. SO I'M SITTING HERE, I'M LISTENING. 
          I'M TRYING TO BE OPEN MINDED. I'M STILL NOT HEARING ANYTHING REALLY ABOUT INVOLVING THE COMMUNITY OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE, EXCEPT FOR MAYBE I'LL GET TO WASH CARS OR SOMETHING AT THE FANCY LOT THAT THEY'RE BUILDING FOR ALL THE WEALTHY FOLKS THAT THEY PLAN ON COURTING. I LIVE OFF AIRPORT BOULEVARD. MY GRANDMOTHERS LIVED THERE FOR 50 YEARS. SHE'S 90 YEARS OLD, AND WE HAVE NO IDEA THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. AND I DOUBT THE TRAILER PARK KNOWS THIS IS HAPPENING. AND IF ANYTHING DID GO OUT, DID IT GO OUT IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH? IS IT ACCESSIBLE TO OUR COMMUNITY OR IS IT ONLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE WEALTHY PEOPLE THEY WANT TO COURT? IS IS RIDICULOUS. IT'S DISGRACEFUL AND IT'S REALLY HURTFUL. LIKE YOU'RE LITERALLY TALKING ABOUT US. LIKE WE DON'T EXIST. THERE'S NO PLEASE DIRECT YOUR COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION, PLEASE. OH, I'M SO SORRY. YOUR POTENTIAL PARTNERS ARE TALKING ABOUT THE COMMUNITY LIKE WE 
          [02:00:05]
DON'T EXIST. AND I UNDERSTAND WE'RE THERMAL, WE'RE COUNTY. WE'RE NOT TECHNICALLY YOUR PROBLEM, BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR NOW, IS IT? I'D APPRECIATE IF THERE IS CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE, THE PEOPLE WHO WORK THERE, THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE THEIR LIVES THERE, THE PEOPLE WHO PUT OUT CHAIRS AT THE BUS STOP THAT COACHELLA OWNS BECAUSE THEY WON'T GIVE THEM A BENCH WHEN THE COUNTY HAS BENCHES. JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BRIDGE, THERE'S A COMMUNITY THERE, THERE'S PEOPLE THERE, THERE'S PEOPLE WHO UTILIZE THOSE RESOURCES. THERE'S PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE INTERRUPTED BY THE NOISE POLLUTION AND THE LIGHT POLLUTION FROM THAT UGLY BILLBOARD THAT IS LIT UP 24 OVER SEVEN FROM THE GAS STATION THAT WILL BE LIT UP 24 OVER SEVEN. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL THESE PROFITS COMING IN. HOW MUCH PROFIT IS GOING TO COME IN FROM ONE DRIVE THROUGH? IS, IS THE WHOLE OF TRAFFIC GOING DOWN 86 GOING TO THAT? PROBABLY A STARBUCKS OR WHATEVER YOU'RE GOING TO PUT IN THERE. THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SMALL BUSINESS BREADCRUMBS THEY'RE GIVING US. 90% OF THAT IS IS FOR CORPORATION. IT'S FOR LARGE INDUSTRY. AND THERE'S SMALL, SMALL BREADCRUMBS, 81,000FT■!S. THAT'S LEFT FOR FOR SMALL BUSINESSES ON A 50 ACRE PARCEL, WHAT IS HAPPENING? AND THEN NOT A DIG AT ANY OF YOU, BUT IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS THAT NEITHER NONE OF YOU READ THE COMPLETE UPDATED EIR BECAUSE THERE WERE ANSWERS TO MOST OF YOUR QUESTIONS IN IN THAT DOCUMENT. I UNDERSTAND IT'S A LENGTHY READ. IT'S NOT FUN, BUT I WOULD HOPE THAT IN THE FUTURE WE COME BACK MORE PREPARED AND MORE EDUCATED ON SOMETHING AS MASSIVE AS THIS IS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW I WILL MOVE FORWARD TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT. SORRY. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AT 805. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW I WILL MOVE FORWARD TO MOTION. IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MOVE A MOTION. CAN I ASK FOR CLARIFICATION ON A RECOMMENDATION? MAYBE COULD WE RECOMMEND TABLING THIS AND TALKING TO THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE GOING TO PROBABLY BE AFFECTED OR NO, WE CAN'T RECOMMEND THAT AT ALL. WOULD THAT BE UP TO THE DEVELOPER? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? IF YOU WOULD LIKE, YOU COULD ISSUE A CONTINUANCE FOR THE PROJECT AND PROVIDE STAFF WITH DIRECTION. OKAY. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. UNLESS THE OTHER MY OTHER FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONSIDERATIONS. OH, WHOEVER WANTS TO DO IT, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE CARE OF THAT? IF ANY OF YOU WANT TO DO HAVE HAVE A MOTION. SO SO I MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. SO WHAT I'M GOING TO HIGHLY RECOMMEND IS BECAUSE OF THE MASSIVE PROJECT THAT THIS IS AND, AND WHAT THE COMPLEXITIES OF IT IS THAT I FEEL THAT IT NEEDS TO BE TABLED IN REGARDS TO ALL OF THE QUESTIONS. WE KEEP ON HEARING THINGS IN GOOD FAITH, BUT NOW IT'S TIME TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN. 
          WE'RE ALL HUMAN, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT A ROBOT, AND IF PEOPLE COMMENTED THAT THEY READ 800 PAGES, YOU KNOW, GOOD FOR THEM. I DO HAVE A LIFE, AND I DID NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THAT. BUT I'M ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THAT THIS IS A MASSIVE PROJECT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AND TO PUT A VOTE ON, ON HOW IS IT GOING TO IMPACT OUR COMMUNITY. SO I FEEL THAT STAFF SHOULD GO BACK AND MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS, I THINK THREE FOLD. RIGHT? HOW IS THIS PROJECT GOING TO FULLY BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY? WHAT ARE WHAT ARE THE THE PROJECTS WILLING, YOU KNOW, TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND OF THIS MASSIVE INVESTMENT THAT THEY'RE DOING? BUT HOW IS THAT ALSO GOING TO BE POSITIVE FOR THE COMMUNITY? I THINK THAT A POSITIVE, A POSITIVE PERSPECTIVE WOULD BE HOW ARE THEY GOING TO WORK WITH OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR LABOR UNIONS TO SEE HOW THAT CAN BE A POSITIVE ENGAGEMENT? NOT THAT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, WHAT ONE SIDE WANTS OR WHAT ANOTHER SIDE WANTS. I THINK IT'S TIME TO COMPROMISE. YOU KNOW, I THINK AS A COMMUNITY, I THINK AS A COUNTRY, I THINK IT'S AS A HOUSEHOLD, THIS IS THE MOMENT NOW THAT IF COACHELLA CAN BE A STANDARD OF HOW THINGS CAN BE AND WORK TOGETHER, AND THIS IS THE TIME, THIS IS THE TIME. I KNOW SOME OF YOU MAY NOT LIKE MY COMMENTS AND THAT'S OKAY. 
          I'M ONE VOTE AND THIS TABLE AND WE ALL HAVE FREE WILL TO VOTE. HOWEVER, WE DECIDE TO VOTE ON THIS. BUT I FEEL THAT AT THE MOMENT I WANT TO APPLAUD WORK ON BOTH SIDES. I MEAN, I THINK IN THE LAST THREE AND A HALF YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE, THIS IS THE MOST PEOPLE I'VE SEEN THE CHAMBER, AND I FEEL THAT IT'S THE WAY TO BE RIGHT. AND SO I THINK AT THE MOMENT, THAT 
          [02:05:06]
WOULD BE MY MOTION TO GO BACK, HAVE AN HONEST CONVERSATION REGARDING THIS, HOW WE'RE GOING TO WORK TOGETHER. AND I THINK MOVING FORWARD TO THE STAFF, IN MY PERSPECTIVE, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY I CAN'T TALK ON BEHALF OF ANYONE ELSE HERE IN THE DAIS, ANY FOR PROFIT ENTITY THAT COMES INTO OUR COMMUNITY OR JUST ANY PROJECT, WE NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT HOW IT'S GOING TO IMPACT OUR COMMUNITY. RIGHT? I'VE BEEN TO THE THERMAL CLUB. I'VE BEEN TO A LOT OF THESE AMAZING PLACES. THEY'RE GREAT, BUT I DON'T SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT LOOK LIKE ME THAT LIVE IN THERE. RIGHT. AND AGAIN, WE LIVE IN A CAPITALISTIC SYSTEM. I UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO DEVELOP AND MAKE THEIR MONEY HOW THEY WANT TO MAKE IT. BUT BUT NOW YOU WANT TO COME TO MY BACKYARD. SO I THINK IT'S IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO LOOK AT THAT, BUT ALSO TO THE OTHER SIDE, RIGHT? I ALSO WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, IS THAT WE ALSO HAVE TO BE MINDFUL HOW WE DIRECT WITH EACH OTHER, RIGHT? WE HAVE TO BE RESPECTFUL OF HOW WE WANT TO START MAKING THESE COMMENTS. I ALSO WANT WE AS A CITY TO START BEING MINDFUL OF THAT, RIGHT? IT'S GETTING IT'S GETTING TOO, TOO, TOO PERSONAL. RIGHT. COMMISSIONER FONSECA, IF I MAY INTERRUPT. YEAH, I JUST ALSO WANT TO REMIND THE COMMISSION THAT THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL, SO YOU COULD MODIFY YOUR MOTION AND SAY, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO MODIFY MY MOTION TO APPROVE THIS RECOMMENDATION WITH X. YOU KNOW, THAT THIS BE DONE BEFORE OR PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. CORRECT? CORRECT. DIRECTOR. SO ALTHOUGH I DEFER TO THE TO THE COMMISSION ON WHATEVER YOU PREFER TO DO TODAY, IF YOU WANT TO TABLE IT. HOWEVER, I ALSO NEED TO ADVISE THE COMMISSION THAT THAT IS AN OPTION WHERE YOU CAN MODIFY YOUR MOTION AND ADDING A CONDITION TO IT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO TO THE CITY COUNCIL. SO APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION OF X TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU. SO I THINK EVEN EVEN IF IT'S GOING TO GO TO THE COUNCIL, I STILL FEEL THAT THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO HEAR THAT. WE NEED TO FIND WAYS OF WORKING COLLECTIVELY. I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY THAT THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. IF SOMEONE ELSE OR THE CHAIR WANTS TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT IN THAT, THEN THEN THEN I. HEARSAY, SIR, CAN I REPEAT BACK IT TO MAKE SURE THAT STAFF UNDERSTANDS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE. YOUR MOTION IS TO TABLE THE ITEM TO PROVIDE TIME FOR STAFF AND THE APPLICANT TO WORK ON ON DEFINING HOW THE PROJECT WILL BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY AND HOW THE APPLICANT WILL WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY. IN LABOR UNIONS. I WOULD SAY THOSE ARE GREAT POINTS, AS LONG AS IF THERE'S ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL POINTS, I THINK THIS IS THE TIME TO TALK ABOUT THAT. 
          I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT WE ALSO GO TO THOSE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE LIVING THERE, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE PEOPLE DON'T FEEL SEEN AND THAT WE MAKE THEM FEEL SEEN, AND WE TALK TO THEM AND ASK THEM HOW THEY FEEL. BECAUSE IF WE CONTINUE TO KEEP PUSHING FORWARD WITH PROJECTS LIKE THIS, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO RUN INTO PROBLEMS LIKE THIS. THAT'S MY ONLY RECOMMENDATION. AND ON TOP OF THAT, AND COMMISSIONER FONSECA, WOULD YOU WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION? YES, MA'AM. AND WE DO NEED A SECOND IF THERE'S GOING TO BE FURTHER, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION, WHICH IS DUE TO. THE FACT THAT THIS. THE STAFF DID SEND OUT LETTERS TO THE VICINITY, AND THEY DID NOT PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS. I'M TAKING IT AS THERE'S NO ACTUAL ISSUES WITH THIS PROJECT FROM THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY WITHIN ITS SURROUNDINGS. SO THE LETTERS DO GO OUT, THEY GO OUT. AND TEN DAYS PRIOR TO THIS COMMISSION, DUE TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE. DUE TO THE STREET IMPROVEMENTS, EVERYTHING THAT THE PROJECT WILL OFFER IN REGARDS TO PHASE ONE, I DO MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AND APPROVE THE PROJECT. I WILL LET CITY COUNCIL KIND OF DEAL WITH. HANDLING HOW THEY WILL INCORPORATE THE LABOR UNIONS INTO THIS AND THEIR AGREEMENTS WITH THE LABOR UNIONS. SO, MADAM, MADAM CHAIR, THERE WAS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR THAT WAS NOT SECONDED. THAT MOTION, THAT FIRST MOTION NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH, EITHER SECONDED OR FAIL BEFORE YOU CAN BRING UP ANOTHER ONE. RIGHT. CHAIR LATA AS WELL. AND ALSO COMMISSIONER FONSECA. SO THERE'S A MOTION ON THE 
          [02:10:06]
TABLE. BUT ALSO IF YOU BELIEVE OR IF THIS COMMISSION BELIEVES THAT THIS ITEM NEEDS TO BE CONTINUED TO A DATE AND TIME, CERTAIN. YOU CAN ALSO DO THAT. AND WE WE NOTICE IT. SO THAT'S ALSO AN OPTION IF YOU, I, I CAN'T RECALL EXACTLY THE EXACT MOTION OF COMMISSIONER FONSECA, BUT IF IF IT'S SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF CONTINUING TO A DATE AND TIME, CERTAIN NOTICE SO THAT WE CAN ADDRESS CERTAIN ITEMS, THAT'S ALSO AN OPTION. I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THE ITEM NEEDS. I AGREE WITH THE. THE REVISIONS TO THIS. LIKE I, I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THAT THIS ITEM NEEDS TO BE PLACED ON A FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. I THINK FOR, FOR ME, AND I KNOW WE NEED A MOTION ON WHAT WAS, WHAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE TABLE AS IT IS, BUT I THINK APPROVING IT WITH SAID CONDITIONS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH CITY COUNCIL SO WE CAN, YOU KNOW, GET THE. STAFF'S TIME SPENT ON THIS TO KIND OF WORK, FOCUS ON MOVING THINGS FORWARD. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALREADY COMPLAINING OF LIKE, THINGS TAKE A LONG TIME. A LOT OF PROJECTS TAKE A LONG TIME. AND THIS KIND OF JUST LIKE ADDS TO IT. AND SO I WOULD HATE TO BRING SOMETHING BACK THAT I THINK WE CAN APPROVE AND HAVE CITY COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, DO THEIR, THEIR DUTIES OF, OF REVIEWING THE LENGTHY, YOU KNOW, PACKET, AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER. SO, YOU KNOW, AS AN ADVISORY COMMISSION, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WOULD BE BEST OF OUR RECOMMENDATION TO OUR CITY COUNCIL FOR THAT. BUT HAPPY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOTIONS IF THAT'S WHAT NEXT STEPS NEED TO BE, THERE NEEDS TO BE A SECOND TO COMMISSIONER FONSECA'S MOTION OR IT FAILS. YEAH. SO IS THERE A SECOND TO COMMISSIONER FONSECA'S MOTION? CLARIFICATION POINT ONE MORE TIME WE CAN IF WE TAKE THIS TO COUNCIL, CAN WE STILL PUT IN PUT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS INTO PLACE? YES, IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT MOTION. YES. RIGHT. OKAY. SO I'M I MOTION TO MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL. SO FOR SO FOR FONSECA'S. IS THERE A SECOND. HEARING NONE. MOTION. THE MOTION FAILS. NOW, MADAM CHAIR, YOU CAN OFFER A SECOND MOTION. SO A MOTION TO MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO THEIR DISCRETION, IN REGARDS TO THE LABOR UNIONS AND WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY IN REGARDS TO ANY ISSUES THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE FOR THIS PROJECT. OKAY. I SECOND THAT MOTION. COMMISSIONER. YES, COMMISSIONER FONSECA, NO. VICE CHAIRPERSON TORRES. IT GOES TO COUNCIL WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. YES. AS MOTIONED BY CHAIRPERSON LAURA. 
          YES. THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PROJECT. SO IF WE APPROVE IT AND THEN COUNCIL REVIEWS IT AND COUNCIL, CAN COUNCIL DENY IT? COMMISSIONER LATA AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, COMMISSIONER LATA, BUT YOUR MOTION WAS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT AS IT IS WITH NO CONDITIONS, RIGHT? IT IS WITH THE CONDITIONS AND LETTING CITY COUNCIL WITH DEAL WITH THE DISCRETION FOR THE COMMUNITY, WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THE LABOR UNIONS. 
          SO THEY'RE TAKING ALL THE POWER OUT OF YOUR HANDS. I THE PLANNING COMMISSION. YEAH. JUST TO CLARIFY TOO, THOUGH, IN TERMS OF LIKE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHAT WE CAN WE'RE IN CHARGE OF DOING, RIGHT? I KNOW WE ARE ONLY IN CHARGE OF LAND USAGE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          SO ARE WE GETTING ARE WE GETTING IN THE WEEDS HERE FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY? SO A MOTION WAS MADE. COMMISSIONER LAND. I MADE A MOTION WITH HER SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR APPROVAL. SO YOU WILL BE APPROVING THE RECOMMENDATION WITH COMMISSIONER CHAIR LATAS RECOMMENDATIONS. RECOMMENDATION. 
          YOU YOU DON'T NEED TO ADDRESS RIGHT NOW. WE'RE NOT IN PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. SO, COMMISSIONER LADA, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M MISUNDERSTANDING YOUR MOTION. 
          THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE PROJECT PRETTY MUCH AS IS WITH THEN THE CITY COUNCIL. BECAUSE WE JUST DO LAND USE. WE DON'T WORK WITH UNIONS. SO IT'S IT'S UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL IF WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE IT, BECAUSE COMMISSIONER TORRES IS IS KIND OF ON THE FENCE. AND WE 
          [02:15:04]
CAN DO THAT AS WELL. OKAY, MA'AM, YOU HAVE TO HAVE ONE MOTION. RIGHT. AND IF I WOULD LIKE TO MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WITH COUNCIL'S DISCRETION REGARDING THE LABOR UNIONS AND COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY IN THE VICINITY. OKAY. AND AND THERE WAS COMMISSIONER DORICA. SAID YES. COMMISSIONER FONSECA SAID NO. OKAY. CHAIRPERSON OR VICE CHAIRPERSON TORRES COMMUNITY DISCRETION IS GOING TO BE BROUGHT INTO THIS STILL, AS LONG AS IF COMMUNITY DISCRETION IS BROUGHT INTO THIS AND THE COMMUNITY CAN TALK AND SAY IT, THEN YES, I'LL VOTE YES. YEAH. SO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, BECAUSE I THINK PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED IN THE CROWD. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR WAS TO RECOMMEND THIS, TO GO TO COUNCIL WITH WITH COUNCIL'S DISCRETION AND THE COMMUNITY AFFECTED WITH ITS DISCRETION. 
          CORRECT? CORRECT. YES. THIS WOULD BE ADDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AND THE COMMUNITY IS MORE THAN WELCOME TO APPEAR AND MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT AND GIVE THEIR THEIR, YOU KNOW, PROS AND CONS FOR THE PROJECT. THAT'S IT. AND THEY WOULD HAVE CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE FINAL SAY AND, YOU KNOW, WORK FORWARD WITH STAFF AND THE DEVELOPERS ON IT. OKAY, THEN. YEAH. YES AND YES. CHAIR CHAIRPERSON. YEAH. MOTION PASSES. 
          [Informational]
YEAH. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS FOR INFORMATIONAL? I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A TOWN HALL MEETING ON. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A TOWN HALL MEETING TO DISCUSS THE DATA CENTER ON MONDAY, MAY 11TH AT THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB. QUICK QUESTION CAN WE ALL CAN'T ATTEND THOUGH, RIGHT? OR YES, WE ALL CAN ATTEND. OKAY, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COMMUNITY MEETINGS. THE COMMISSION CAN CAN ATTEND. JUST MAKE SURE STAY AWAY FROM THE SERIAL MEETINGS. OKAY? BUT YES, YOU CAN ATTEND THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, ALL OF THEM, EVEN IF IT'S A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION. ALL RIGHT. AND WITH THAT, I ADJOURN THE MEETING AT
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.