The following information comprises the minutes for a regular meeting of the City Council, a joint meeting of the Banning City Council and Banning Utility Authority and a joint meeting of the Banning City Council and the Banning City Council sitting in its capacity as the Successor Agency Board.
MINUTES 6/11/2024
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Member Sheri Flynn
Council Member David Happe
Mayor Pro Tem Rick Minjares
Mayor Alberto Sanchez
Council Member Colleen Wallace
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Doug Schulze, City Manager
Laurie Sampson, Assistant City Manager
Serita Young, City Attorney
Caroline Patton, Administrative City Clerk
John Garside, Multimedia Specialist
Art Vela, Director of Public Works
Lincoln Bogard, Administrative Services Director
Emery Papp, Senior Planner
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Sanchez called the regular meeting to order at 5:02 p.m.
1.1. Invocation – Pastor Nate Rodriguez of Infinite Center led the invocation.
1.2. Pledge of Allegiance – Mayor Sanchez led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1.3. Roll Call
COUNCIL MEMBER PRESENT ABSENT
Flynn, Sheri
Happe, David
Minjares, Rick
Sanchez, Alberto
Wallace, Colleen
2. AGENDA APPROVAL
2.1. Approve Agenda
Motion to approve the agenda, removing agenda items 6.10 and 7.1.
Motion by Mayor Sanchez
Seconded by Council Member Happe
Regular Meeting Minutes 6/11/2024 Page 2 of 8
COUNCIL MEMBER YES NO ABSTAIN RECUSE ABSENT
Flynn, Sheri
Happe, David
Minjares, Rick
Sanchez, Alberto
Wallace, Colleen
Motion approved by a vote of 5-0.
3. PRESENTATIONS
None
4. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
Serita Young, City Attorney reported that there was discussion and direction provided to staff, with no final nor reportable action. For item 3.2, the Council was unable to meet and the item was continued.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS, CORRESPONDENCE, APPOINTMENTS, CITY COUNCIL
COMMITTEE REPORTS, CITY MANAGER REPORT, AND CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
5.1. PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following individuals addressed City Council during Public Comment:
• Kathleen Dale
Motion to allow the public to speak for 5 minutes on Agenda items 6.10 and 7.1 (related to Banning Point).
Motion by Council Member Flynn
No second. The motion failed.
• Inge Schuler
• Stuart MacKenzie
• Donald Price
• Jack Gunderson
• Bill Hobbs
5.2. CORRESPONDENCE
14 items of correspondence were received by the City Clerk’s Office regarding the Banning Point agenda items 6.10 and 7.1 that were removed under agenda item 2.1.
5.3. APPOINTMENTS
5.3.1. Appoint Two Council Members to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Local Agency Technical Assistance (LATA) Broadband Feasibility Grant Stakeholders Committee for FY 2024/2025 and 2025/2026
Carla Young, Business Support Manager, presented the staff report.
Regular Meeting Minutes 6/11/2024 Page 3 of 8
Public Comment
• Inge Schuler
Motion to appoint Council Member Mayor Sanchez and Council Member Wallace to the CPUC LATA Broadband Feasibility Grant Stakeholders Ad Hoc Committee for FYs 24-25 and 25-26.
Motion by Mayor Sanchez
Seconded by Council Member Minjares
COUNCIL MEMBER YES NO ABSTAIN RECUSE ABSENT
Flynn, Sheri
Happe, David
Minjares, Rick
Sanchez, Alberto
Wallace, Colleen
Motion approved by a vote of 5-0.
5.4. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Council Member Wallace reported on a Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) meeting.
Mayor Pro Tem Minjares reported on a stormwater draft reporting plan.
Council Member Flynn reported on a Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) meeting.
Council Member Happe had no report.
Mayor Sanchez had no report.
5.5. CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Schulze reported on a meeting with representatives from the FAA and Hillwood, as well as a recent design charette hosted by the City.
5.6. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
City Attorney Young had no report.
5.7. CITY TREASURER REPORT
Treasurer Geronimo reported that next week was the last meeting of the fiscal year for the Budget and Finance Committee.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
6.1 Approval of the Meeting Minutes for the May 28, 2024 City Council Meetings
6.2 Consideration of Resolution 2024-78, Calling for the Holding of a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 5, 2024 for the Election of Three Members of the City Council to Four Year Terms Representing Districts 1, 2, and 3, and One Member of the City Council Representing District 4 to the Remaining Two Years of Regular Meeting Minutes 6/11/2024 Page 4 of 8
that Term, and for the Election of the At-Large City Clerk and City Treasurer Positions to Four Year Terms, All as Required by the Provisions of the Laws of State of California Relating to General Law Cities and the Banning Municipal Code, and Requesting Consolidation of the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election to be Held on the Same Day
6.3 Consideration of Resolution 2024-79, Approving the Purchase of 908 Devices Inc.
MX908 Handheld High-Pressure Mass Spectrometer (HPMS)
6.4 Consideration of Resolution 2024-80, Approving a List of Projects to be Funded for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 by SB 1 “The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017”
6.5 Consideration of Resolution 2024-81, Approving Amendment No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement with Mariposa Landscapes, Inc. in the Amount of $148,372 for FY 2024/2025 City Property Landscape Maintenance
6.6 Consideration of Resolution 2024-82, Approving Amendment No. 1 for Professional Services Contract with Engineering Resources of Southern California of Redlands, California in the Amount of $100,000 for Staff Augmentation Services to Fill a Vacant Associate Civil Engineer Position in the Water/Wastewater Division
6.7 Consideration of Resolution No. 2024-83, Approving the Execution of the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) Three-Year Free Fare Program and Repealing Resolution 2024-68
6.8 Consideration of Resolution 2024-84, Approving the Short Range Transit Plan for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 – 2026/2027 and Authorizing the Submittal of the FY 2024/2025 Funding Claims
6.9 Consideration of Resolutions 2024-85 and 2024-86, Approving Two Memorandum of Understandings (MOU) with International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) General and Utility Units
6.10 Consideration of Resolution 2024-87, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Banning, California, Setting Aside and Vacating its Previous Approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 38164, Approval of Design Review 21-7008 and Denial of the Appeal of the Planning Commission’s Approval of Design Review 21-7008, and Adoption of an Addendum, All in Connection with the Banning Point Project, Doing so in Compliance with the Peremptory Writ of Mandate that Requires the City Council to Set Aside and Vacate those Decisions, and Rescinding City Council Resolution 2022-14 Removed under agenda item 2.1.
6.11 Consideration of Resolution 2024-89, Awarding a Construction Agreement for Project No. 2024-01, “Citywide Street Overlay” to Vance Corporation of Beaumont, CA in the Amount of $1,308,987.71 and Establishing a Total Project Budget of $1,439,886.48 and Rejecting All Other Bids
6.12 Consideration of Resolution 2024-90, Approving Amendment No. 1 to the Custodial Services Agreement with Executive Facilities Services in the Amount of $221,492.44 for FY 2024/2025 Custodial Services at City Facilities
6.13 Consideration of Resolution 2024-91, Awarding Professional Services Agreement to CPS HR Consulting for as needed Executive Recruitment Services
6.14 Consideration of Resolution 2024-92, Approving a Professional Services Agreement with Matrix Consulting Group LTD ("Matrix") for the Comprehensive User Fee and Impact Fee Study in an Amount Not-To-Exceed $96,954.00
6.15 Consideration of Resolution 2024-93, Approving a Sole Source Contract with CASC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. for Consulting Services Associated with the Focused General Plan Update Services for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 in the Amount of $186,485
6.16 Consideration of Resolution 2024-94, Approving a Deposit Agreement for the Sansone Group
Regular Meeting Minutes 6/11/2024 Page 5 of 8
6.17 Accept an Easement from Tri Pointe Homes for Electric Utility Purposes on Accessor’s Tract Map No. 37389-1, within the Atwell Development for the Maintenance of the City-Owned Electric Distribution System
6.18 Accept the Notice of Completion for Project No. 2020-01EL, Ivy and Stagecoach Substation Construction and Authorize the City Manager to Sign and the City Clerk to Record
6.19 Accept the Notice of Completion for the Electric Substation Equipment Maintenance Testing Project and Authorize the City Manager to Sign and the City Clerk to Record
6.20 Accept the Notice of Completion for the Electric Utility Underground Construction Labor and Equipment Work Project and Authorize the City Manager to Sign and the City Clerk to Record
Public Comment
• Inge Schuler
• Frank Connolly
Motion to adopt consent agenda items 6.1, 6.3 to 6.9, 6.11 to 6.15, 6.17 to 6.20.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Minjares
Seconded by Council Member Wallace
Motion approved by a vote of:
• 5-0-0 for Items 6.3 to 6.9, 6.12 to 6.15, 6.17 to 6.20; and • 4-0-1 (Abstained: Minjares) for Items 6.1 and 6.11.
6.2. Consideration of Resolution 2024-78, Calling for the Holding of a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 5, 2024 for the Election of Three Members of the City Council to Four Year Terms Representing Districts 1, 2, and 3, and One Member of the City Council Representing District 4 to the Remaining Two Years of that Term, and for the Election of the At-Large City Clerk and City Treasurer Positions to Four Year Terms, All as Required by the Provisions of the Laws of State of California Relating to General Law Cities and the Banning Municipal Code, and Requesting Consolidation of the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election to be Held on the Same Day
Council Member Flynn spoke on the item.
Public Comments
None
Motion to adopt Resolution 2024-78.
Motion by Council Member Flynn
Seconded by Council Member Wallace
COUNCIL MEMBER YES NO ABSTAIN RECUSE ABSENT
Flynn, Sheri
Happe, David
Minjares, Rick
Regular Meeting Minutes 6/11/2024 Page 6 of 8
Sanchez, Alberto
Wallace, Colleen
Motion approved by a vote of 5-0.
6.16. Consideration of Resolution 2024-94, Approving a Deposit Agreement for the Sansone Group
Public Comments
None
Motion to adopt Resolution 2024-94.
Motion by Council Member Wallace
Seconded by Council Member Flynn
COUNCIL MEMBER YES NO ABSTAIN RECUSE ABSENT
Flynn, Sheri
Happe, David
Minjares, Rick
Sanchez, Alberto
Wallace, Colleen
Motion approved by a vote of 5-0.
7. PUBLIC HEARING(S)
7.1. Consideration of Resolution 2024-88, (1) Approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 38164, Allowing the Subdivision of Approximately 47 Gross Acres of Vacant Land Into Three Parcels; (2) Affirming the Planning Commission’s Approval of Design Review No. 21-7008 and Denying an Appeal of that Decision and Permitting the Construction of a Proposed 619,959 Square Foot Industrial Warehouse Building, including 10,000 Square Feet of Office Space and a Combined 34,000 Square Feet of Retail/Commercial Buildings, on Real Property Located within the Boundaries of the Sun Lakes Village North Specific Plan Area (APN: 419-140-057); and (3) Adopting an Addendum under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Making Findings in Support Thereof, Including Findings of Consistency with the Certified Environmental Impact Report Prepared for Amendment No. 5 to the Sun Lakes Village North Specific Plan (SCH # 2020029074) Removed under agenda item 2.1.
Mayor Sanchez announced a recess at 5:54 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 6:08 p.m.
8. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
8.1. FY 2023-24 Budget-To-Actuals and Preliminary Fiscal Year 2024-25 and Fiscal Year 2025-26 Biennial Budget
Lincoln Bogard, Administrative Services Director, presented the staff report.
Regular Meeting Minutes 6/11/2024 Page 7 of 8
Public Comment
• Cindy Barrington
• Richard Royce
9. DISCUSSION ITEM(S)
None
10. ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS
10.1. New Items
1. Closed Session: Information Given to the Council on Lawsuit against the City (Flynn)
2. All Active Lawsuits against the City (Flynn)
10.2. Pending Items:
1. Grow Banning (Sanchez)
2. Neighborhood Groups/Identities (Minjares)
3. Update on Community Garden (Flynn)
4. Zencity Contract (Flynn)
5. Zoom Options for Public Meetings (Flynn)
6. Update on 150 E Ramsey Street Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (Flynn)
7. Update on 33 S San Gorgonio Ave Purchase and Sale Agreement (Flynn)
8. Developer Presentation for Sunset Crossroads Project (Flynn)
9. City Manager Evaluation (Flynn)
11. ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourn.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Minjares
Seconded by Council Member Wallace
COUNCIL MEMBER YES NO ABSTAIN RECUSE ABSENT
Flynn, Sheri
Happe, David
Minjares, Rick
Sanchez, Alberto
Wallace, Colleen
Motion approved by a vote of 5-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Minutes Prepared by:
Caroline Patton, Administrative City Clerk
Regular Meeting Minutes 6/11/2024 Page 8 of 8
These minutes have been prepared as Action Minutes in accordance with City Council Resolution 1995-21 and Government Code Sections 36814, 40801, and 54953(c)(2).
This entire meeting and all associated documents may be viewed here:
https://banningca.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=1 ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A – Public Comment Received
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Patricia Norcutt
Friday, June 7, 2024 4:49 PM
Caroline Patton
Banning Point Project
JUN U 7 202~
City of Banning
Ci Clerk's Office
My parents were residents of Sun Lakes for 30 years until their deaths. They absolutely loved Banning! I am a 16 year resident of Four Seasons in Beaumont. This project affects not only Banning residents but also Beaumont residents along with anyone who frequents Highland Springs. The infrastructure can barely support the traffic now. Adding additional trucks would be a horrendous and disastrous decision. Please vote NO. No warehouses near Albertsons.
Patricia Norcutt
Exhibit A
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cindy Medley < >
Monday, June 10, 2024 6:47 PM
RECEIVED
JUN 1 0 2024
City of Banning
Citv Clerk's Office
Sandra Calderon; cityclerks; Caroline Patton; Alberto Sanchez; Rick Minjares; Colleen Wallace; David Happe; Sheri Flynn; Doug Schulze; _City Council Reconsider Banning Point
Hello City Clerk, and City Council Members,
Please vote No to continue with the Banning Point Development. Th is project will not add any value to Banning. Look at all the vacant warehouses in San Bernardino County, they get built and then sit empty.
New warehouses are also being built in Calimesa, Yucaipa and Beaumont that may never be occupied. If they are occupied think what a mess the air quality will be, think about the people with breathing problems such.as COPD and asthma, this could be your Grandparents, Parents, Kids or even yourself.
Another concern is for all the additional traffic, just what we need more congestion on all our surrounding surface streets. Accidents waiting to happen.
All these warehouses are not going to get the people to spend money in our community if they need to travel to other Cities to find the places they want to shop at, eat at or to receive medical services. People want to purchase homes in a community where they can do these things.
Please reconsider and vote NO on the Banning Point Development. Maybe this would be a good site for Medical offices, Banning has a horrible shortage of Medical Professionals. Something to consider!! Thank You,
Cindy Medley
Sent from my iPhone
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To Whom It May Concern,
Anita Chatigny <
Monday, June 10, 2024 1:14 PM
cityclerks
Letter
RECEIVED
JUN 1 0 2024
City of Banning
City Clerk's Office
I am writing as a concerned citizen of Banning. I am a working professional who moved to Banning approximately 5 years ago. I moved with the promise of spending my retirement in a community built upon City leadership that would support my health and well-being.
I have watched with dread as the City has taken a blind eye to responsible city planning. Even with legal issues that bring the council to revisit the Banning Pointe project, I am still not convinced that Banning City Council will act in its citizens' best interests.
The question before you is simple: How many lives is the City of Banning willing to sacrifice for the promise of money?
I want to believe in this City Council and its ability to revisit the Banning Pointe initiative with a fresh viewpoint. As much as I hate to consider this, I am prepared to move from this community if the actions of the council do not demonstrate the care/concern for its senior citizens as I once envisioned. I wonder how many others there are that feel the same.
I want to keep my tax dollars here and to work in partnership with the City Council. Please demonstrate by your vote your commitment to partner with me.
Sincerely yours,
(Electronically signed)
Anita Lara Chatigny, Ph.D.
Sent from my iPad
RECEIVED
From:
Sent:
To:
Kathleen Dale < >
Monday, June 10, 2024 2:24 PM
citycl erks; Caroline Patton; Doug Schulze
JUN 1 0 2024
""'lY of Banning
City Clerk's Office
Cc: Sheri Flynn; Rick Minjares; Colleen Wallace; Alberto Sanchez; David Happe Subject: Re: 6/11/24 City Council Meeting - Agenda Items 6.10 and 7.1 (Substantive Content Missing)
Just in case - correcting my time warp reference in the original subject line.
Kathy
On Monday, June 10, 2024 at 02:20:17 PM PDT, Kathleen Dale <[email protected]> wrote:
Good afternoon - in reviewing the posted agenda packet yesterday , serious omissions in the back-up material became evident.
1. Neither report includes a location exhibit or any exhibits identifying the proposed project.
2. The only attachment to the report for Item 6.10 is the proposed three-page resolution to rescind the prior approval. The body of the report does not refer to inclusion of a copy of the resolution being rescinded, the resolution to be rescinded is not listed as an attachment, and the resolution to be rescinded is not otherwise present or linked.
3. The report for item 7.1 includes two attachments, the proposed approval resolution and Exhibit A to that resolution (the conditions of approval). The body of the report refers to additional attachments that are not listed at the end of the report, and that are not otherwise present or linked (project exhibits noted at the end of the APPEALS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION AND HEARING DATES section, public comments noted in the ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS section, the December 1, 2021 Planning Commission packet noted in the JUSTIFICATION section , and the Planning Commission approval resolution noted in the PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION section).
4. There is no supporting content for Item 7.1 related to the proposed CEQA action (e.g. , the Addendum, supporting technical reports , or mitigation monitoring program).
These are serious omissions of substantive content necessary for the public to provide informed comment and for the decision-makers to make an informed decision.
I trust that these items will be pulled from the agenda for Tuesday's meeting.
Respectfully,
Kathleen Dale
REC.EIVED
JUN 1 0 2024
From: Stuart <
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2024 1 :04 PM
To:
Cc:
Alberto Sanchez; rminhares@bannin gca.gov; Sheri Flynn; Colleen Wallace City Manager; Laurie Sampson
Subject: Transit and Business Center of the Pass
Attachments: Transit and Business Center of the Pass copy.pages 1 . Alberto Sanchez , Mayor ,
2 . Rick Minhares , Mayor Pro Tern ,
3 . Sheri Flynn , Council Member ,
4 . David Happe , Council Member ,
5 . Colleen Wallace , Council Member .
Cc : Doug Schulze , City Manager ,
Cc : Laurie Sampson , Assistant City Manager .
Enclosure : Letter to Banning Planning Commission , 2024 - 06- 05 This is a proposal asking you to consider better use of the so- called Banning Point area in west Banning . Establish a Transit Center to serve as a station for the Coachella Val l ey - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor service , better known as Coachella Valley Rail , with passenger service between Los Angeles and Indio .
The current proposal for a warehouse and the accompanying big truck traffic and diesel fumes and particles do not belong in a residential zone . It conflicts with Banning ' s stated desire to adopt a "Blue Zone " status for the health and welfare of all residents .
Th i s land is an opportunity for Banning to plan for the positive and healthful future of the People of Banning and the Pass Area .
This proposal is a challenge to the developer of the proposed warehouse to build something beneficial to the People of the Pass . If the developer cannot do this, the developer does not belong in California .
Assistant City Manager : Please pass this on to Council Member Happe who did not list an email in his City Bio .
Thank you ,
Stuart MacKenz i e
Banning , California 92220
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Council Members,
RECEIVED
JUN 1 0 2024
City of Banning
bruano < City Clerk's Office
Monday, June 10, 2024 1:17 PM
Laurie Sampson; Alberto Sanchez; [email protected]; Colleen Wallace; David Happe; Sheri Flynn
[email protected]
Banning Point Warehouse Project
Please vote no against the Banning Point Warehouse project. I have been a Sun Lakes resident for 6 years. I am involved in the Banning community, not only in Sun Lakes. My career took me to many cities/states over the years but Banning is the place I want to spend my senior years. The warehouse would severly dampen the joy of living here. The truck traffic, more traffic jams, dirty air are all hazardous for all residence of Banning but even more for the elderly. Again, please vote NO to warehouses next to the residential areas.
Respectfully,
Bess Ruano
Banning Resident
1539 Faireway Oaks Ave.
Banning CA
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
.. -.v;
Patricia Syre
1212 Laguna Seca Ct
Banning CA 92220-5419
RECEIVED
JUN O 6 2024
Ctty of Banning
City Clerk's Office _J ~
~~ o/) /3ru-r:_uljf
?9\J E, ~1:;:1t ~-
/3~ (!I) (/;;l,k]~ ~
'24JUN 6 9=0~hiN
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sheets Family <
Wednesday, June 5, 2024 2:46 PM
cityclerks
No Warehouse
> RECEIVED
JUN O 5 2024
City of Banning
Citv Clerk's Office
Please reconsider approving the warehouse on Sun Lakes Blvd. Having trucks running day & night is not only a health risk to seniors in Sun Lakes & The Lakes but also a traffic nightmare. A warehouse does not belong in a quiet residential area.
Please note the error of the environment study which was done during the Covid lockdown when traffic wasn't an issue.
It makes more sense to put in a warehouse in downtown Banning where there are no homes.
Concerned senior residents,
Bob & Nancy Sheets
1 JUN O 5 2024
City of Banning
Cl Clerk's Office
~'LSI UE NI~ G't
s;utu L\iVLs cDuNtK~ C\_UB~
On June 5 2024 M "peff ' " ' s. Gartzke submitted signed I ion sheets to the City Clerk's Off. ice.
1,007 sheets of the attached
notice were received.
To: The Banning City Council
The residents of Sun Lakes Country Club chose to move into the comm.unity because it met the needs of these residents who were entering the latter stages of their life. The surrounding community offered a slower pace of life with adequate resources for their everyday needs. The air quality was good. The traffic was moderate. The neighbors were nice. The city was looking after the public health, safety, and welfare of its citizms and the community.
This approach to choosing where you live is likely not so different from how some members of the City Council choose the homes they live in. _They want a safe, clean neighborhood with a quality school close to home for their children and not too far from work. We ask the Council:
If your children's school is shut down or there was a factory constructed across the street from the school that produced constant fumes and noise surrounding the playground, would you consider re-locating to another neighborhood? As a person who is 30 to 50 years younger than most Sun Lakes residents, you have the option to re-locate.
We, in Sun Lakes, are not in our prime earning years and our options are limited due to health issues and reduced income. We ask the City Council to delay any vote on the Banning Point Project until after they take into consideration that Sun Lakes Country Club alone represents nearly 20 percent ofBanning's total residential population, and this population is going to be negatively affected by the development of the Banning Point Project for the rest of their natural lives.
We ask the Banning City Council to also take into consideration that the City is still looking for land to develop low density and/or medium density housing. A small apartment complex built to house our own Banning seniors whose income would not allow them to purchase or rent homes in Sun Lakes would be a godsend to many. The City is also trying to encourage the reopening of a new Department of Motor Vehicles building. With so many seniors within a twoor three-mile radius of th.is property, a medical facility providing medical specialists would be well supported. A facility like this would bring residents from many of the surrounding cities to take advantage ofBanning's Specialist facility. Any of these options could be developed on the Banning Point 4 7 acres. Consider promoting and soliciting developers for these types of projects. Allow the current developer to re-locate to an area farther away from existing, mature . developments designed to house seniors, and allow the current developer to negotiate with the owners of one of the many empty warehouses already collecting dust.
SEt;H YOO/? HA.HR Sr'J?llflr' AOORSSS
THE BANNING POINT WAREHOUSE FIGHT CONTINUES
The Judge ruled that the current Banning City Council must reconsider the Banning Point Project. That means that any individual concerned that construction of a 620,000 square foot warehouse with its associated traffic and pollution would be detrimental to the surrounding community still has an opportunity to let their voice be heard before the Coun~il conducts another vote on the project.
The attached document has been created to inform the City Council of the residents' concerns and to request that the Council delay any vote on the Banning Point Project until after taking into consideration that Sun Lakes Country Club alone represents nearly 20 percent ofBanning's total residential population, and this population is going to be negatively affected by the development of the project for the rest of their natural lives.
If you would like to add your name to the list of Sun Lakes residents who want to be heard before it is too late, please print your name, sign your name, provide your street address, and give the date you signed the document. Return the signed document to your District Delegate as soon as possible (3 to 5 days). We want to let the City Council members understand that we are still opposed to this warehouse project, but we must speak up BEFORE they take another vote.
Thank you,
Dorrie Gartzke, SLCC Recycle Project
From: Fran Matzen< >
Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2024 6:22 AM
To: Sandra Calderon <[email protected]>
Subject: Banning Point
Dear Banning city officials,
RECEIVED
JUN O 5 2024
City of Banning
Ci Clerk's Office
Thank you for listening to your constituents. Please DO NOT APPROVE the Banning Point warehouse project.
As I am sure you are aware, there are over 3,000 residents living in close proximity to the proposed project. Studies have shown the ill effects warehouse projects can have on the health of those living nearby.
Also, traffic in the general area is already bad. We don't need truck traffic added to the mix. Have you ever tried exiting the eastbound 110 in the late afternoon? We often are on the shoulder well west of the exit, sometimes just barely able to get in the line that is backed up almost to the Pennsylvania Avenue on-ramp. Please don't add truck traffic to this. In addition,the street traffic on Highland Springs south of the freeway to Sun Lakes Boulevard is already quite congested.
Please consider those who elected you when you vote.
Thank you,
Frances Matzen
5652 Lopez Way
Banning, CA 92220
From : Shirley Dills<
Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2024 8:55 AM
To: Sandra Calderon <[email protected]>
Subject: Banning Point
RECEIVED
JUN O 5 2024
City of Banning
I am writing to you to reconsider your approval of the Banning Point. City Clerk's Office I have lived here in Sun Lakes for 20 years and considered this my last home here in Banning.
I have a great life here in Banning, but that is threatened now due to Traffic from big rigs blocking streets that we must use. Sun Lakes through the Mello Roos paid out of our pocket for the Highland Springs underpass so we could have fast access to San Gorgonio Hospital.
This is now, due to the approval of Banning Point being approved, a real life threat to many here in Sun Lakes.
We have paid our taxes and are a large part of the City of Banning.
I'm a Senior, age 84 at the present time and am very concerned about the quality of the enviornment, and air quality which would undoubtedly be affected by a warehouse so close to my home.
I'm requesting you to reconsider at the June 11, 2024 meeting.
If this was your Mother what would your choice be?
Thank You
Shirley J Dills
Sent from my iPhone
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Raymond Reddig
Tuesday, June 4, 2024 9:18 AM
cityclerks
BANNING POINT
As a citizen of Banning I object to the Banning point project [email protected]
RECEIVED
JUN O 4 2024
City of Banning
Cltv Clerk's Office
RECEIVED
From: Barbara Jesus
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 12:04 PM
To: Sandra Calderon <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Hearing May 28, 2024 Review 21-7008 ETC City of Banning
Ci Clerk's Office
We submit some of these links to support why these trucking operations should not be put near our residential communities.
Minority Population means any readily identifiable groups of minority persons who live in geographic proximity, and if circumstances warrant, geographically dispersed/transient persons who will be similarly affected by a proposed USDOT program, policy or activity. • Low-Income means a person whose median household income is at or below the Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines. • LowIncome Population means any readily identifiable group of low-income persons who live in geographic proximity, and, if circumstances warrant, geographically dispersed/transient persons who will be similarly affected by a proposed USDOT program, policy or activity. Besides the minority and low-income populations, elderly people and children are particularly vulnerable to potential health impacts brought by freight. In this analysis, these populations are defined as below: • The Elderly Population refers to the people that are 65 years and older. • Children refers to the people who are under 10 years of age. https://www.ehn.org/diesel-truck-air-pollution-2655321340.html Diesel trucks are causing environmental
injustice across US cities
Low-income people of color in the U.S. are exposed to
28% more nitrogen dioxide (N02) in the air they breathe compared to their wealthier white counterparts, a new
study using satellite measurements reports.
www.ehn.org
https://www.edf.org/media/edf-report-air-pollution-warehouse-trucks-places-unegual-burden-communitiescolor-a nd-a reas ~ Environmental ~ Defense ~ Fund
EDF Report Air Pollution from
Warehouse Trucks Places Unequal
Burden on Communities of Color and
Areas of Low Wealth
Growth of delivery brings more warehouses, diesel trucks and associated health impacts closer to communities
www.edf.org
https :// e nvhea Ith centers. u sc. ed u/wp-conte nt/ up I oa ds/2016/11/Drivi ng-H a rm. pdf Barbara and Jay Jesus -909-915-4320
2 LuAnn Green
April 20, 2024
Mayor - Alberto Sanchez
Mayor Pro Tern. - Rick MinJares
Council Member - Sheri Flynn, David Happe; Collen Wallace Topic - Bannin Point Projec.t
RECEIVED
MAY 2 4 2024
City of Banning
City Clerk's Office
Before you make a decision a new Traffic and Safety Study is necessary. It should be conducted at various times of day. If one was performed it was conducted at the wrong time of day.
Anyone that has driven on Highland Springs both North & South of the 10 freeway will tell you it is a congested mess at peak hours and on weekends. Adding even more 18 wheelers to the this area would be a dangerous nightmare. Someone should ask the Highway Patrol (located right on Highland Springs) for their input.
Please think this through. Thank you,
LuAnn M. Green
2445 Birdie Drive, Banni ng, Ca 92220
1 To: The Banning City Council 13/JU#l//li-Po/NT PRtJJ&CT The residents of Sun Lakes Country Club chose to move into the community because it met the needs of these residents who were entering the latter stages of their life. The surrounding community offered a slower pace of life with adequate resources for their everyday needs. The air quality was good. The traffic was moderate. The neighbors were nice. The city was looking after the public health, safety, and welfare of its citizens and the community.
This approach to choosing where you live is likely not so different from how some members of the City Council choose the homes they live in. They want a safe, clean neighborhood with a quality school close to home for their children and not too far from work. We ask the Council:
If your children's school is shut down or there was a factory constructed across the street from the school that produced constant fumes and noise surrounding the playground, would you consider re-locating to another neighborhood? As a person who is 30 to 50 years younger than most Sun Lakes residents, you have the option to re-locate.
We, in Sun Lakes, are not in our prime earning years and our options are limited due to health issues and reduced income. We ask the City Council to delay any vote on the Banning Point Project until after they take into consideration that Sun Lakes Country Club alone represents nearly 20 percent of Banning's total residential population, and this population is going to be negatively affected by the development of the Banning Point Project for the rest of their natural lives.
We ask the Banning City Council to also take into consideration that the City is still looking for land to develop low density and/or medium density housing. A small apartment complex built to house our own Banning seniors whose income would not allow them to purchase or rent homes in Sun Lakes would be a godsend to many. The City is also trying to encourage the reopening of a new Department of Motor Vehicles building. With so many seniors within a twoor three-mile radius of this property, a medical facility providing medical specialists would be well supported. A facility like this would bring residents from many of the surrounding cities to take advantage of Banning's Specialist facility. Any of these options could be developed on the Banning Point 4 7 acres. Consider promoting and soliciting developers for these types of projects. Allow the current developer to re-locate to an area farther away from existing, mature developments designed to house seniors, and allow the current developer to negotiate with the owners of one of the many empty warehouses already collecting dust.
PJ?/Hr YOO/? HAMS SRiH YOO/? HA.ME' SJ'J?E'E'T AOOJ?f!.."SS L/.J/.JJJJJ M. G££EJJ Z-44S- !31£.ZJJE ZJL'.
OAr£
All!/ L ZD...) 2/J2-</
• HP _ __ , ~ ~ ,--.-i:_..:, -~ :;,_. .. - •
6~EEJJ
24-</S /3/0JJE ZJ,R
13/J)JAJJ IJ(;J e.A o 5ZZZD
·'--
SN BERNARDINO CA ~
22 APR 2024 PM 4 L
923 ~
~
.~
A!.LJ/5fl[J SliJICJIEZ- aJ!J/JUl.
13/lJ.JJJ/Jv ti Cl 1Y ~IA LL
~ 9 E. £4MoEY J T
13/lJIJJJN6J CA, '?222 0
'32220-::.1-8::!'7'3'3 •11111111•1 p 1111 I' 11 11111)11 1I•1'11111111 ,,, Ip It I I l 11 i --,.