►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting | January 9, 2019
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
C
A
C
A
C
D
A
E
C
A
Second,
all
in
favor
passes
public
comment.
This
time
has
been
set
aside
for
members
of
the
public
to
address
the
Planning
Commission
on
consent,
calendar
and
agenda
items
and
items
of
general
interest
within
the
subject
matter.
Jurisdiction
of
this
commission.
Please
note
that
the
Planning
Commission
cannot
take
action
on
any
item
that
was
not
posted
and
posted
and
agendized.
Each
speaker
will
have
three
minutes
and
I
believe
that
every
every
item
on
today's
agenda,
except
for
the
consent
calendar,
is
a
public
hearing
item.
A
A
A
That
passes
six
yeses
one
abstention
public
hearing
items
to
a
los
Palmas
brewing
LLC
on
behalf
of
Larry
and
Connie
brand
brand
with'
for
a
conditional
use
permit
to
allow
for
a
cocktail
beer,
lounge
and
accessory
brewery
at
461,
North
Palm,
Canyon,
Drive,
zoned,
CBD,
section
16
staff
report.
Please
cheer.
H
H
So
the
applicant
has
revised
the
plans
that
you
have
as
a
part
of
your
packet
and
and
also
here
on
the
screen.
You
see
that
they
have
indicated
to
provide
some
improvements
to
the
store
front,
elevation
paint,
the
rear
of
the
the
building
and
re
stucco
the
front
and
relocate
the
the
drainage
on
the
facade
of
the
building.
So
this,
what
you
see
here
on
the
screen
is
a
rendering
of
what
they
proposed
the
storefront
to
look
like
they
would
install
a
planter
and
some
enhanced
detailing
for
the
patio
railing.
H
So
that
has
been
changed
in
PL
in
5.
We
also
added
PL
in
9
the
draft
resolution,
and
that
is
related
to
the
storefront
and
for
improvements
that
are
provided
to
you
today.
So,
oh
and
sorry.
Lastly,
the
information
on
trash
handling
for
the
property
there
currently
are
trash
receptacles
at
the
rear
of
the
patio
or
the
rear
of
the
business
and
the
rear
patio
space
and
those
service
temporary
receptacles
until
the
African
transports,
those
to
the
trash
bins
that
are
located
in
the
public
parking
lot
to
the
southwest
of
this.
H
So
a
couple
of
other
items
that
the
Commission
may
want
to
consider
after
the
packet
went
out
were
conditions
that
staff
spoke
with
one
of
the
commissioners
about
one
being
that
a
subwoofer
speaker
shall
be
prohibited
from
the
exterior
of
the
building
for
should
be
prohibited
from
the
on
the
outside
of
the
building
and,
secondly,
that
outdoor
speakers
be
turned
off
by
10:00
p.m.
so.
Those
are
a
couple
of
items
that
you
may
wish
to
consider
today
could.
C
C
Do
you
know
if
there's
any
plans
for
I
there's
a
comment
made
that
on
the
drawing
actually
the
elevation
that
electrical
devices
will
be
removed,
and
yet
that
seems
it
looks
like
the
main
meter
box
for
the
building
is
on
the
rear,
facade
there
as
those
zone
air
conditioning
units
that
I
mentioned.
Do
you
have
any
information
about
that.
H
H
B
H
H
H
A
H
A
H
Are
not
requiring
that
they
do
this
weird
we're
adding
it
as
a
condition
per
their
request
to
make
these
modifications.
So
I
don't
understand
that
because
we
didn't
ask
that
they
do
these.
What
the
Commission
requested
that
the
Afghan
look
at
and
consider
making
these
changes
and
based
on
the
discussions
that
they
heard
from
the
Commission,
they
decided
to
move
forward
with
those
changes
so
because
they
are
proposing
these
changes.
We
are
requiring
it
as
a
condition.
It's
not
a
requirement
that
staff
is
imposing
on
them,
but
but
just
in
their
willingness
to
do
the.
B
B
B
E
Don't
recall
you
asking
that
question
at
the
meeting,
because
your
consideration
of
a
conditional
use
permit
is
limited
to
those
items
that
are
specifically
being
requested
as
part
of
the
conditional
use
permit.
In
this
case
it's
for
the
proposed
use.
We
do
not
have
a
minor
architectural
application
before
us
or
a
major
architectural
application
before
us,
and
so
consequently,
it's
generally
restricted
to
those
items
that
are
being
requested
by
the
applicant.
As
mr.
Newell
has
indicated.
E
B
H
B
A
A
A
There
any
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak
on
this
item
there
being
no
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak.
If
the
applicant
would
come
back
up,
I
told
you
it
would
be.
I
should
have
warned
you.
It
would
be
quick.
So
if
you
would
come
back
up
and
I'm
assuming
you
don't
have
a
rebuttal
to
the
lack
of
testimony
so
questions
that
we
may
have
of
you,
starting
with
Commissioner
Keller
time.
B
Thanks
for
making
these
changes
that
the
project
looks,
you
know
not
a
hundred
a
thousand
percent
better
I
think
you'll
benefit
from
it.
The
public
will
benefit
from
it.
Your
customers
will
benefit
from
it.
So
thank
you
so
much
I
do
have
a
couple
questions,
though,
on
item
number
two
on
your
letter,
you
state
we
will
conceal
roof
drains
within
trim.
Could
you
be
more
specific
on
that?
Please
absolutely.
J
So
it
will
be
a
decorative
trim
of
of
waterproof
metal
similar
to
what
is
constructs
a
a
roof
train,
and
this
trim
will
be
also
attached
to
the
facade
of
the
building.
In
the
same
way,
a
drain
would
be
attached,
but
the
obvious
goal
of
this
trim
is
to
enhance
the
appearance
of
the
facade,
as
well
as
as
requested
conceal.
The
roof.
Trains
with
the
proper
slope
did.
B
A
B
Okay
and
and
so
okay,
so
that's
nice-
that's
probably
no
aluminum
cover
that's
good,
exactly
okay,
nice
and
then,
while
you're
up
there
I'll
ask
my
next
my
last
question,
which
would
be
you
stayed
on
the
storefront
glazing,
you're
gonna
restore
it.
Could
you
be
more
specific
about
that?
Also,
please!
Yes,.
J
B
B
C
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
They're
gonna
resurface
the
existing
glazing
channels
and
without
door
music
to
end
at
ten
o'clock
there
being
no
sub
movers
I
think
those
were
the
in
some
some
covering
of
the
trash
bins
and
air-conditioning
in
the
rear
yard.
Those
and
you're
okay
with
those
conditions,
yes
I,
you
want
to
make
that
motion.
B
Was
out
there
again
this
week
and
again,
I
love
what
you're
doing
I
think
it's
gonna
be
a
great
addition
to
the
city
and
that
part
of
the
little
block
area.
It's
gonna
be
a
terrific
success
with
the
hotel
opening
up
across
the
street.
It's
just
a
huge
win.
What
about
Sun
control?
Are
you
guys
gonna
put
use
umbrellas
because
that
little
patio
looks
like
it
might
get
kind
of
toasty
at
7
parts
of
the
day?
Yes,.
J
A
J
G
Madam
chair
I
would
just
like
to
thank
the
applicant
for
listening
to
the
comments
responding
to
the
common
comments
line
by
line
and
working
to
make
a
better
product.
I
hope
it
helps
you
financially
as
well
as
helps
the
city's
just
want
to
acknowledge
your
cooperation
on
this,
and
thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
much.
D
But
really
looking
forward
to
seeing
it
and
I
like
to
drink
wine,
sometimes
so,
okay.
A
A
K
Please
we
agree
afternoon,
madam
chair
I,
say
request
of
staff
and
after
reviewing
what
the
applicants
are
provided
tours
in
response
to
your
comments
and
direction
from
the
last
meeting,
staff
made
a
determination
that
that
application
was
not
ready
to
come
before
you
and,
as
a
result,
we
are
asking
for
a
continuation
to
a
date.
Certain
of
January
23
2019
can.
A
The
item
is
continued
until
January
23
2019
to
see
requests
by
Coachella
flats
LLC
for
a
conditional
use
permit
and
a
variance
application
to
decommission
and
review
363
existing
one
wind
turbine
generators
and
replaced
them
with
20
new
wind
turbines,
with
a
maximum
of
height
of
$4.99,
400,
400
and
99
feet,
and
to
315
foot
tall
meteorological
towers
on
approximately
850
800
cated
west
of
North
Indian,
Canyon,
Drive,
north
of
highway
111
and
south
of
Interstate
10.
Before
we
get
to
the
staff
report,
we
have
two
items.
A
D
K
I'm
Jeremy
I
just
add
that
the
majority
of
those
mitigation
measures
had
the
same
as
contained
in
the
initial
study,
the
MND
itself,
but
because
this
one
had
a
monitoring
program,
and
that
was
why
we
have
a
separate
submission
and
it's
our
press
summary
that
I
was
supposed
to
be
an
attachment
number
seven
in
your
package
and
which
was
also
emailed
to
Planning
Commission
as
last
night.
So
he
says,
axiom
does
the.
A
K
A
A
K
Good
afternoon
Madame,
chair
and
members
of
the
Planning
Commission,
so
the
item
you
have
before
you
now
is
a
request
by
Coachella
flats,
and
this
request
consists
of
a
CU,
p
application
and
a
variance
application.
So
let
me
go
on
the
CEOP
first.
The
CDP
is
for
the
decommissioning
and
replacement
of
the
existing
363
aging
wind
turbines
at
that
location.
K
Those
wind
turbines
were
installed
in
the
80s
when
the
c-word
that
area
of
the
city
was
to
learn
that
the
jurisdiction
of
the
county
of
Riverside,
but
there
is
a
coda,
is
a
require,
a
provision
in
our
code
that
requires
that
the
wind
turbines
be
replaced
after
30
years,
so
because
of
the
the
aging
the
age
of
these
turbines
and
the
fact
that
some
of
them
are
no
longer
functional.
This
applicant
is
requesting
to
remove
the
existing
363
Torrance.
K
This
exhibitor
ama
am
about
to
show
we.
This
is
this,
is
the
this
exhibit
indicates
the
existing
turbines
to
be
removed
and
the
proposed
ones
that
will
be
replacing
the
existing
one
so
they're,
all
the
red
dots
will
represent
all
the
existing
turbines
at
the
allocation,
so
the
car
to
the
east,
it
may
be
actually
just
come
to
the
bot.
K
K
K
So
again,
there
is
a
variance
application
that
is
included
in
this
request.
As
I
indicated
in
the
staff
report,
the
city
allows
a
maximum
height
of
300
feet
for
wind
turbines
and
200
feet
for
met
towers.
However,
the
request
is
for
a
499
two
wind
turbines
and
a
maximum
height
of
315
feet
for
the
met
towers.
So
this
these
exhibits
you
seen
on
the
monitor,
shows
where
the
maximum
height
is
going
to
look
like
when
the
top
blade
is
at
12
o'clock
position.
K
K
There
are
some
action
that
have
been
taken
prior
to
today,
number
one,
as
required
by
the
city
and
as
required
by
the
airport
land
use
Commission
because
of
the
location
of
the
of
the
side.
A
log
have
reviewed
the
application
and
MIDI
determination
that
it
is
consistent
with
the
requirements
that
was
on
November
8
and
then
on.
September
14.
K
This
is
also
because
it's
within
the
Coachella
Valley
Commission
Conservation
Commission,
a
jape,
a
GPR
or
joint
process
review,
is
required
on
September
14
applications
were
mailed
to
to
jpr
and
there
is
a
condition
of
approval
that
that
staff
is
proposing.
She
should
any
requirement
or
additional
requirement.
We
made
of
staff
of
the
applicant
to
to
comply
with
whatever
those
conditions
will
be.
K
K
K
K
So,
as
part
of
the
prior
Commission,
also
the
FAA
reviewed
and
issued
a
determination
of
new
hazard
to
act
navigation.
There
is
the
copy
that's
before
you
today,
so
there
are
20
of
those
letters
for
each
of
the
wind
turbine
so,
but
I
only
gave
you
one
I,
don't
think
you
want
to
go
through
these
20
of
them
because
they
are
all
the
same
and
then
on
November
15
staff
did
receive
an
email
from
staff
of
Southern
California
Edison.
K
That
made
a
determination
that
this
is
within
the
ADA
does
maybe
our
guidelines
and
I
thought
they
will
have
no
objection
to
to
the
safety
setbacks.
The
only
entity
that
staff
has
now
received
such
a
determination
or
an
agreement
from
will
be
the
railways,
the
rail
authorities.
However,
staff
is
aware
that
the
applicants
are
working
with
with
the
railroad
authorities
in
the
past.
K
What
has
happened
is
that
a
condition
of
approval
is
placed
on
such
a
project
that,
prior
to
construction
or
prior
to
grading
agreement,
will
be
supplied
to
staff,
and
that
is
the
way
that
has
been
dealt
with
in
the
past
and
cue
project.
Two
very
similar
projects
came
to
mind
that
also
required.
Such
a
waiver
and
a
condition
was
placed
on
them
because
of
the
time
constraint
and
that
it
takes
to
go
through
the
process
that
conditional
is
placed
on
the
project
and.
A
K
Proposing
that
today
yes,
so
going
back
to
the
issue
of
variance
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
this
project
does
require
two
kinds
of
very,
very
specific
setbacks.
So
number
one
is
the
safety
setback.
So
if
you
go
to
the
very
first
table
on
your
staff
report,
all
those
I
mentioned
mostly
to
safety.
Setbacks
are
from
transmission
lines
from
rail
right-of-way,
so
the
applicant
was
not
able
to
meet
four
of
them
and,
as
such,
a
variance
will
be
required
for
those,
then
the
second,
his
second
setback
requirement
will
be
this
scenic
setback
requirement.
K
Usually
the
city
requires
a
certain
distance
from
highways
or
from
the
Indian
Canyon,
not
Indian
Canyon
ride
the
I-10
freeway
highway
111
and
that
no
works.
There
is
a
specific
requirement
from
the
location
of
half
of
works
to
residential
areas.
This
applicant
did
meet
all
those
setback
requirements,
so
they
are
not
seeking
for
any
variance
in
their
regards.
K
Stop
is
it
was
able
to
make
all
the
necessary
findings
for
both
the
variance
request.
As
for
the
heights
for
the
for
the
wind
turbines
and
the
met
itself
and
for
this
setback,
River
requirement,
I
also
want
to
mention
that
in
the
last
two
weeks,
application
that
came
before
the
Planning
Commission
we
had
to
make
very
similar
and
they
were
under
very
similar
circumstances.
So
the
last
one
that
came
before
you
was
for
a
foreigner
and
forty
feet
maximum
height,
and
at
that
time
the
Planning
Commission
had
directed
staffs.
K
You
look
into
making
in
some
text
amendment
I
wouldn't
allow
higher
heights.
However,
due
to
a
difference
of
different
kinds
of
constraints,
staff
focus
shifted
a
little
bit
and
we
haven't
been
able
to
accomplish
that.
So.
But
if
you
look
into
other
jurisdictions,
particularly
Riverside
County,
they
have
an
approving
wind
turbines
in
excess
of
400
or
500
feet,
because
that's
where
the
new
technology's
going.
So
you
have
less
in
quantity,
but
with
higher
heights
that
will
generate
even
more
power
than
the
older
ones.
K
K
Consultant
hired
by
the
city
they
were
distributed
for
public
review
and
comments
from
August
6
to
I
was
27
on
2018
and
staff
also
made
available
those
those
MMD's
to
the
Planning
Commission.
But
we
only
received
four
comments
and
all
those
who
are
responded
to
then,
in
addition
to
the
mitigation
measures
that
were
recommended
by
the
consultant
staff,
also
added
a
Mira
additional
conditions
of
approval
to
make
sure
that
the
issues
of
safety
addressed
adequately.
K
K
So
that
was
intended
to
address
the
proximity
of
any
residence
to
decide.
There
is
none,
the
closest
one
would
be
the
mountain
gate
and
it's
about
2.7
5
miles
from
these
sides.
So
the
code
requires
that
there
should
be
no
habitable
structure
within
50
feet,
I
believe
of
or
any
habitable
structure
within
the
location
of
a
WAC.
So
there
is
no
or
residential
use,
even
are
not
even
the
desert
Highland
area
that
is
for
that
down.
So
it
is
very
far
away
from
this
side.
C
K
C
K
C
I
said
I'd,
you
know
whether
it's
now
or
I
don't
know
when,
but
it
would
be
good
to
clarify
that
issue.
Okay
and
I.
Don't
know
whether
to
be
honest
with
her,
that's
within
the
city
limits
or
Serie
C
or
to
influence
or
whatever,
but
like
I,
said
I
believe
there
are
people
living
in
that
that
quadrant
there
okay.
D
K
D
K
C
To
that
question,
Edward
in
the
package
I
saw
that
we
received
several
months
ago.
There
were
many
many
more
visual
simulations
from
different
vantage
points
and
I
was
wondering.
Is
that
still
part
of
this,
the
middle?
Were
they
left
off,
because
I
think
it
does
pertain
to
chairs
question
about
the
visibility
of
the
these
towers
from
yours?.
K
K
Had
it
on
our
on
our
website,
thank
you.
So
madam
chair
I'm,
going
to
defer
the
remainder
of
that
questions
relative
to
the
lights
to
our
consultant
and
the
applicant
specialist
that
he's
here
to
address
those
but
going
back
to
the
rest
of
the
questions.
So
the
first
questions
came
from
the
vice-chair
and
the
first
part
of
it
was
actually
comments.
But
the
first
two
are
comments
and
then
the
first
question
there
was.
K
K
Corrected
and
then
your
questions
regarding
the
MND
on
page
28,
where
it
states
that
lower
blade,
rotational
speed,
higher
order,
height
and
greater
distances
between
turbines,
allow
more
visibility
to
avian
species
and
increase
avoidance
potential.
I
will
also
define
a
term
environmental
specialist
on.
K
K
K
You
did
mention
here
that
it
sounds
like
this
is
the
direction
that
the
industry
is
headed.
Your
question
there
is,
at
the
other,
existing
potentially
proposed
wind
farms.
That
would
also
seek
five
hundred
foot
tall
towers
in
the
near
future.
The
answer
to
that
is
yes,
because
if
you
recall
the
last
two
prior
to
this,
one
also
exceeded
the
maximum
height
of
the
hundred
feet,
so
we
had
to
also
seek
for
a
variance
for
those
I.
Don't.
K
The
additional
questions
I
believe
from
the
chair
and
from
Commissioner
woods
who
asked
about
the
summary
page,
where
all
the
mitigation
measures,
so
those
are
the
ones
that
were
provided
to
you
today
and
I,
also
want
to
mention
to
you
that
at
least
three
of
them.
Those
mitigation
measures
have
already
been
met
by
the
applicant.
K
Specifically,
the
mitigation
measures
IV
four
five
and
six
we've
already
provided
the
documents
that
were
required
of
their
staff
is
in
possession
of
those
documents.
A
K
K
There
has
been
no
instance
of
a
failure
where
you
have
a
with
turbine
collapse
or
fall
and
their
rule
to
hurt
either
other
developments
or
individuals
or
homes
that
has
never
happened
so
and
I
keep
going
back
to
the
last
two
wind
turbines,
a
project
that
you
approved.
They
were
under
the
very
same
similar
circumstances,
so
you
did
grant
variance
for
those
two
and
we
have
had
no
complaints
or
any
type
of
failure
relative
to
those
jewel
up
until
now,.
E
E
The
properties
here
on
the
north
side
of
I
believe
the
railway
line
there
are
currently
within
the
county,
so
they
are
not
within
the
city
limits.
However,
they
are
within
our
sphere
of
influence.
The
first
properties
that
you
see
here
on
the
north
side
of
the
tracks
already
here
shows
under
county
records
as
being
a
commercial
property
with
a
zoning
of
w2,
which
I'm
assuming
is
either
wind
overlay
or
water
course,
and
then
going
to
the
city's
general
plan
map
showing
the
sphere
of
influence.
E
We
designate
that
particular
area
as
a
wind,
energy
overlay
and
so
going
back
to
the
question
is
that
residential
there
there
is
a
couple
of
residential
houses
within
that
area
that
unincorporated
area
of
the
county.
However,
it
still
meets
the
separation
requirement,
that's
required
under
our
zoning
code
and
the
intent
is
that
the
future
use
of
those
properties
would
be
within
the
wind
overlay
if
they
were
annexed
into
the
city
of
Palm
Springs.
K
So
I'm
gonna
defer
that
question
to
our
consultant
and
you
also
asked
about
any
proof
of
low
outlet
rotation,
as
stated
in
the
MMD.
Yes,
that
was
relative
to
the
question
has
by
the
vice-chair
I'm,
also
going
to
defer
that
through
our
trial
consultant
and
then
what
are
the
widths
of
turbine
blades
or
the
rotors.
K
Those
are
for
around
27
feet,
diameter
and
the
distance
from
nearest
housing
development
so
do
one
or
that,
in
addition
to
the
one
that
the
director
just
are
mentioned,
there
is
the
man
gate
and
desert
Highland
man,
gate
and
the
future
era.
Lung
development
is
over
a
little
two
point.
Seven
two
point:
eight
miles
from
these
sites.
K
I
I
Nobody
had
any
idea
what
windmill
would
look
like
what
it
would
do,
what
it
explode.
What
would
happen
so
setbacks
were
set
significant
distances
from
the
adjacent
properties,
and
that
was
a
good
idea
in
the
very
early
days
there
were
some
pretty
interesting.
Blade
throws
frankly
in
1981
and
that's
when
machines
had
100
200
rpm
rotations.
These
are
rotating
at
about
30,
rpm
I.
Believe
there's
never
been
a
large
tower
go
over
if
it's
gonna
go
over,
it's
gonna
happen
at
a
high
wind
is
coming
from
the
West.
It's
never
happened
here
worldwide.
I
There
have
been
a
few
blades,
a
few
at
less
than
10
come
off
these
really
large
machines,
and
when
they
do,
they
fall
straight
down
in
every
single
case.
They
weigh
you
know,
40
50
tons
and
you
you
so
the
safety
issues
are
much
different
than
the
the
thinking
back
in
1980.
When
this
started,
there
are
two
very
large
windmills
directly
across
the
freeway
there
had
variances
for
height,
one
of
the
things
you'll
notice
is
if
the
land
going
north
of
rises
about
500
feet
up
towards
Desert,
Hot
Springs.
I
When
you
look
at
the
from
the
city
looking
at
the
windmills,
the
ones
in
the
distance
will
be
700
feet
above
the
eye,
and
these
will
be
400
500
feet
essentially
above
the
eye.
So
the
what
happens
is
the
tall
ones
get
lost
in
the
view
shed
because
the
ones
that
are
only
a
hundred
feet
high
are
actually
700
feet
higher
than
your
eye,
the
so
the
safety
setbacks
which
were
set
great
overkill
in
the
beginning,
which
was
a
good
idea
and
no
longer
really
relevant
and
you've
done
waivers
before
on
them.
I
I
I
This
is
completely
consistent
in
the
city's
policy
of
cleaning
up
the
old
projects
and
any
environment.
The
the
project
is
an
environmental
mitigation
pure
and
simple,
because
it
it
goes
from
one
windmill
for
two
and
a
half
acres,
the
one
for
40
acres.
What
was
the
view
shed
the
trips
for
maintenance
or
vastly
less
the
old
machines
are
30
years
old
now,
and
they
need
a
lot
of
maintenance.
A
lot
of
people
go
on
out
there.
The
new
machines
don't
require
that
so
in
any
sense
of
environmental
mitigation,
I
can
think
of.
I
By
doing
this,
you've
mitigated.
There
may
be
other
things
you
want
and
then
finally,
the
the
Conservancy
has
no
jurisdiction
on
permitting
that
was
carefully
negotiated
when
the
Conservancy
was
set
up,
they
have
suggestions,
but
by
agreement
by
law
they
cannot
did
not
have
permitting
authority.
You
guys
do
no,
sir.
Excuse
me
the
Conservation
Commission.
I
A
I
What
you've
got
here
is
situation
where
you
got
parcels
that
are
not
big
enough
to
repower
these
projects.
If
you,
if
you
don't
work
with
the
setbacks
and
there's,
there
are
no
people
living
there
and
it's
not
zoned
for
residents,
except
for
the
small
group
you
pointed
out,
and
so
the
the
questions
of
safety
really
come
down
and
what
does
edison
think
about
its
power
lines
and
they've
seem
to
be
okay.
They've
done
this
before
the
railroad.
I
I
have
no
idea
where
a
road
would
do
I've
never
had
to
deal
with,
unfortunately,
but
I'm
sure
they'll
want
a
pound
of
flesh
like
they
always
do
so
other
than
that.
What
you
really
have
here
is
a
project
really
consistent
with
the
policy
of
the
city,
which
is
to
get
rid
of
the
old
machines
and
the
clutter
and
they're
30
years
old.
They
have
the
equivalent
now,
if
they
were
a
truck
they'd
have
the
equivalent
of
two
and
a
half
million
miles
on
them.
So
we.
A
K
So,
madam,
madam
cheering
conclusion,
staff
is
recommending
approval
for
the
CU
p
and
also
recommending
that
the
Commission
grant
the
variance
or
waivers
for
the
applicant,
given
that
this
project
is
consistent
with
other
similar
wind
turbine
farms
within
the
city,
and
also
that
there
are
adequate
mitigation
measures
that
are
imposed
on
this
project
to
assure
its
safety
and
to
meet
our
code
requirements
and
that
adequate
findings
have
been
made
for
the
variance
and
the
condition.
I
use
applications
and.
K
A
E
Know
you
can
ask
questions
as
the
environmental
consultant
at
any
point
in
time
during
the
hearing,
but
in
terms
of
the
action
when
you
get
to
a
point,
if
you're
going
to
take
action
today,
we
would
ask
that
you
make
your
findings
on
the
environmental
documentation
first
and
then
proceed
with
the
conditional
use.
Permit
would.
A
People
have
questions
in
advance
of
that,
so
that
yeah
just
so
that
the
environmental
consultant
knows
what
our
questions
are
and
is
able
to
answer
them.
That's
a
question
for
four
people
in
terms
of
procedure.
Should
we
do
questions
now,
then
have
the
environmental
consultant,
or
would
you
prefer
us
to
have
them?
First.
L
Édouard
pretty
much
summed
it
up.
The
esthetics
analysis
was
prepared
by
Dudek
and
they
determined
that
impacts
were
less
than
significant
I'd
like
to
address
the
nearest
structures,
as
you
mentioned,
are
3,200
feet
away
and
the
closest
one
is
a
metal,
scrap,
yard
and
I
believe
the
residential
buildings
are
north
of
that.
So
the
scrap
yard
is
between
the
buildings
and
the
wind
turbines,
and
currently
there
are
eight
turbines
existing
on
the
site
that
have
lighting.
As
mr.
L
noble
mentioned,
the
FAA
requires
lighting
for
structures
taller
than
260
feet,
and
so
there
are
currently
eight
turbines
out
there
that
have
lighting
on
them
and
they
have
the
older
style
of
lighting,
and
so
it
will
be
reduced
when
the
twenty
new
turbines
are,
but
the
lighting
style
will
be
reduced
when
the
new
turbines
are
built.
A
biological
I'm,
just
gonna
touch
on
the
topics
that
had
mitigation
there.
L
L
L
L
Open
the
conclusion
was,
there
were
less
than
significant
impacts
on
all
of
the
neighborhoods,
including
the
aerial
tramway
State
Park,
the
that
she
excuse
me
a
microphone.
Oh
sorry
and
I
can't
see
without
my
glasses,
but
I
can't
put
them
back
on
so
that
James
Jessie,
Desert,
Highland,
Unity,
Center
and
Mountain
Gate.
Those
were
all
part
of
the
visual
analysis
study
and
which
determined
there
would
be
less
significant
impacts
based
on
the
existing
conditions,
where
there
are
the
300,
approximately
300
turbines,
to
be
replaced
with
20,
and
there
are
eight
already
out
there
with
lights.
L
C
I
met
her
just
a
quick
question.
You've
mentioned
the
eight
existing
turbines
on
the
on
the
site,
the
taller
ones.
Do
you
know
roughly
what
the
height
of
those
eight
turbines
is
I.
A
A
Then
good
impact
on
page
28,
there
was
a
very
specific
question
that
came
from
Commissioner
calor
join
regarding
it
was
a
a
V
in
protection.
Whether
there
was
any
it
says
that
there's
a
lower
blade
speed.
We
understand
that,
but
it
says
fewer
turbines.
Do
those
blades
overlap,
so
is
it
actually
safer
for
birds?
Is
there
really
a
space
between
them?
Do
you
know.
L
A
A
L
D
D
M
A
A
A
L
Part
of
this
document,
but
I
do
know
that
Governor
Brown
did
a.
He
funded
a
study
to
determine
the
height
of
the
turbines.
That
would
be
the
least
impactful
to
avian
species,
and
that's
the
newest
designs
are
based
on
that
study.
I,
don't
know
the
date
of
it,
but
that
is
as
I
sat
down.
I
remembered
could.
L
L
L
A
A
D
M
M
And
if
so,
is
there
a
report
that
discusses
that
that
we
have
access
to
as
it
talks
about
Raptors
it
talks
about
migratory
patterns,
I
mean
all
these
things
that
I'm
curious
about
and
I'd
like
to
have
answers
to,
but
I
don't
see
a
report
so
I'm
just
a
little
confused
or
an
expert
that
could
perhaps
answer
those
questions.
I.
M
Issues
that
say,
as
suitable
compensatory
mitigation
shall
be
proposed,
so
I'm
not
sure
what
that
means,
as
relates
to
no
Raptors
and
migratory
birds
that
have
been
killed.
So
I'm
wondering
what
would
be
suitable
compensatory
mitigation.
That's
one
question
and
then
for
mitigation
measure
4-5
that
talks
about
an
equal
conservation
plan.
I,
don't
know
what
that
is
exactly
it'd,
be
curious
to
see
what
that
is
and
I
know.
There
was
a
mention
of
an
eagle.
Take
permit
right.
L
K
Madam
chair,
yes
earlier
on
I
mentioned
that
some
of
those
mitigation
measures
have
been
met,
so
this
dart
report
that
their
commissioner
Peters
is
asking
for
were
submitted
to
start
this
morning.
So
here
the
risk
assessment
that
mitigation
measure
or
id4
was
asking
for
so
the
applicant
for
broad
for
bird
and
bat
conservation
strategy.
What
yeah.
A
K
A
K
A
A
That
could
be
answered
and
there's
a
lot
of
information
that
might
help
not
just
the
Commission,
but
maybe
staff,
do
a
text
amendment
for
our
general
plan
and
our
zoning
code,
so
that
we
end
up
with
with
good
plans
but
I'm
I'm,
just
wondering
as
I'm
hearing
the
questions,
I'm
hearing
questions
without
without
clear
answers
and
I'm
wondering
Flynn.
If
you
have
a
thought
on
how
we
proceed
with
this.
E
E
And
you
would
be
able
to
have
experts
there
who
could
respond
to
the
questions
that
they
are
asking
now
so,
based
on
that,
if
you
do
have
concerns,
what
I
might
recommend
is
that
we
do
a
study
session
prior
to
our
next
Planning
Commission
meeting.
We
will
have
our
consultant
bring
their
experts
in
those
areas
where
you
have
questions
to
respond
to
those
questions,
and
that
might
be
the
best
way
to
handle
this
and.
A
D
A
E
What
I
would
recommend
is
that
we
continue
with
the
public
hearing
we
have
yet
to
hear
from
the
applicant
I
would
like
to
hear
from
anyone
in
the
audience
of
the
public,
who
would
also
like
to
speak
on
this
matter
so
that
we
can
take
their
testimony
and
then,
once
we
conclude
the
public
hearing
portion
of
this
meeting,
based
on
the
testimony
that
you
hear
in
the
public
hearing,
you
may
then
want
to
continue
this
to
a
study
session
prior
to
your
next
Planning
Commission
meeting
and
continue
the
item
accordingly.
I
think.
D
D
It's
that's
pretty
new
yeah
and
to
actually
require
a
permit.
It's
going
to
be
be
very
time-consuming.
D
D
M
K
And
that's
a
very
good
question,
thank
you,
sir,
so
and-
and
that
also
relates
to
the
question
that,
if
vice-chair
just
asked
so
the
question
of
the
avian
and
issues
and
bats
and
birds
and
the
Eagles
came
from
the
u.s.
wild
us
world
and
fish
services
that
was
worthy
one
of
their
comment.
Letters,
and
so
we
had
to
respond
to
that.
K
K
D
K
Issued
they
were
all
they
all
received,
including
the
Planning
Commission
that
received
the
initial
studies,
but
never
received
any
comments
from
them
and
also
including
a
lot
nearby
local
jurisdictions.
So
we're
all
sent
the
initial
studies,
but,
okay
thanks,
we
don't
receive
any
comments
back.
It's.
L
B
L
B
A
L
F
With
respect
to
mitigating
a
mitigation
with
regard
to
biological
resources
that
you've
discussed
a
lot
of
it
has
to
do
with
burrowing
or
berming
around
specific
areas,
and
my
question
was
whether
that
was
the
appropriate
way
to
do
it,
and
whether
the
the
wind
movement
from
the
turbines
would
upset
those
mounding
of
dirt
areas
that
you're
talking
about.
How
would
how
would
the
mitigation
react
to
the
the
flow
of
wind?
That's
coming
off
the
turbines,
I.
L
K
A
A
I
A
M
O
O
I
would
like
to
briefly
introduce
you
to
Terrigen
the
parent
company
of
the
project
applicant.
We
are
a
us-based
independent
power
producer
focused
on
development,
construction
and
operation
of
renewable
energy
projects.
We
currently
own
and
operate
almost
a
thousand
megawatts
of
wind,
solar
and
geothermal
projects
in
the
US.
Our
parent
company
Energy
Capital
Partners
is
a
private
equity
firm
that
invests
in
North
American
energy
infrastructure
projects.
They
provide
Terrigen
a
solid
financial
backing,
having
raised
over
thirteen
billion
dollars
to
date.
O
Our
development
team
is
based
in
San
Diego
and
we
are
heavily
focused
on
renewable
energy
development
in
California.
In
fact,
over
the
past
ten
years
we
have
been
the
number
one
wind
energy
developer
in
the
state.
Our
track
record
includes
the
development
and
construction
of
the
fifteen
hundred
and
fifty
megawatt
Alta
Wind
Energy
Center,
located
in
Kern
County.
It
is
the
largest
wind
farm
in
North
America,
consisting
of
11
phases,
586
modern,
wind
turbines
and
3.3
billion
dollars
in
investment.
O
We
are
also
active
in
the
San
Gorgonio
wind
resource
area,
owning
six
operating
projects,
totaling
approximately
230
megawatts
these
projects
are
primarily
managed
from
our
onm
facility
off
of
North
Indian
Canyon
Drive.
We
are
very
excited
about
repowering
opportunities
within
this
resource
area,
which
is
why
we're
here
before
you
today.
O
We
have
been
working
on
the
development
of
this
repower
project
for
over
a
year
now,
in
November
2017,
we
submitted
CEP
invariance
applications
to
kick
off
the
formal
application
process
with
the
city
in
February
2018.
We
met
with
the
planning
department
and
the
city
secret
consultant
to
discuss
the
project
and
on
August
6
2018,
the
city
published
the
is
MMD
on
November,
8th
2018,
the
ailich
I.
A
O
Is
MMD
initial
study
mitigated
negative
declaration
on
November
8th
2018,
the
a
lock
the
airport
land
use,
Commission
board,
heard
our
project
and
voted
unanimously
to
approve
ending
receipt
of
FAA
Federal
Aviation
Administration,
no
hazard
determinations
for
the
proposed
turbines,
those
FAA
no
hazard
determinations
were
issued
on
December
4th
2018
and
we're
then
provided
to
a
lock
the
airport
land
use
Commission
moving
forward
from
today.
We
hope
to
begin
construction
in
the
third
or
fourth
quarter
of
this
year
and
place
the
project
into
operation
late
next
year.
O
We'd
like
to
highlight
one
of
the
many
positive,
a
strobe
use
of
this
project,
and
that
happens
to
be
the
reduction
in
visual
clutter
due
to
the
decommissioning
and
removal
of
approximately
three
hundred
and
sixty
three
existing
turbines.
The
best
way
to
present
this
is
through
visual
simulations,
two
of
which
are
on
the
following
slides.
First,
visual
simulation
is
from
the
north
of
the
project
off
of
garnet
Avenue.
The
second
visual
simulation
is
from
the
southeast
corner
of
the
project.
O
O
That
this
slide
would
help
highlight
and
compare
some
of
the
important
attributes
of
the
existing
versus
the
proposed
repower
project.
As
mentioned
earlier,
the
existing
site
has
approximately
three
hundred
sixty
three
existing
turbines
most
were
built
in
the
1980s
and
range
from
a
hundred
and
eight
to
one
hundred
and
ten
feet.
In
height,
the
average
generating
capacity
is
between
sixty
five
kilowatts
and
108
kilowatts.
The
average
annual
net
capacity
factor
is
a
meager
seventeen
percent,
which
will
further
decline
as
these
turbines
age.
O
In
comparison,
the
repowered
site
would
consist
of
only
twenty
turbines,
which
is
about
a
1
to
18
reduction
due
to
the
efficiencies
of
modern
turbine
technology.
The
annual
net
capacity
factor
is
expected
to
more
than
double
to
40
percent.
Unlike
the
existing
project,
the
repower
project
would
have
modern
safety
features,
including
fire
suppression,
an
automatic
shutdown.
O
Our
noise
analysis
indicated
that
the
existing
project
on
the
repowered
site
would
remain
under
city
noise
standards
and,
last
but
not
least,
the
repower
project
would
provide
a
significant
boost
in
the
and
the
property
tax
base
for
the
site,
providing
Riverside
County
with
approximately
sixteen
point,
two
million
dollars
in
property
taxes
over
a
30-year
period.
Yeah.
O
Finish
up
my
presentation
I'd
like
to
summarize
these
benefits,
removes
363
turbines
and
replaces
with
20
utilizing
an
existing
site
and
existing
disturbance,
reduces
visual
clutter,
replaces
old
equipment
with
safer,
more
efficient
and
state-of-the-art
technology.
It
generates
more
electricity,
creates
between
80
and
100
temporary
jobs
during
construction
and
preserves
jobs
for
our
current
operations,
team
generates
a
significant
property
tax
revenue
for
Riverside
County,
provides
an
economic
benefit
during
construction
to
the
general
region
and
supports
various
renewable
energy
initiatives,
and
also
a
benefit
that
is
not
on.
A
A
I
I
I
The
reason
is
they
live
in
up
in
the
trees
up
in
the
hills
and
a
botanist
explained
to
me
that
if
you're
an
eagle
and
you
can
fly
laterally
and
get
a
rabbit
and
take
it
to
your
nest
or
come
down
here
and
lift
at
4,000
feet,
you
know
you're
gonna
stay
up
in
the
hills,
for
whatever
reason
they
just
don't
come
down
here
there
was
one
Eagle
killed
one
time
found
on
Dillon
Road
between
two
wind
farms
and
it
turned
out.
It
had
hit
a
power
line.
I
It's
off,
shoulder
was
almost
cut
off
being
almost
cut
off
and
that's
a
power
line.
Does
that
there
are
no
above
ground
power
lines
in
wind
farms,
the
windmill
blade
is
like
getting
hit
by
a
bus,
it
might
crush
an
animal,
but
it's
not
gonna
cut
his
wing
off
the
market
or
e
birds
tend
to
fly
above
a
thousand
feet.
I
Millions
of
them
come
through
the
cereno
pass
to
each
way
during
the
year,
but
there's
been
very
little
evidence
that
they've
been
killed
in
any
significant
numbers
and
those
were
always
by
the
windows
out
way
out
to
the
west
by
Cabazon.
So,
as
you
consider,
these
matters,
I
would
very
much
hate
to
see
this
go
down.
The
road
of
that
we
have
a
giant
bird
problem
here
would
be
nice
bad,
for
these
guys
be
better
for
me
next
time,
I
show
up
with
a
project.
I
want
to
build.
I
I
You'll
find
that
the
very
issue
mercifully
down
here
is
is
eggwin,
and
then
I
could
be
having
my
geography
wrong
on
lights,
but
I
think
citizens,
Palm
Springs,
proper,
have
to
look
through
the
existing
lights
on
existing
projects
that
will
remain
before
they
can
see
the
lights
on
this
one,
not
a
double
check
that
but
I
think
that's
right.
So
it
may
be
that
these
lights,
albeit
they're
or
a
bit
higher,
may
not
even
be
discernible
from
the
city,
but
that's
something
you
can
look
at
the
geography
and
find
out.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
A
M
C
I
have
a
sort
of
basic
question:
you're
asking
for
499
foot
height,
which
is
say
500
and
to
me
that's
very
high.
So
I
was
my
question:
is:
did
you
look
at
an
alternative
scheme
keeping
with
just
their
throw
number
out
there
a
turbine
height
of
300
feet
and
in
terms,
obviously
there
would
need
to
be
more
turbines,
but
was
that
a
feasible
option
or
did
you
explore
that
at
all.
C
Sorry
and
I
can
answer
that
question.
Thank
you.
The
nature
of
the
turbine
business
today
is,
as
turbines
get
more
efficient
and
they
get
taller
all
the
major
modern
manufacturers
of
today
have
followed
that
path.
So
there
really
are
no
new
modern
turbines
that
that
are
under
300
feet.
It's
just
they've
gone
to
the
400,
450
490
foot
range
and
that's
just
sort
of
how
it's
gone.
If
we,
we
had
been
able
to
find
turbines
under
300
feet
and
what
happens
is
we
have
more?
C
We
have
more
impact
more
turbines,
the
same
size
site
and
trying
to
achieve
the
same
capacities
it
just
the
set
bag
needs
the
impacts
on
the
ground.
All
of
those
things
go
against
us
and
go
against
the
site.
So
it's
really
at
this
point.
The
the
modern
turbine
world
is
410
feet
and
higher
and
I'd
like
to
answer
the
fa
question
as
well.
Typically
I.
C
Imagine
some
of
the
existing
turbines
out
there
today
have
daytime
and
evening
lights
flashing,
our
turbines,
that
the
requirements
of
the
FA
are
medium
intensity,
red
lights
and
they
will
only
flash
at
night
and
not
every
turbine
will
be
lit.
How
the
FA
manages
the
lighting
program
is
once
the
final
layout
for
construction
has
been
determined.
The
FA
will
look
at
it
and
they'll
issue
a
lighting
plan,
and
it's
typical
that
that
they
light
between
35
to
40%
of
turbines
that
you
build.
F
Maybe
this
could
be
to
the
gentleman
in
charge
of
environment.
So
much
of
the
mitigation
talks
about
it
sounds
like
it's
pretty
active
from
a
biological
resources
standpoint.
It
sounds
pretty
active
and
a
lot
of
critters
running
around
that
area,
and
they
talk
about.
If
you
find
that
they're
being
endangered,
that
the
way
you
protect
them,
is
you
sort
of
put
mounds
of
dirt
around
their
nesting
or
wherever
their
habit?
Ating,
and
my
question
is
I,
of
course,
I.
F
Don't
understand
how
the
whether
there's
a
downdraft
to
these
turbines
or
not,
but
my
question
was
whether
the
the
velocity
of
the
wind
from
the
coming
off
of
the
turbines
would
affect
what's
happening
on
the
ground
and
disturb
the
mitigating
issues
that
might
be
put
into
place
for
serving
saving
the
biological
resources.
I.
N
Can't
address
that,
we've
in
Tehachapi
and
other
wind
farms
throughout
the
western
United
States
that
I've
overseen,
not
just
the
construction,
the
disturbance
at
the
time,
but
also
the
vegetation,
the
the
revegetation
monitoring
and
the
mitigation
that
we've
done
on
the
ground
for
desert
tortoise
burrowing,
owls
vegetation
communities,
whatever
those
may
be.
Our
monitoring
has
not
shown
any
effect
from
any
wind
activity
associated
with
turbines.
N
The
sites
are
typically
characterized
because
of
the
nature
of
the
way
the
move,
the
wind
moves
across
the
landscape,
its
laminar,
its
flat,
it
doesn't
roll,
it
doesn't
tumble
those
make
the
best
and
most
productive
wind
areas.
So
that's
where
we
put
those
turbines.
So
the
fact
that
those
turbines
are
hundreds
of
feet
in
the
air.
It's
an
unrestricted
movement
of
air
below
those
turbines,
and
it
does
not.
We
have
very
sensitive
receded
areas
that
have
been
sown.
N
F
N
We've
got
meteorologists
that
study
that
in
the
minutia,
and
so
I
can't
speak
to
the
specifics,
however,
that
these
areas
historically
are
fantastic
for
the
wind
regime,
that's
there
and
how
the
turbines,
the
selection
of
those
turbines
to
use
that
wind
resource
the
most
efficient
manner
possible.
Like
Robin
mentioned.
That's
part
of
the
reason
these
are
so
tall
now
is
because
that
wind
resource
is
so
clean
at
that
elevation.
Thank
you.
If
I
could
do
a
rebuttal
to
mr.
N
nobles
comments
regarding
some
of
the
questions
that
were
asked
about
how
we
interact
with
the
non
government
organizations
like
Sierra,
Club
and
defenders
of
wildlife,
we
work
very
closely.
We've
got
professional
working
relationships
with
these
with
his
organizations
we
go
to
the
same
industry
conferences,
we
sit
on
the
same
panels.
We
work
on
the
same
mitigation
strategies,
the
monitoring
strategies
and
one
that
there
are
three
things
that
come
into
play
for
this
project
and
reap
ours
in
general.
One
is
that
we
want.
N
We've
got
the
ability
to
use
data,
that's
been
collected
over
the
last
20
years,
so
instead
of
running
a
model
from
new
or
what
would
be
determined,
more
rigorous
studies
at
greenfield
sites
where
there
are
no
projects,
we're
very
fortunate
to
use
the
data.
That's
already
been
collected
to
see
how
these
are
performing
in
terms
of
how
they're
impacting
wildlife
resources,
so
we've
we've
collected
and
you've
got
a
document
in
front
of
you.
This
is
the
the
burden,
bat
conservation
strategy.
We.
N
Also.
What
this
document
represents
is
bringing
something
that
these
older
projects
don't
have,
and
that's
a
sense
of
paying
attention
to.
What's
going
out
there,
current
statistical
monitoring
protocols
that
are
in
place
so
we're
actually
monitoring
the
effects
that
we've
got
on
those
new
which
is
absent
from
the
landscape
right
now
in
a
majority
of
the
projects.
N
So
this
is
actually
bringing
this
this
project
up
to
the
standard
of
care,
that's
expected
by
the
Fish
and
Wildlife
Service
as
CDF
MW
and
the
organizations
as
well
as
just
the
industry
standard,
and
you
had
asked
earlier
what
are
some
of
the
mitigations
that
have
been
imposed
for
unexpected
or
high
mortality
rates.
In
fact,
that
is
repowering
projects.
Just
what
we're
proposing
to
do?
Taking
those
those
old
machines
offline,
those
those
windrows
that
have
affected
birds
for
whatever
reason
from
the
monitoring
and
repower?
N
D
G
N
F
N
I
can
say
that
the
we
have
11
projects
representing
close
to
700
turbines
in
very
similar
desert,
arid
type
of
in
the
Tehachapi
area.
We
have
monitored
those
11
projects,
three
years,
apiece,
that's
33
years
in
aggregate
of
formal
post
construction,
mortality
monitoring,
we
have
never
taken
a
listed
species
and
we
have
never
found
any
large
numbers
of
mortality
from
any
particular
event.
That
is
a
considerable
amount
of
information
that
we
can
use
that
if
that
that's
published
yes-
and
it's
quite
in
quite
frankly,
the
arid
eras
areas
of
California
show
lower
mortality
numbers.
N
Typically,
six
birds
per
megawatt
is
expected
in
the
western
United
States
for
as
long
as
these
surveys
have
been
that
this
is
a.
This
is
an
aggregate
of
everything.
That's
it's
a
compilation
of
the
studies
about
six,
the
wind
farms
in
this
area
that
have
been
studied.
It's
not
six!
It's
one
point
two
22.3!
So
it's
substantially
less
than
the
national
average
and
California
is
about
four
birds
per
megawatt.
M
A
A
F
A
A
Sorry
that
would
shorten
it,
wouldn't
it
city
of
Palm
Springs
for
his
own
text,
amendment
two
sections:
nine.
Ninety
one
point:
zero,
zero
point:
one
zero.
Ninety
two
point:
one
point:
one
in
ninety
three
point:
two
three
point:
one:
four
of
the
Palm
Springs
zoning
code
related
to
accessory
second
units
in
residential
zones.
Staff
report.
Please
Thank.
P
P
P
The
main
thing
about
the
inconsistency
that's
observed
currently
is
the
terminology
that
is
used.
The
city's
zoning
regulation
calls
access
a
second
dwelling
unit
versus
the
state
law,
calls
it's
access
leading
unit,
so
the
stuff
and
the
Department
of
Planning
Services
is
proposing
to
achieve
consistency
in
the
language.
That's
used
and
also
include
additional
definitions
to
provide
more
clarity
to
the
person
who
interpreted
the
code
in
it
to
the
public
as
well.
P
This
is
a
table,
that's
included
in
the
staff
report
and,
as
you
see,
we
are
trying
to
make
it
easier
for
the
residents
to
establish
exercise
during
units.
If
you
look
at
the
bottom
of
the
table,
which
is
the
maximum
access
a
second
unit
rental
period,
the
the
word,
the
maximum
actually
should
be
minimum
to
be
consistent
with
the
city's
vacation
rental
regulations
and
one
of
the
major
differences
is
that.
P
For
the
maximum
allowable
size,
currently
the
zoning
code
allows
30
percent
of
the
existing
living
area
or
1200
square
feet,
and
the
land
use
permit
can
be
applied
to
increase
the
the
floor
area
up
to
99
percent
of
the
primary
residence.
However,
this
will
be
changed
to
make
a
maximum
50%
of
the
existing
living
area
or
1200
square
feet,
whichever
is
less,
which
is
required
by
the
state
law.
P
The
intent
of
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
is
to
provide
affordable
and
diversified
options
and,
as
you
can
imagine,
the
larger
structures
are
typically
typically
more
expensive
compared
to
smaller
structures,
and
also
the
housing
means
really
need
to
be
diversified
and
for
the
reason
staff
is
recommending.
The
mission
of
the
99%
fluid
increase
by
land
use
permit
and
one
of
the
other
change,
but
what
other
changes
that's
being
proposed
is
the
the
parking
requirements
right
now.
The
required
amount
of
parking
space
is
determined
by
the
number
of
bedrooms
that
an
excessively
a
second
unit
contains.
P
However,
the
staff
is
recommending
these
regulations
to
be
changed
to
be
consistent
with
the
state
regulations.
So
the
state
regulation
states
that
the
provision
of
one
parking
space
regardless
number
of
bedrooms
and
if
access
a
dwelling
unit
meet
certain
conditions,
they
are
not
the
residence
on
re-quote.
Excuse
me:
the
residents
are
not
required
to
provide
the
parking
space
for
the
unit
and.
P
This
is
the
last
part
of
the
table
that
was
included
in
staff
report
and
I
just
clarify
the
fire
sprinkler
requirements.
This
is
actually
steady
in
the
states.
The
building
code
section,
which
is
reviewed
by
the
building
safety
department
and
the
fire
sprinkler,
is
required
unless
all
these
specific
conditions,
as
stated
in
the
the
building
code
met.
P
However,
according
to
the
most
recent
state
law,
the
language
has
been
actually
introduced
as
a
part
of
the
exercise
do
any
unit
stipulation,
but
there
will
be
not
much
of
a
difference,
because
the
state
law
now
requires
that
this
fire
sprinkler
is
not
required
if
it's
not
required
for
the
primary
residence.
That's
actually
one
of
the
findings.
That's
currently
included
in
the
building
code
regulation
and
the
last
one
the
utility
meter
requirement.
P
G
P
G
P
P
That
is
too
well
state
law
says
30
days,
but
because
we
do
have
a
vacation
rental
regulations
in
a
code
which
states
that
28
days
well
I'm
sorry
to
just
clarify
the
vacation
rental
based
on
the
zoning
code.
The
definition
is
a
single-family
dwelling
that
is
utilized
for
occupancy
for
a
period
of
28
days
or
less
right.
G
P
E
Is
a
city
requirement
and
that
came
out
of
the
discussions
that
were
had
when
we
last
updated
the
ordinance
and
fifteen.
There
was
a
recommendation
from
the
Planning
Commission
at
that
time
and
that
was
followed
through
by
the
City
Council,
also
supporting
that
language
that
we
have
in
the
ordinance.
So
that's
where
that
came
from.
B
E
A
E
E
E
A
B
E
F
Have
a
question:
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
is
defined
as
a
complete
independent
living
facility
for
one
or
more
persons,
and
it
shall
include
provisions
for
living,
sleeping
eating,
cooking
and
sanitation.
What
if
I
as
a
private
property
owner,
wanted
to
build
a
casita
solely
for
the
use,
my
own
personal
use?
Would
this
apply
to
that
situation?.
F
F
F
F
A
Other
questions
on
this
ordinance
just
directing
it
maybe
just
specific
questions
so
that
we
can
get
through
it
in
five
minutes
I
have
on,
which
is
I,
understand
the
change
in
the
maximum
allowable
size,
which
was
from
30%
of
the
living
area
to
50%.
But
why
exclude
the
ability
to
go
to
99%
with
an
Lu
P
one.
E
That
way,
going
back
to
miss
Q
cheese
explanation.
This
is
really
intended
to
be
for
affordable
housing
to
increase
the
stock
of
affordable
housing.
You
have
a
unit,
that's
99
percent,
of
the
main
dwelling.
It's
no
longer
really
within
the
realm
of
affordability.
Let's
say
the
main
dwelling
is
3500
square
feet
at
99
percent
of
that
you
have
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
of
33
or
so.
A
D
I'm
concerned,
if
people
will
try
to
game
the
system
and
try
to
add
a
second
dwelling
unit,
that's
actually
a
vacation
rental,
somehow
maybe
by
flipping
them
or
some
other
things.
We
just
want
to
monitor
that
in
the
future
to
make
sure
that
I,
don't
think
the
purpose
of
this
at
all
is
to
provide
for
vacation
rentals.
How.
E
A
E
I,
don't
think
that
we
need
to
because
again
the
regulation
is
very
clear:
it's
just
a
matter
of
coordination
between
our
two
departments
to
make
sure
that
they
can
enforce
and
understand
the
need
to
enforce.
This
is
a
public
hearing
item.
Then
you
do
have
members
of
the
public
here
in
the
audience.
Oh
I'm.
A
I
Thank
you,
madam
chairman
and
council.
Basically,
I
only
have
one
request:
could
I
get
an
updated
copy
of
what
you
guys
are
discussing
cause
I'm
I'm
looking
at
what
was
on
your
poster
on
your
website
and.
C
E
E
C
A
G
Be
happy
to
make
a
motion.
My
motion,
no
I'm,
not
done
with
my
motion.
Thank
you.
My
motion
is
to
approve
it
but
to
strike
the
maximum.
Excuse
me,
the
minimum
you
rent
a
period
I,
really
don't
believe
that
in
any
way,
building
affordable
housing.
If
somebody
uses
that
a
vacation
rental,
some
will
some
won't
but
we're
building
the
product
and
then
the
less
if
the
product
is
land,
I
just
really
see
no
reason
to
regulate
it.
G
When
we've
subsequent
to
2015,
we've
gone
through
a
pretty
hefty
election
and
at
this
point,
vacation
rentals
are
very
well
regulated
and
I
think
if
a
person
wants
to
make
an
extra
income,
whether
they
rent
it
for
28
days
or
more
or
28
days
or
less,
that's
the
economics
of
the
time.
So
is
there
a
second
to
my
motion.
F
We're
really
running
out
of
time,
because
two
of
our
council
members
are
eager
to
get
in
here,
but
I
know.
This
is
the
last
session.
The
Planning
Commission
for
Lin
and
Cathy
and
I
just
want
to
say
that
you
could
not
work
with
two
better,
more
informed
or
cooperative.
More
collegial
people
than
Linda
Cathy
I
have
served
on
many
boards.
Public
and
private
and
I've
never
met
a
chairman
more
qualified,
more
able
to
run
a
meeting
to
concentrate
of
the
substance
and
get
the
process
through
in
an
expeditious
way
than
can't
Cathy
Warmack
and
I.