►
Description
Thousand Oaks Planning Commission Meeting - 9/12/22
A
A
B
D
B
B
B
B
The
speaker's
remarks
should
be
addressed
to
the
commission
as
a
whole
and
not
to
an
individual
commissioner
or
staff
member
unless
otherwise
provided
by
the
commission,
speakers
or
commission
are
limited
to
five
minutes.
The
screen
will
show
you
your
the
remaining
time.
You
have.
Are
there
any
public
speakers
this
evening.
C
B
F
B
D
B
B
C
2022-70360
to
allow
a
modification
of
the
thousand
oaks
municipal
code,
zoning
ordinance,
section,
9-4.2404,
e-1,
requiring
10
of
the
surface
parking
area
to
be
evenly
distributed
through
the
entire
parking
area
to
be
removed
and
dispersed
in
other
areas
in
order
to
facilitate
the
installation
of
solar,
arrays
and
associated
support
structures
over
the
existing
parking
lots
and
find
that
the
project
is
exempt
from
sequa
the
pro
the
property
is
designated
as
employment
park.
In
the
rancho
canelo
specific
plan,
sp
7,
located
at
1700,
rancho
canel
boulevard,
the
applicant
is
solar
optimum
inc
inc
for
takeda
pharmaceuticals.
G
G
G
G
A
special
use
permit
major
mod
that
was
filed
in
april.
It
is
to
allow
the
installation
of
15
solar
car
ports,
two
solar,
shade,
canopies
and
a
ground
mount
solar
array.
However,
this
installation
does
require
an
approval
to
modify
the
municipal
code
section
9-4,
sorry,
9-4.24
e1,
as
mentioned
project
description,
is
as
follows.
G
Two
solar,
shade
canopies
are
going
to
go
over
the
walkways
and
outside
seating
areas,
approximately
75
000
square
feet
of
ground-mounted
arrays
over
an
unimproved
portion
of
the
property
associated
electrical
and
battery
equipment,
of
course,
and,
lastly,
a
modification
for
the
redistribution
of
required
parking
lot.
Landscaping
in
this
case,
10
minimum
here's
a
site
plan
depicting
the
areas
that
are
going
to
receive
the
solar,
solar,
canopies
and
the
arrays,
as
well
as
the
ground
mount.
You
see
the
ground
mount
here,
just
just
west
of
the
parking
lot.
G
If
you
take
the
pink
area,
which
is
approximately
twelve
thousand
square
feet
and
added
to
the
rest,
the
remaining
of
the
remaining
parking
lot
landscaping,
it
does
equate
to
about
thirty
six
thousand
square
feet
or
makes
up
sixteen
percent
of
the
required
of
the
required
minimum.
Ten
percent
parking
lot
landscaping
to
go
in
the
parking
areas
as
well
as
circulation
areas,
the
requested
modification
or
sorry
the
requested
modified
parking
lot.
Landscaping
would
look
like
this
again
just
to
point
point
this
out.
G
The
area
in
blue
is
the
total
amount
of
surface
parking
area
and
vehicular
circulation
that
comprises
227,
920
or
922
square
feet,
so
roughly
228
thousand
square
feet
of
that
figure,
they're
supposed
to
be
10
minimum
landscape
requirement.
That's
that's
the
code
that
we're
looking
at
it's
not
enough
that
the
minimum
be
met.
There
is
also
a
section
of
code
that
does
talk
about
the
landscaping
be
evenly
distributed
throughout
the
parking
area.
G
This
next
slide
shows
kind
of
an
example
of
the
parking
area
we're
talking
about
and
the
trees
that
are
going
to
be
removed
to
accommodate
carports
they're,
approximately
about
20
feet
and
you
know,
span
so
there's
20
feet
between
them.
These
are
california
sycamores
and
they
are
sort
of
located
on
the
perimeter
area
of
the
of
the
parking
parking
lot.
G
Here's
another
view
just
to
show
you
again
where
the
where
these
trees
are
and
how
they
are
right
now
situated
again
along
the
edge
of
the
parking
area.
This
area
to
the
west
is
actually
the
unimproved
area.
That's
going
to
receive
the
ground
now,
here's
another
view,
standing
on
canejo,
rancho,
canejo,
boulevard
and
looking
westward.
G
G
G
And
here's
just
another
view
to
show
again
the
landscaping
from
a
different
vantage.
This
is
from
across
the
street
you'll
notice
that
some
of
these
gaps
in
here
these
are
going
to
get
filled
with
the
proposed
10
trees
to
help
again
mitigate
for
screening,
so
just
again
to
get
into
the
the
special
use
permit
and
why
we're
here
tonight
it
is
for
a
modification
of
the
code
requirement
which
requires
planning
commission
approval,
in
this
case
we're
modifying
the
section
again
9-4.2404
e-1,
requiring
landscaped
areas
to
be
evenly
distributed
throughout
the
entire
parking
area.
G
This
becomes
a
planning
commission
decision,
because
the
landscaping
must
be
maintained
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
as
set
forth
in
section
9
4.2404,
unless
otherwise
approved
by
the
planning
commission.
There
is
some
very
small
deviations
that
are
allowed
by
the
by
the
director,
but
this
goes
way
above
and
beyond,
so
we're
here
tonight
to
review
that
there
needs
to
be
four
findings
made
in
order
to
approve
this
sup,
and
I
went
ahead
and
abbreviated
these
a
little
bit.
G
So
we
start
our
evaluation
again.
As
stated,
the
proposed
solar
system
is
a
compatible
accessory
used
to
the
to
the
main
research
facility
to
decatur
and
the
redistribution
of
the
parking
lot
landscaping
will
maintain
compatibility
with
the
character
of
the
development
and
uses
an
sp7,
rancho
conejo
employment
part
it's
for
the
following
reasons:
the
overall
landscaping,
change
and
design
of
the
solar
arrays
are
not
contradictory
to
the
surrounding
development.
G
G
The
proposed
use
is
not
expected
to
become
obnoxious,
dangerous,
offensive
or
injurious
to
the
public,
health
safety
or
welfare.
The
solar
arrays
do
not
involve
any
hazardous
material
production
handling
or
odor
emissions
thereof;
rather
they
produce
electricity
by
utilizing
solar
energy,
the
photovoltaic
system
and
associated
parking
lot.
Landscaping
modification
will
preserve
the
integrity
and
character
of
the
zone
in
which
the
use
will
be
located
and
the
utility
and
the
value
of
the
property
in
the
zone
and
in
the
adjacent
zones.
G
G
In
addition
to
the
the
four
the
four
criteria
we
mentioned,
it
does
meet
sql
exemptions
and
there's
actually
three
classes.
It
actually
qualifies
for
class
three
for
new
small
structures
such
as
carports
class
11,
also
defines
those
as
accessory
to
an
existing
industrial
project
or
sorry,
this
industrial
development
and,
lastly,
class
32
for
infield
development,
and
it
does
meet
all
of
the
five
exemption
criteria.
G
G
And
this
is
just
a
surrounding
land
use
map.
Obviously
the
site
is
encircled
in
red,
the
subject
site
that
is
and
there
you
see
the
the
industrial
uses
nearby
and
there
is
a
residential
use
apartments.
I
believe
the
arroyo
apartments
are
just
down
the
street
and
there
is
a
little
bit
of
a
buffer
there
between
them.
G
F
G
G
Whether
they're,
I
think,
if
you
look
at
the
area
there
are
some
solar
panels
mounted,
perhaps
on
the
on
some
of
the
roof.
But
but
that's
a
that's
about
it.
I
think
I
was
just
referring
to
it
as
a
as
a
more
common
feature
if
it
were,
if
it
were
so,
you
know
applied
to
that
site,
but
I
don't
know
I
could
not
verify
if
they
actually
have
those
or
not.
F
G
A
great
question
at
this
point:
it
is
case-by-case
basis,
but
to
your
point
it
is
something
that
staff
is
going
to
need
to
review.
We
feel
this
may
eventually
be
a
trend
forthcoming.
So
as
as
these
as
these
research
facilities
and
biotech
industry
developments
come
online.
This
is
something
we
may
have
to
look
at
down
the
road.
F
G
It's
multifaceted-
and
I
have
not
been
here
long
enough
to
give
you
the
the
folklore
on
how
how
you
know
how
it
came
about,
but
I
did
speak
to
somebody
who
had
been
here
for
a
while.
So
it's
a
couple
of
things
one
is
to
provide
natural
shade
from
from
the
sun
elements
to
the
cards.
Second,
is
to
break
up
the
obviously
the
asphalt
surface,
so
it
is
to
provide
a
softening
and
aesthetic
softening
of
sorts,
and
I
think,
lastly,
is
to
provide
some
screening.
There
are
based
on
design
guidelines.
G
There
are
areas
where,
if
you
have
a
parking
parking
lot
or
vehicle
circulation,
a
budding
a
public
right-of-way
you're
supposed
to
have
some
sort
of
bushes
and
screening
for
that.
So
in
the
areas
where
they
have
that
right
now,
they're
not
proposing
removing
it
as
long
as
it
doesn't
interfere
with
the
canopies
it's
remaining.
But
those
are
the
three
reasons
to
my
understanding
that
that
was
the
origination
for
having
parking
lot
landscaping.
H
True
newman,
thank
you,
mr
slim.
Besides
the
supplemental
information
that
we
got
this
afternoon,
that's
part
of
our
packet.
Did
you
receive
any
other
communications
from
neighbors
or
anybody
else
in
the
community?
No
sir,
I
did
not,
and
just
so
I'm
understanding
and
everybody
watching
so
the
if
this
was
just
the
solar
panels,
it
would
not
have
needed
to
come
before
us.
It's
the
landscaping
issue.
That's
the
only
reason
it's
here
correct,
absolutely
yes,
sir,
and
normally
as
to
landscaping,
especially
when
we
look
at
developments.
H
G
There
are-
and
I
have
a
slide
here
to
show
you
if
you
wanted
to
see.
If
there
are
for
transparency,
there
are
148
trees
that
are
being
removed
of
those
148
trees.
Only
50
are
california
sycamores,
which
otherwise
would
be
protected.
Trees.
However,
they
are
under
the
12-inch
diameter
prerequisite
to
make
those
protected
had
they
been.
This
would
be
another
discussion
and,
of
course,
they
would
have
to
figure
out
a
way
to
supplement.
I
think
it's
a
three
to
one
replacement,
but
because
these
are
not
protected.
These
are
literally
just
landscape
trees.
G
G
H
C
G
That's
a
good
question:
I
can
bring
up
another
slide,
or
rather
I
can
just
let
you
know
it's
so
right
now,
they've
got
about
36
000
square
feet,
roughly
of
parking
lot
landscaping
that
does
not
include
the
landscaping.
That's
found
in
all
the
setback,
perimeter,
setbacks
or
open
areas
or
areas
for
recreating.
So
that's
that's.
In
addition,
too,
that
36
000
square
feet
comprises
about
16
percent,
so
they're
about
6
percent
over
their
minimum
requirement
and
currently
it
is
evenly
distributed
throughout
the
parking.
The
parking
lot.
Obviously,
because
there's
no
there's
no.
G
G
That's
a
great
question,
early
discussions
with
the
applicant
because
we
staff
did
push
back
a
little
bit
on
that.
I
was
told
that
there's
there's
a
number
of
reasons,
one
right
now,
and
especially
with
these
type
of
industries,
there's
a
large
amount
of
rooftop
equipment,
hvac
equipment
to
create
these
positive
pressure
rooms
and
clean
rooms,
and
because
of
that
there
would
be
some
competition
with
these
solar
arrays.
It
just
wouldn't
work
out.
In
addition
to,
there
might
be
some
structural
considerations,
but
I
would
I
would
actually
turn
that
question
over
to
the
applicant.
G
C
D
G
No,
sir-
and
I
don't
anticipate
that
being
the
case-
we
did
get
a
public
works
memo
and
as
well
as
the
conditions
of
approval
with
for
public
works
and
and
I'm
not
gonna.
I
don't
want
to
misspeak
here,
but
nothing
stood
out
honestly
and
I
could
go
back
and
we
could
just
take
a
look
at
them,
but
they
do
have
some
standard
language
in
there
that
that
accent
that
asks
them
to
address
that.
But
but
I
don't
think
there
was
any
conflict
with
any
of
the
bioswales
or
anything
like
that.
B
Mr
slim,
the
staff
report
described
takeda's
energy
consumption.
As
formidable
I'm
wondering,
and
perhaps
this
is
a
question
for
the
applicant,
but
I'm
wondering
if
we're
able
to
quantify
that
what
what
this
plant's
current
power
consumption
is
and
if
we
approve
the
this
project.
What
percentage
of
that
would
be
covered
by
solar
production.
G
B
A
I
G
I
mean
I
I
couldn't
answer
that
fully
to
say
if
there's
precedence
or
not,
we've
always
maintained
that
these
cases
that
these
projects
are
case-by-case
basis,
we
find
ourselves
in
the
middle
of
a
drought
right
now
so
to
push
the
issue
of
hey,
we
need
more
trees,
more
trees
that
I
think,
would
be
kind
of
difficult
and
probably
not
wise.
So
it
is
case
by
case
given
again
where
we're
at
in
its
current
state
state
of
the
you
know,
environment,
whether
or
so.
E
Mr
duggan,
yes,
mr
chairman,
I
think
this
is
something
we
need
to
consider
in
the
future,
so
I'm
going
to
be
convening
the
staff
to
discuss
this.
I
anticipate
there'll
be
further
applications
like
this.
It
may
require
cut
amendment
in
the
future
for
these
non-protected
trees.
Maybe
we
make
them
protected
if
they're
to
be
replaced
by
these
types
of
facilities
or
there's
a
different
kind
of
ratio
of
replacement,
but
it's
something
we
need
to
have
some
good
discussion
about
in-house.
Then
we'll
bring
it
back
to
the
commission
for
further
deliberations.
B
Which
is
a
perfect
segue
to
my
final
question
is
just
to
underscore
that
we've
heard
the
word
case
by
case
thrown
around
several
times
already.
I
just
want
to
underscore
the
case
before
us
tonight
per
commissioner
buss's
question
is
not
a
precedent
setter.
It
is.
It
is,
as
the
staff
report
says,
site
specific
and
use
specific
for
this
applicant
at
this
site.
Only
there
are
other
issues,
as
mr
dugan
has
just
pointed
out,
but
we
are
not
here
tonight
to
make
a
recommendation
to
city
council
to
change
municipal
code.
G
F
Yeah
I
apologize.
I've
got
one
more
question
for
you,
sir,
so
the
california
sycamores
that
are
currently
planted
there
were
those
planted
as
a
result
of
any
other
trees
being
removed
from
that
property
as
native
trees.
Prior
has
anybody
looked
up
what
we
killed
before
to
build
the
buildings
that
we
built
in
the
parking
lot
we
built,
and
if
these
trees
were
considered
part
of
that
replacement
and
that
they
just
haven't
grown
to
size,
to
to
warrant.
G
I
I
couldn't
we
haven't.
I
haven't
done
that
history,
research
based
on
the
configuration
and
the
way
the
trees
were
added.
When
I
did
the
site
visit
it
looked
as
though
they
were,
they
were
just
there
for
the
purposes
of
the
parking
lot
landscaping
based
on
on.
I
think
it
looks
like
the
time
they
went
in
probably
about
15
15
years
ago.
Roughly,
that
you
know
they
would
have
came
in
as,
like.
You
know,
two
inch
caliber
trees,
but
but
again
that
I
don't
think
it
was.
G
F
G
F
F
F
G
F
B
B
J
J
One
of
the
commissioners
asked,
if
there's
precedent
for
this
in
the
city
of
thousand
oaks.
I
definitely
don't
know
the
specifics
here,
but
I
can
tell
you
on
many
projects.
There
has
been
the
need
to
remove
trees
to
go
green,
which
is
kind
of
oxymoronic,
but
the
the
the
the
numbers
speak
for
themselves
in
terms
of
the
carbon
offset,
as
well
as
the
environmental
impact
calculated
by
the
epa.
J
So
I
can
go
through
that
for
this
project
and
I
can
tell
you
not
anecdotally,
but
actually
what
projects
we've
done
in
the
past,
where
we
have
had
to
remove
trees
and
the
justification
for
those
two.
This
is
a
large
campus
with
142
trees.
I
think
we
just
mentioned
that
is
a
sizable
amount
of
trees,
they're
not
full
grown,
but
still
it's
trees
being
removed,
and
we
prefer
not
to
whenever
we
have
that
ability.
J
The
I'll
give
you
a
few
metrics
to
compare
that
to
and
the
reason
why
the
adoption
of
solar,
even
with
the
removal
of
trees,
is
usually
the
path
forward
and
in
terms
of
the
trees
that
we're
removing
in
in
terms
of
the
solar
we're
putting
on
the
site.
It's
offsetting
5862
acres
of
u.s
forests
per
year.
So
when
we're
talking
about
142
trees
being
removed,
one
thing
that
we
are
leaving
out
is
the
actual
impact
in
terms
of
those
trees
and
what
that
compares
to.
So
it's
absolutely
unfortunate
anytime.
J
We
have
to
remove
a
tree
to
put
a
carport
up,
but
the,
but
the
reality
of
the
impact
of
that
solar
is
that
it's
not
just
an
order
of
magnitude
but
orders
of
magnitude
larger
in
terms
of
the
carbon
offset.
So
it
would
be
close
to
6
000
acres
of
trees
on
an
annual
basis
that
we're
offsetting
with
that
4.44
megawatt
solar
array.
And,
again
you
can.
J
You
can
look
at
that
carbon
offset
through
the
epa's
website
in
many
different
ways:
it's
over
half
a
million
gallons
of
gasoline
consumed,
it's
1700
tons
of
waste
recycled
instead
of
landfilled,
it's
5.5
million
pounds
of
coal
burned
on
an
annual
basis,
so
this
is.
These
are
massive
numbers
on
an
annual
basis
and
the
let's
call
it
the
justification
for
that
offset
between
the
trees
and
the
solar.
J
Those
numbers
are
what
you
can
look
up
or
what
I
can
share
with
you.
I
believe
mr
slim
has
most
of
that
also
to
share
with
the
planning
commission
in
terms
of
precedent
here.
I
don't
believe
it
falls
under
the
jurisdiction
of
thousand
oaks,
but
it's
within
this
a
thousand
oaks
borders.
I
believe
caltrans
has
just
across
the
street.
Is
it
across
the
street,
there's
carports
and
canopies
very
similar
to
what
we're
proposing,
but
it's
not
part
of,
I
believe,
there's
a
different.
J
It
doesn't
go
through
normal
planning
commission
when
it's
caltrans
sites,
but
the
the
the
main
purpose
of
our
presentation
is
to
justify
that
environmental
impact
of
the
solar
version
versus
the
the
tree
removals
and
we
were
told
to
provide
the
3d
renderings
of
the
site
too.
And
my
again,
I
have
a
few
slides
here.
If
you
guys
want
to
get
into
the
the
specifics
of
the
offsets,
but
I'd
much
rather
answer
the
questions
directly
that
you
guys
have
for
us.
J
J
If,
if
they
had
the
room
for
it,
they
would
probably
want
to
do
it
now.
So
I
I
can't
speak
for
takeda
pharmaceuticals,
but
we're
essentially
maximizing
the
capacity
of
solar
as
well
as
batteries
that
make
sense
for
the
facility
without
without
going
overboard
and
actually
causing
a
planning
commission
issue.
H
J
I
I
I
the
in
this
planning
commission
meeting.
I
do
represent
the
takeda
and
but
I
don't
know
all
the
specifics
about
the
engineering
of
the
facility,
but
I
can
tell
you
that
we
went
through
this
process
a
few
times
early
on,
probably
a
year
and
a
half
ago,
a
few
things.
There
is
an
incredible
amount
of
equipment
on
that
roof.
J
The
slightest
issue
that
you
cause
to
that
roof
will
significantly
impact
their
day-to-day
operations.
So,
although
at
face
value,
a
rooftop
solution
is
what
we
would
normally
pursue
with
any
one
of
our
clients.
And
although
it's
a
less
expensive
solution,
nine
out
of
ten
times
the
the
avoided
issues
and
complications
that
utilizing
the
rooftop
bring,
especially
given
the
amount
of
usable
space
there
is
it's.
J
I
think
it
was
a
no-brainer
for
the
facility
for
the
company.
So
the
the
main
issue
is
that
if
you
impact
the
pharmaceutical
clean
rooms
and
the
positive
pressure
rooms
in
the
cold
rooms
by
having
a
penetration,
I've
actually
seen
this
at
another
pharmaceutical
company
not
having
to
do
with
a
solar
project.
But
when
you
puncture
the
roof,
if
it's
in
a
cold
room,
you
start
forming
massive
icicles
and
you
you
don't
want
to
affect
the
integrity
of
the
pharmaceutical
clean
rooms
for
what
they're
producing.
So
these
are
injectable
drugs.
J
H
I
think
you
know
years
ago
I
heard
that
we
were
just
on
the
verge
of
having
ceiling
tiles
that
were
going
to
have
solar
capabilities
and,
of
course,
we
haven't
gotten
there
yet
so
again,
once
we
turn
to
it,
we
want
it
to
actually
be
formal
functional.
So
another
obvious
question,
as
I
look
at
the
the
board
here
is
surrounding
the
facility,
is
a
bunch
of
what's
green,
which
I'm
assuming
was
taken
way
before
our
drought
who
owns
the
land.
D
H
J
H
J
Did
so
we
are
using
utilizing
the
ground
mount,
I
mean
the
ground
area
directly
to
the
let's
call
it
northwest
of
the
campus,
and
naturally
I
mean
that
could
be
a
site
for
future
development,
but
they're
investing
in
renewable
energy
for
the
site,
as
opposed
to
just
growing
buildings
on
that
site,
so
that
ground
mount
area
is
feasible
and
was
utilized
is
utilized.
Maybe
it's
on
the
different.
Does
the
other
rendering
show
the
ground
mount?
Oh?
No.
You
can
see
it
over
there
on
the
far
left.
Yes,
apologies.
J
My
my
angle
is
a
little
less
direct
than
yours,
so
the
ground
mount
that
we
are
able
to
use.
We
are
using
and
the
the
carport
area
again,
there's
the
the
form
and
function
of
it.
I
mean
providing
the
shade,
which
is
more
shade
to
the
cars
and
the
employees
and
the
customers
of
takeda
than
the
trees
would
is
also
one
of
the
benefits.
But
to
to
the
same
point,
I
believe
I
was
answering
with
ms
mcmahon.
J
J
We
are
putting
a
couple
large
they're,
called
tesla
mega
packs,
so
they're
container
size
batteries
and
again
those
have
multiple
benefits
to
their
bills,
as
well
as
the
utilization
of
the
solar
energy,
so
they're
predominantly
charged
from
the
solar,
and
they
also
help
out
with
the
the
massive
demand,
spikes
and
usage
that
the
facility
would
be.
Essentially
that's
called.
J
I
don't
want
to
call
it
burdening
the
grid,
but
when
you're
using
a
lot
of
power
in
one
site,
it's
it's
harsher
on
the
grid
than
without
it,
so
the
utilities
charge
for
that
separately.
So
having
the
batteries
supplementing,
the
solar
provides
the
benefits
to
the
energy
consumed,
as
well
as
the
demand
offsets
that
the
facility
would
be
producing
on
site
essentially
from
the
batteries.
H
J
The
my
understanding
and
again
I
can
go
to
my
technical
and
ops
people,
but
my
understanding
is
that
our
car-
it's
not
just
my
understanding.
I
think
this
is
the
reality
of
it.
The
the
carports
are
going
into
the
the
parking
areas
if
we're
putting
the
canopies
where
those
trees
are
where
they
would
normally
have
landscaping
in
between
the
parking
the
cars
facing
each
other.
J
J
J
I
don't
know
what
the
percentage
of
the
population
is.
That's
looking
through
the
planning
commission
meeting
minutes
before
the
project
happens,
but
once
you
see
mobilization
on
site
and
they
start
seeing
the
erection
of
the
solar
facilities,
that's
when
you
start
getting
more
interest
into
the
project,
so
I
I
can.
I
can
speak
to
what
we've
seen
in
the
past
from
other
cities
and
other
projects
that
we've
done
all
throughout
california,
but
specifically
from
this
project
in
thousand
oaks,
not
yet.
Okay.
Thank
you.
F
G
G
G
F
Was
just
this
kind
of
follows
into
my
other
question
about
you
know
what
was
the
important
significance
of
these
trees?
I
am
curious
what
what
was
there
and
why
it's
there
and
I-
and
you
know
my
initial
question-
was
you
know,
is
our
landscaping
plan
arbitrary
or
important
it
all
kind
of
flows
together
so
in
the
future,
when
we're
when
we're
presenting
these
these,
these
would
be
the
things
I'd
be
most
interested
in
just
so,
you
know,
and
it
sounds
like
I'm
not
gonna
get
answers
on
it
tonight.
D
A
D
B
I
Eric
godinez
los
angeles,
and
I
am
operations
manager
for
solar
optimum
and
we
did
discuss
about
keeping
shrubbery
in
those
areas.
Trees
would
just
end
up
growing
into
the
modules
the
module
technology
we're
using
is
called
bifacial,
which
does
allow
some
light
to
come
through
the
modules.
So
you
know
we
don't
want
to
completely
take
out.
What's
there
only
the
trees
are
affecting
the
the
modules.
D
I
mean
that
would
make
sense.
I
I
familiar
with
a
certain
city
that
will
go
on
name
that
has
canopies
over
the
top
of
a
parking
lot
and
we
we
still
have
plants
underneath.
So
I
assume
that
obviously
this
you
are
removing
trees
and
again
wrapping
my
head
around
the
fact
that
I
have
to
cut
down
a
tree
in
order
to
save
carbon
or
not
I'm
not
saving
carbon,
I'm
capturing
carbon
yeah,
so
we're
removing
trees
in
order
to
then
to
take
the
co2
out
of
the
environment
here.
D
J
B
I
B
I
So
so
the
10
trees
came
into
the
plant
when
we
were
having
early
discussions
about
the
tree
removal
and
we
looked
at
the
right-of-way
and
we
noticed
that
there
were
some
gaps
in
the
the
tree
line
that
existing
tree
line.
So,
mr,
I
believe,
was
mr
nazar,
who
suggested
maybe
we
add
some
trees
to
fill
in
those
gaps.
To
kind
of
give
you
a
little
more
greenery
on
the
right-of-way
and
not
show
so
much
of
the
carports.
B
Okay,
so
in
that
case,
staff
city
staff
recommended
that
correct
and
and
again
just
so,
I
understand
how
the
I
don't,
I'm
not
familiar
with
how
the
division
of
labor
works
in
a
project
like
this,
when
you're
preparing
your
your
solar
plants
and
and
the
project
plan
set,
is
very
specific
about
these
panels.
Go
here
and
each
one
has
this
many
watts
and
the
production
is
there,
and
all
of
that
is.
I
D
B
D
I
can't
speak
to
the
current
plans,
but
I
know
that
we
don't
typically
modify
the
landscaping
often
so
we
don't
have
someone
that
has
that
on
their
radar.
I
know
that
in
the
last
10
years
we've
gone
from
from
turf
to
drought,
tolerant
plants,
so
most
of
our
campus
has
succulents
and
and
drought
resistant
landscaping,
so
they
haven't
added
many
trees
in
those
last
10
years
for
water
conservation.
D
B
Right
and
to
be
clear
when
my
understanding
and
mr
he
here
can
correct
me
if
I'm
incorrect
about
this,
but
my
understanding
of
our
landscaping
law
is,
is
that
parking
lots
be
landscaped,
not
necessarily
that
they
have
trees
just
that
they'd
be
landscaped,
so
it
might
I'm
not
attempting
in
any
way
to
design
your
property
from
this
diet.
That's
not
what
we're
about
here,
but
but
it
could
be
drought,
tolerant.
It
could
be
something
other
than
in
trees.
The
trees.
B
My
understanding
from
mustard
from
mr
gardinez
here
is,
is
that
the
per
the
reason
it
was
trees
at
that
location
was
visual
was
to
block
block
the
public
view
of
this
massive
amount
of
solar
capacity.
That's
going
in,
but
in
other
places
like
there
could
be,
and
that's
really
what
I'm
getting
at
is
I'm
asking
or
I'm
trying
to
find
out.
B
D
B
B
B
B
J
J
B
I
J
Great,
I
believe,
to
answer
mr
bus.
Sorry
sure,
sorry
before
you
guys
close
it
out,
I'm
not
an
arborist
and
I'm
not
an
expert
in
this
field,
but
knowing
the
campus
and
seeing
the
the
landscaping
around
the
campus,
especially
the
ground,
mount
area,
your
question
was:
what's
being
what
was
the
purpose
of
these
trees?
A
D
A
F
Those
trees
that
exist
that
you're
asking
to
take
out
were
replacements
for
trees
that
we
agreed
to,
remove
and
replace
the
threefold
and
now
we're
allowing
you
to
do
it
possibly
or
you're,
asking
us
to
do
to
to
give
the
seven
percent,
and
so
that's
a
consideration,
because
literally
the
foundation
of
the
city
was
based
upon
the
fact
that
we
would
preserve
these
elements
and
that
we
would
try
to
live
in
harmony
with
with
the
environment.
We
find
ourselves
in
yeah.
J
A
J
H
H
J
B
I
I
K
The
canelo
climate
coalition
enthusiastically
supports
generating
energy
from
solar
installed
on
the
built
environment,
especially
rooftops
as
one
of
the
most
effective
strategies
to
fight
both
the
escalating
climate
emergency,
which
just
forced
all
of
us
to
combat
the
pervasive
to
force
all
of
us
to
endure
a
sweltering
10-day
heat
dome
and
to
combat
the
pervasive
ecological
collapse.
That
literally
threatens
the
survival
of
all
life
on
earth,
including
human
life
data,
indicate
expanding,
not
slowing
climate
impacts.
K
Your
every
decision
must
solve
for
multiple
problems
at
once.
Rooftop
solar
is
a
win-win
for
a
stable
climate,
healthy
biodiversity
and
human
safety,
but
takeda
proposes
the
false
binary
of
either
solar
or
nature.
We
can
and
must
have
both.
Our
planning
department
must
prioritize
the
conservation
and
restoration
of
native
trees
and
strengthen
their
role
in
climate
and
environmental
policy.
K
Enhancing
biodiversity
trees
maintain
clean
water
quality
through
filtration
and
reduce
water-related
risks
like
floods
and
droughts,
trees,
reduce
stress
and
enhance
well-being,
trees
provide
community
benefits,
whether
they
are
protected,
heritage,
trees
or
landscape
trees,
takeda
requests
a
waiver
to
cut
down
148
trees
because
all
are
under
10
inches
in
diameter,
about
the
width
of
a
dinner
plate
and
proposes
to
transplant
just
10..
That's
a
net
loss
of
138
trees,
nursery
trees
do
not
provide
the
carbon
storage,
water
retention
or
wildlife
habitat
a
single,
mature
tree
offers.
K
Our
city
must
require
destroyed,
trees,
be
replaced
on
a
mass
for
mass
basis,
while
the
canelo
climate
coalition
advocates
for
solar
plus
battery
storage
in
the
kaneho
valley
and
applauds
takeda
for
adding
clean
energy
generation
on
site.
Key
questions
need
to
be
addressed
before
we
can
lend
our
support,
including
a
tree
inventory
of
impacted
species.
K
Takeda
and
future
projects
should
be
encouraged
to
maximize
a
rooftop
array
rather
than
removing
any
ecologically
valuable
native
trees,
and
if
infeasible
and
tree
removal
is
necessary,
the
number
of
ecologically
valuable
trees
taken
should
be
minimized
and
a
one-to-one
mitigation
on
or
off-site
needs
to
be
required.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
B
B
F
Can't
operate
a
microphone,
sorry
planner
slim.
I
just
have
one
question:
we
learned
from
the
presenter,
the
applicant
that
the
suggestion
was
made
by
staff
to
do
infill
on
those
trees,
the
ten
trees
that
are
going
to
be
planted.
My
only
question
on
that
is:
what
do
you
think
the
survivability
of
those
trees
that
are
going
to
be
planted
as
end
pill,
considering
we're
in
a
significant
drought?
Do
they
have
the
the
irrigation
necessary
and
all
that
fun
stuff?
G
That
that
will
bear
out
in
the
what
will
be
required
landscaping
plan
check,
so
they'll
have
to
come
in
and
show
us
that
escaping
plant
check
that'll
have
all
the
components
with
it,
along
with
it
to
survive
the
insurability
of
that
or
ensure
the
viability
of
the
trees
being
planted.
Another
reason
we
asked
for
48
inch
box
trees
is
they're,
typically
larger,
and
so
they
have
a
higher
survival
rate
than
planting
a
24
inch
box
tree.
F
So
they're
actually
undertaking
the
obligation
to
keep
those
trees
alive
if
they
agree
to
that.
Is
that
correct
yeah?
Absolutely
with
the
planting?
Yes,
I
was
just
curious.
You
know
it
seemed
like
it
was
something
imposed
on
you
and
then
something
you
undertook
voluntarily.
So
I
was
just
curious.
Thank
you.
G
Good
question
I
mean
so
to
kind
of
take
a
step
back.
What
so
the
parking
lot
landscaping
has
a
specific
definition,
depending
where
you
look
in
the
design
guidelines
and
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
just
kind
of
talk
a
little
bit
about
it.
Where
you
have
perimeter
landscaping,
that's
a
budding
another
lot,
just
not
a
street.
You
typically
have
to
have
ground
cover
and
a
tree
typically
every
20
feet,
or
so
in
areas
where
you
have
more
than
10
stalls.
I
believe
it's
a
additional
tree,
so
interior
you'd
have
10
stalls.
G
You'd
have
to
have
a
peninsula
with
a
tree
and
ground
cover.
If
you
have
parking
area
or
vehicular
circulation
that
abuts
the
public
right-of-way,
you
not
only
have
to
have
well
ground
cover
gets
to
compete,
but
you
have
to
have
shrubbery
at
least.
I
think
three
to
four
feet:
high
tall
to
help
with
with
headlights
and
trees.
Once
you
dismantle
that
configuration
once
you
say,
take
out
a
tree,
it
no
longer
qualifies
for
parking
lot
landscaping.
We
can't
use
it.
G
We
can't
say
that,
because
you
retained
your
ground
cover,
whether
it
be
succulents
or
what
have
you
that
it
is
now
considered
part
of
your
landscaping
requirement
so
because,
if
you've
dismantled
that
component
with
that
we're
not
telling
them,
they
can't
have
additional
ground
cover
to
soften
air
area
or
even
small,
low-lying
shrubs
that
sort
of
mimic
ground
cover,
and
that
certainly
could
be
part
of
the
part
of
the
solution.
But
ultimately
we
don't
want
against
situation
where
they're
forced
to
plant
something
that's
going
to
be
in
competition
with
maintenance.
G
D
A
D
B
G
G
The
one
thing
to
consider
I
mean
yes,
let's
tree
yet
you
know
eventually
when,
when
these
things
maybe
matured
and
the
canopy
started
to
come
close
to
crossing
yeah,
they
would
have
been
a
great
habitat
for
craters
and
what
have
you
but
so
yeah
I
mean
we
realize
that
this
is
the
case,
that
there
is
a
loss
there
and
we
do.
We
did
consider
that
so.
B
B
J
I
apologize
for
that.
I
I
believe
we've
discussed
all
the
topics
that
were
brought
up
by
the
public
speakers
too,
the
unless
there
are
any
other
questions
of
us.
I
I
don't
think
there's
any
value
in
me
rehashing
the
the
the
benefits
of
the
project
environmentally
or
the
for
the
physical
location.
I
mean,
I
believe,
mr
slim,
as
well
as
the
planning
commission.
H
Thank
you,
train
newman,
and
thank
you
to
the
applicant
for
for
going
through
the
information
and
very
detailed
information
for
bringing
visuals,
which
always
tends
to
help.
As
you
can
see,
we
do
take
our
trees
seriously
here,
as
you,
you
said,
our
city
is
named
after
a
treat,
which
is
is
why
we
take
them
so
seriously.
H
The
other
discussion
about
what
the
solar
panels
are
going
to
do
and
and
and
whether
employees
use
them
and
and
again
by
the
way,
if
we'll
extend
our
law
at
some
point
to
non-heritage
trees
or
trees
with
less
diameter
or
trees
that
have
a
mass
to
mass
relation.
All
of
that
sounds
fantastic
to
me.
I'd
love
to
have
that
discussion,
but
to
me
that's
beyond
the
scope
of
this
statute
and
my
job
as
a
planning,
commissioner,
is
to
enforce
this
statute.
H
So
I
personally
believe
that
the
circumstances
exist
to
allow
this
modification
based
upon
again
the
factors
slighted
by
mr
slim
and
the
specific
code
section
we
have
involved
again.
I
I
would
love
to
see
a
discussion
later
on
with
regard
to
trying
to
find
other
ways
to
save
and
protect
a
lot
of
the
trees
that
we
have
and
provide
all
the
things
that
miss
whit,
provided
I
I
100
agree:
it's
just
we're
not
a
legislative
body.
We
don't
make
law,
so
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
move
to
approve
this
motion.
H
I
B
Actually,
before
before
you
go
on,
I
just
want
to
note
the
language
and
the
staff
report
to
this
point.
The
staff
report
says
the
request
is
to
allow
a
modification
of
the
municipal
code,
and
my
understanding,
based
on
everything
we've
discussed
tonight,
is
that
we
are
not
modifying
the.
We
are
granting
a
waiver
to
the
municipal
code
correct.
B
D
So
it's
just
a
major
modification
is
what
we're
approving
here.
It's
not
a
modification.
It's
not
a
code
text
amendment.
So
that's
the
journal,
that's
the
distinction.
What
we're
talking
about
here,
but
anyway,
before
I
lose
my
train
of
thought.
If
I
haven't
lost
it
already,
I
think,
in
the
best
of
circumstances,
what
we
would
like
to
do
is
have
both.
In
all
cases
I
mean
we
want
to
have
everything
we
want
to
be
able
to
have
solar.
D
This
to
me
seems
to
be
a
logical
trade-off
that,
in
order
to
facilitate
the
goals,
that
are
the
lofty
goals
that
the
state
has
established
and
given
that
this
I'm
I'm
going
to
assume
that
there's
probably
some
help
that
takeda
is
being
provided.
Otherwise,
and
if
they're
not.
I
mean
kudos
to
you
for
putting
together
such
a
massive
project
that
taking
the
responsibility
and
trying
to
offset
the
amount
of
energy
that
is
consumed
at
this
facility
through
this
project
is
commendable.
D
So
I
would
say
that,
despite
the
number
of
trees
being
removed-
and
I
could
see
that
these
trees,
whether
there
were
hundreds
of
trees
removed
as
a
result
of
this
project
back
in
1991,
I
would
imagine
if
there
was
something
that
needed
to
be
replaced.
It
would
have
been
replaced
in
kind
at
the
time,
especially
if
it
was
an
oak
tree
and
whatever
rules
were
in
place
in
91.
D
We
would
have
seen
a
whole
lot
more
oak
trees
on
this
site
than
we
do
when
we
don't
so
that
what
had
been
there
and
would
have
needed
to
be
replaced
had
been
replaced
responsibly,
and
in
this
case
frankly,
there
hasn't
been
enough
time
in
that
into
town,
probably
not
enough
water,
to
get
anything
to
a
size.
That
is
significant
that
reaches
the
level
of
needing
to
be
replaced
in
three
to
one
or
four
to
one,
whatever
that
ratio
might
be,
but
anyway,
so
a
long
way
of
going
around.
D
C
C
I
think
of
that-
and
I
also
think
of
the
employees
who
are
looking
at
an
awful
lot
of
asphalt,
which
radiates
heat
they
get
into
their
hot
cars
and
as
nice
as
tree.
Trees
are
we
love
trees,
but
they
don't
do
as
much
to
shade
the
cars
as
the
carports
will
do.
So
I
think,
although
I
do
not
like
to
see
all
the
trees
being
removed,
I
think
that
there
are
so
many
benefits
to
this,
for
not
just
takeda
but
for
the
rest
of
the
community,
I'm
going
to
vote
for
it.
F
So
I
originally
got
this
packet.
I
was
taking
the
train
through
chatsworth
to
glendale
and
I
opened
it
up.
While
I
was
if
anybody's
ridden
that
train
you
go
through
a
lot
of
industrial
areas
in
the
san
fernando
valley,
and
so
when
I
ended
up
going
to
this
site
in
this
facility,
and
I
see
the
the
the
the
rendering
that
you
guys
did.
F
We
may
be
self-defeating
at
some
point
if,
if
we
allow
too
many
of
these
projects
continue
without
knowing
what
our
history
is
and
and
and
what
our
future
is
but
saying
that
that's
on
us
not
on
not
on
you
guys.
I
I
firmly
believe
that
you've
done
a
wonderful
job
presenting,
and
I
thank
you
and
with
that
I
offer
my
support
as
well.
B
I
would
start
by
saying
we
wouldn't
be
doing
our
job
if
we
weren't
up
here
asking
weird
questions
about
trees.
That's
why
we're
here
we
take
our
trees
seriously
and,
as
you
can
see
it,
it's
an
important
part
of
our
namesake,
but
but
it's
more
than
just
shade
and
it's
more
than
just
the
psychic
benefits
which
we
all
enjoy,
and
we
should,
as
people
trees
are
wonderful
to
have
around.
B
I'm
glad
this
is
not
a
precedent-setting
case,
because
I
I
am
concerned
that
a
replacement
ratio
of
6.7
is
really
badly
insufficient
and
I
applaud
takeda
for
being
a
good
citizen
of
thousand
oaks
and
for
taking
this
very
forward-looking
step
to
put
in
this
very
wide-ranging,
large-scale,
solar
installation.
I
think
it's
terrific
you're
doing
a
good
thing,
not
only
for
yourselves
but
for
your
community,
and
I
applaud
that.
B
At
the
same
time,
I
wanted
to
be
clear-eyed
about
this,
that
you
are
removing
this
benefit
of
these
trees
and
they
may
not
be
from
what
was
in
the
natural
state
of
the
land
before
these
were
trees
put
in
by
previous
landscapers.
I
understand
that
they're
not
protected,
but
the
reason
I'm
saying
I
don't
think
this
should
be
a
precedent
is
that
I
think
we
should
be
looking
at
replacement
ratios
that
are
we
need.
We
need
to
do.
B
B
I'm
going
to
support
this
measure,
I
think,
on
balance.
I
agree
with
commissioner
bus
that
this
is
a
case
of
the
very
good
or
the
perfect
being
the
enemy
of
not
only
the
good,
but
the
very
good,
and
this
is
a
very
good
project.
I
agree
with
that.
I
agree
with
comments
that
the
panels
should
be
up
some
panels.
At
least
what
could
be
supported
would
be
better
up
on
the
roof
than
on
the
ground.
B
I
understand
the
reasons
why
all
of
them
cannot
be,
and
overall,
I
think
this
is
a
very
good
project,
but
I
think
we
should
all
be
clear-eyed
about
what
we're
doing
to
our
trees
here
and
in
our
future
discussions
which
are
out
of
scope
tonight,
we
should
be
having
that
discussion
about
how
we
protect
both
trees
that
are
protected
and
the
ones
that
aren't
so
with
that
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
prepare
us
for
a
vote.
Thank
you.
D
B
B
B
B
E
On
september
26th,
the
planning
commission
will
have
a
public
hearing
regarding
a
municipal
code.
Amendment
related
to
sb9
efforts
to
increase
the
housing
supply
and
october
10th
will
be
a
public
hearing
regarding
a
municipal
code,
amendment
related
to
self-storied,
so
we
were
busy
this
summer
working
on
all
these.