you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you I'm Um. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. you you you you you you Recording in progress you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Feet, Fe to further ensure the ongoing site cleanup efforts staff developed the approach and the special conditions with mellow park. Okay. Sorry. Hello. Does it work? Okay. Sounds good. I'll continue on with slide six with the introduction of the special conditions for this special use permit. It's to ensure the ongoing site cleanup efforts staff develop the approach and the special conditions with Mellow Park Fire Protection District and San Mateo County Environmental Health to bring the site back in compliance by ensuring and restoring the facility safety while also providing flexibility for the business and its operation. The first special conditions as you see on the screen will limit the continued operation will only be based on the existing inventory and will seize new inventory intakes until the site is restored. The second condition requires the applicant to return to planning commission, no later than April 30th, 2025, to confirm all fire damage areas and objects are either repaired or removed from the site and will be compliant with the conditions approval. The dirt conditions requires the applicant to obtain passing inspections from both MeloFire and Cemento County of Ramello Health within 90 days of this permit approval. The last condition we'll be ensuring the, is to ensure the applicant to demonstrate the ongoing site cleanup progress and provide updates to planning. The hard copy in front of you would be addressing the revised condition number 283. Staff has revised condition number 23 to address illegal dumping concerns that is occurring near the site. The added language is shown in the red italicized that the applicant shall provide signage in a highly visible public area to inform the customers and vendors that illegal dumping in the public right of way. It's illegal and it's not allowed. And the applicant shall submit the signage location, the signage and its location within 30 days of the issuance of this permit. Staff recommends the approval of the special use permit 24-001 for the continued operation of an auto dismantling and recycling facility at 2091 Bay Road with four addition special conditions and as amended condition number 23. And finding that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act, which exempts the continued operation of the existing facilities, involving no expansion of the use beyond at the time of the Lee Agency's determination. For this project, there is no changes, opposed to the operation of this auto, dismantling and recycling business. Thank you. This concludes the presentation. Okay. Thank you for that. Any questions for staff? Michael, have you got anything that you want to share with us? Are you your annual pilgrimage here to the Planning Commission Come on Michael. Let's look here for Michael first You would mind just hitting the buttons so the mic turns on I'm Mike Baker. I own infinity salvage for many years and I've had a tough year this year, you know, with the fire and a lot of break-ins and they broke in the office and all the containers and you know, it's crazy and they're dumping a lot you know in front and across the street, you know, so I don't know what's going on this year, but it's been a rough year. So we've been working on the cleanup from the fire in July for about three or four months now, because it destroyed my forklift. We couldn't, we had to fix another one. And the fire department and the county said to get rid of all the burnt cars, so that was a priority which we have done. And we have three state contracts, you know, to recycle cars to clean the air. So a lot of people in San Mateo County in East Palo Alto, and now in San Francisco, there's no dismantlers left at all in San Francisco. So we're busy recycling cars, you know, and I'm proud of the fact that we help clean the air, and we give the local people a lot of money from the government programs. So one of the things I have an issue with is the first time I've heard about it is that we can't accept any new cars coming in, because that will break the contract with my three government contracts. I have to accept the cars or else I'll lose the contract to recycle the cars. So, I mean, I just heard of that today. I would say I also read it in the condition of approval and was troubled by that condition because it affects the operation of your business. And I would ask, do you have the capacity for more vehicle? No, but I have a plan that's gonna work out well. I have the buyer for Sims Metals, where we take our cars in Redwood City. He's gonna come down tomorrow and I'm gonna show them the facility in the back and we're gonna have him bring his crusher in and recycle about 100 or 150 cars. Cause all those cars out there, we never even deal with. We just deal with the cars that come in every day to recycle them, we're that busy with that. So we're gonna clear the back so that we can address the weeds because the weeds just keep growing. We really, I haven't been in the back for two years. I'm so busy in the office answering the phone, doing paperwork and recycling the cars. So we're gonna get rid of 100 cars probably, quickly. You know, he'll probably start in January because we take the last week of the year off, so we can't have him come in when we're not there. So we'll probably start in January. I would say we'd take him maybe two weeks to basically clear most of the cars out of the back. And then we can get a machine. You have capacity again to take. I mean, we don't even keep the new cars we get in because we're not allowed to sell parts off them. We just drain them, crush them, and ship them. Oh, yeah, sure. You see, so they never go in the back. So all those wheels on the back have never really been touched. We don't really self-parts that much. Anymore, we more or so recycle cards that are coming in immediately. So by moving all those cards, it's going to open up the walkway aisles between the rows because they'll be gone. And we can mow all those weeds on the dyke in the whole yard quickly. So because I've got three different contractors, I want to give a bit about addressing the weeds. If they don't even want to deal with it, it's so much work, you know, because it's a lot of property. It's like an acre and a half. So I think the best way to do it is sort of clear most of it and make it easier to cut. But we have to maintain our business also and maintain my contracts with the state. So I have to have my guys do in the front operation while Sims guys do the back operation and do all the clearing and my guys don't have to deal with it. We'll deal with tearing down the wooden rack that burnt harshly. So our guys can do that. But those guys will address getting rid of the cars so we can successfully cut the weeds in a quick manner. You know, because it would take a contractor maybe two months and that's a lot of money to pay a guy out there for the weed eater. So you said you were hearing about this tonight. I'm in its exhibit C that I'm looking at right here on my screen is the one that talks about continued operation. Well, Michelle sent me the link to open it, the agenda. And I opened it this morning. And I read that and I go, whoa, wait a minute, didn't even discuss that. So she had just brought that into the mix, right? Basically, I had never heard of that before. This was also discussed through you in our previous communications. Also I called you Friday as well to kind of talk about the conditions of approval. Okay, but I never heard anything about not getting any new vehicles coming in because I really need that to address what we do for a living and to take care of my contracts because they'll just drop me and then pull get them all. It limits your business. Yeah, definitely it stops the business because I'm going to have higher sense to take care of all the cleanup in the bag other than cutting the weeds. And we need to make our living doing what we do This recycling cars now the other could Thing you referenced early on Besides the item we were just talking about Was people people dumping visit vehicles across from infinity salvage. They don't they don't drop they don't drop vehicles hardly ever. They drop garbage. I mean weeds, tree cuttings, tires, everything. And it's on the public right away. Yeah, right. But I don't feel that I should be paying for a sign saying no dumping across the street from my business. Right. I mean, it's not your responsibility from what I'm seeing. Yeah. The what I see for people in the community or outside the community, dumping stuff along the public right away near infinity salvage. I have a problem with that being your responsibility. That's the city's responsibility to take care of that stuff. And they they've been doing it. They've cleaned it up three or four times. You know they wait for six months and it's really built up and I don't even know why these people do it. I don't understand that kind of mentality really. Vice Chair, if I may. Please. So I think we recognize that Infinity Salvege has been before the Planning Commission and we've been able to recommend approval of the special use permit. But the situation has changed because of the fire, which we totally acknowledge that is not, the applicants doing, but the thing is given the location, which we totally acknowledge that is not, you know, the applicants doing, but, you know, but the thing is given the location, given the materials involved on site, staff has worked really closely with Menlo Fire and the County Health Department. We're relying on those experts as to what conditions need to be on here. So the primary goal of this is, you know, we wanted to find a way to help accommodate the applicant to continue his business, but at the same time, make sure that safety is established, that we don't cause any potential environmental damage to the area, just because of where this is. But we do recognize that he has a business in which is why we've come up with this compromise, which is a special use permit with the compliance review in about four months. And again, that we're giving extra time to let the applicant be able to address all of the code issues. And he also needs to make sure the other thing, as I mentioned, is that we rely on county health as well as men with fire to kind of track the environmental health issues on this. And so Michelle has worked very closely with both men with fire and county health to come up with a compromise approach, which is what this represents. So specifically, I think the applicant mentioned weeds. I don't think that's something that the city is as concerned about. It's basically repairing the fire damage. Once the fire damage is repaired, then he can go ahead and proceed and fix the compliance issue with the other things on sites such as weeds. But the primary thing we're looking for here is to make sure to give the applicant the opportunity to work with men with Fire and the County Health Department to bring his sign to compliance to meet all of those standard health and environmental health regulations. And then that way, then we can continue to work with him to continue the city's process. But again, the timeframe has been established to give the applicant time without having to say we're going to hold the special use permit. So we don't have to revoke the special use permit. So we are trying to work with the applicant. And like I said, we are working closely with the technical experts on what's required. And so this condition of not utilizing, not accepting new vehicles is something that Michelle were closely with those agencies because we feel that by not accepting new vehicles, then he'll have time to address the fire damage on site. So it's representing a compromise that we're hoping to continue to work with the applicant on. To the chair. Well, we are not seeing is the reasoning. What we are not seeing is the reasoning. We're hearing in consultation with this agency and that agency, we've come up with this condition of approval to limit this fellow's operation of his business, even on a limited basis, as he has the capacity to take new cars. And I find that very limiting for this business, which is the only one in the Bay Area that does this kind of work. And basically, you're tying him up in knots. And I don't see the reason for that. And I don't see it specified by the staff member who was in consultation with the San Mateo Department of Health and with the other agencies you mentioned. I'm not seeing the basis for that and we should be able to see that here. Commissioner Allen Fiskin and through the Vice Chair if I may. That is a fair point. I do want to provide some additional context. So the special use permit under which infinity salvage operates exists because it was adopted by the council and is in the muni code as a compromise in and of itself. The infinity salvage business actually operates in the Ravenswood specific plan. And these types of uses were supposed to have sunsetted on condition that they quote, will not negatively impact public health, safety, and welfare of the community, and would not interfere with redevelopment efforts. Now the first part, public health, safety and welfare, that is something that Alaina is talking about here. And I recognize that some of the conversations that we, as staff have had with Menlo Park Fire and the county relate to public health and safety and the welfare of the community. But they are not here to speak to that. That is a fair point. The alternative is to continue this item until they've come to the meeting and had a chance to kind of speak more fully to this commission or perhaps to staff and then an updated staff report can be provided to provide that context. But at present right now, I don't believe that staff has any reason to believe that these public health safety conditions are not without a basis. These are the subject matter experts that we have, and we rely on them to let us know what conditions should be imposed. And while I recognize that there is some trepidation to accept that wholeheartedly without understanding the reasoning, that's kind of where staff is at this point. What it is, staff, is I don't see a reason for exhibit C to exist at all. Under the considerations here tonight. That's my opinion. I don't know if the other commissioners will want to strike exhibit C paragraph one as I will probably make a motion to do. Because I think this is putting a hamstring on infinity salvage business model and his current contracts as he's just mentioned. So I've never had an issue with Menlo Fire or San Mateo County code enforcement. They've always liked the know, light the way we ran the business and I've helped menal fire give them free vehicles for years. You know, I take them over their site here by the Dumbarton Bridge. I take them to their headquarters in Menal Park so they can show the public how they save people's lives. So I've worked one on one for 20, 30 years with men with fire. I mean, a guy was just in today asking for a couple cars. A new lieutenant for a men with fire. And we gladly give them to them at our cost, you know, and pick them up. So I don't see why they would have a problem with us doing what we do for a living because they've taken advantage of what we do for 30, 40 years. I mean, I've been there 50 years doing it. Understood. And I'm notwithstanding that context and I appreciate you adding that. It's very, very helpful and useful. Our understanding is that the conditions related to exhibit C in number one relate to health safety. And so they flow from a recent development at infinity salvage involving the fire But that was ours and that wasn't anything to do with our operations You're stood and that that is a fault issue. Nobody is laying blame at infinity salvage for that But what we are discussing is a condition that relates to public health safety that comes from either one of those agencies and It's my understanding that they believe continued operation, you know, not ceasing at 100%, but not accepting new vehicles as a compromise that they believe will protect public safety, but will allow you to continue to operate. And I understand that you brought up new information related to your ability to maintain these contracts because of that. I don't have a response for that because the condition that comes to us comes from Menlo Park Fire and the county and they're not here to kind of answer to that. Well, I think the reason they're saying that rationale is that how can we accept new cars at the same time get rid of the other cars? But I've just addressed the fact that I'm going to pay Sims to professionally recycle all those cars without my guys being involved at all. Great point. That is. Well, therefore they're standing around. Well, we can work on the wooden rack, yes. But that's as far as recycling the cars in the back has nothing to do with us recycling the daily cars that come in. And sir, I appreciate that response and it sounds reasonable to me. But we also don't have Melopark, Fire Protection District nor do we have the county to kind of figure out if that meets their concerns at all. And so that's why it's important that we kind of have to even continue this so that we can have that conversation to see if they believe that this dialogue that we're having meets their concerns. But we're not here. Reduce it down to a minimum. But if you cut it off, only I'm afraid the state contracts, they could sue me for that for not doing my part of the contract. But Mike, you've got fair concerns, staff, you've got fair concerns. It sounds like a timeout is in order to sit down and have a conversation about what works, what's feasible for you, Mike, what's feasible in terms of adhering to health and safety guidelines and sort of just get everybody, have a huddle and talk about it. I think what you're saying, John. Absolutely, my dear. I guess what I want to drive home to you, sir, is that what you're saying could be entirely reasonable and will entirely meet their concerns. But because they're not here, we don't know the answer to that. Is that a fair point? And maybe another way of saying, F, maybe out in front of those agencies, maybe a bit more robustly than those agencies would even desire. Well, part of why you need to have a conversation. Those agencies aren't aware of my plan of attack Absolutely, and then I agree with that I agree with that and that's why somebody else a professional yes I think it's so we can address the weeds quickly my question for you just to give us an idea what sort of volume to you experience in terms of cars that come through We get like three or four cars a day but we get twenty phone calls a day and people wanting to bring cars that's how many people want to use these programs and there's no dismantlers in the area at all yeah as i recall from last year if you're not mistaken you'd mention that you're the only one when the only one in the san mitale county for for many years and now San Francisco has none at all either. So like the Bay Area Quality Clean Cards for all program, we get a lot of people from San Francisco because they take advantage of that clean cars for all where you get 9,500 bucks plus 2000 to do a plug-in. So I don't know why San Francisco gets a lot of those cars, but people, and he's spelled out, they'll have gotten them too. They're gonna manage that program. 30 chair question. All right, so we are being asked to either approve or not approve his special condition permit, correct, special use permit. Well, I think staff is saying, let's not even do that. Let's continue the item and have everybody understand. I'm just asking what we are being asked to. We're being asked to approve it or not approve it tonight. Correct. That is correct. If we're not to approve it, he would not be able to operate moving forward and a meeting would have to happen before that time so that he wouldn't be out of compliance. If we approve this, it buys him time to get this worked out, which does not preclude you off from still having this meeting to resolve it, which means this could be come back. We could approve this night. We would have that condition in there. But if you go and meet tomorrow and it gets worked out in another, what is how does that come back or how does that get worked out or resolved to excellent question. Remember, when I think what would have to happen in there, there would have to be a subsequent meeting. But what I was having a side bar with Alina about is the possibility of delegating to staff, the authority to kind of negotiate a condition that sort of works for the applicant, but then also works for Menlo Park Fire and also the county. And if we can't come to terms then we come back. If we do come to terms and it kind of meets the public health safety, but then also meets his concerns as to continued operation and his viability with his contracts, then that would just be the end of that. And so I think that would be staffs kind of recommended change if the commission is willing to do that. And to me, this sounds like it's until this is addressed. So this is giving you their approval. We should go ahead and operate. Of course, not taking any new ones. But if you can go and get this worked out and resolved tomorrow, this doesn't say like this has to carry in that manner. But I'm reading that it carries on until it's all resolved. Which means it could be that conversation. It could be. It's a little bit different than that. The special conditions are in place until the item is resolved. And then this thing has to come back for an annual renewal, which the applicant is used to. What we were saying just now was a little bit different where the commission approves it with a modification. So that staff has the degrees of freedom to negotiate this thing and have that negotiation. And if we get that negotiation and both sides agree with it, the special conditions would be in place until the annual renewal happens. And then that would just, that would come back to you guys anyway. So it'd be a motion to basically say, one would be in, but we would add an additional language that says until it's restored to as an original condition or agreements are made with the health department, men, low fire, the city and the applicant at a date, at a sooner date or whatever. That's something. Added language we could, we could approve this with. Right. And you're asked what you're saying. some down below the added language we could we could approve this with right. What you're asking what you're saying. Yeah, and I would be a little bit more intentional. And I want to make sure you guys are okay with this, but it would be authorizing steps. So it would be the condition would be exhibit C1. Continued operation will be based on existing inventory and see sending you inventory acquisition. Unless staff and the applicant can agree and see sending you inventory acquisition. Unless staff and the applicant can agree to a different arrangement in consultation with Menlo Park Fire Protection District County County, and if the parties cannot, then it will come back to the commission for the consideration. To the chair, I would say that our attorney makes a reasonable compromise on the face of it. But what we don't have here or won't have unless we ask the staff to do it is a letter from Menel Park Fire, a letter from San Mateo County Environmental Health supporting item one in Exhibit C. We don't have that evidence. We have staff having had conversations. We don't have anything in writing. That's my issue. So that we can judge if if what staff is investigating is whether they have evaluated, whether you have evaluated the conversations and the direction that you may have gotten from these agencies, we don't see that information here. That's what I'm getting at. But is the concern for the health and wellness. Pretty vague. All this but it's a very important consideration. We know that there was a fire. We know that there was an incident. Is there any documentation that says that everything is cleaned up and is restored back to original condition and there's no risk of anything else. I mean, we can judge that. Well, all the cars are gone. Yeah, we just have to tear down the wooden rock. So there's primarily the bad condition now is taking care of the weeds. But there's so there's still things that need to be repaired. And if anything else will have the same considerations, they would not have gotten approval to keep operating until those things are remedied. Vice Chair. Yes. I just wanted to add to the record, the one thing that staff was looking for, and that's a standard condition of approval, is that the applicant is required to obtain passing inspections and permits from the county and men will fire. So the reason why these conditions are in there is because we did not receive that yet. And so that's why staff coordinated with these agencies with these conditions to allow us to continue the business and give the applicant time to obtain those requirements. So what we're looking for is because we're not the subject matter expert is that we're looking to the county and mental fire to do the inspections and to provide the approval permits so we can rely on that to move this forward. So you're saying in lieu of that documentation from those agencies that's why yeah so to council let me ask you if the item were to be continued which is kind of the original conversation and for some reason now your roll past 1231 is January 13th is the first commission meeting at the end of the day what ramifications if any are there of that permit lapsing for 13 days is that a big at the end of the day is that really a big deal or not necessarily? I would say that the implication is an enforcement action and I'm not at present at liberty to determine whether or not that is something is a big deal or not. That is something that I would have to talk to code enforcement staff and depending on the size or magnitude of the violation, perhaps even the council. But that is something that is important that we need to consider. But I think Alainham brings up a great point, which is this condition is premised on the notion that the Nellin Park Fire Protection District in addition to the county has said that there is not a passing inspection. So in order to get that passing inspection before anything else happens, there needs to be a reduction in service. And that's essentially what they're saying. So it really at the end of the day becomes mood anyhow because if it doesn't pass that inspection, you're not going to be able to operate anyway or they're going to take some certain enforcement action against not complying, correct? That is a possibility in addition, you know, overlapping jurisdiction. What the city does, what mental park fire protection does, correct? And if we continue it, you're running a lapse and you run risk. There's more risk there to all these or anything else if you're running in the lapse. Correct. I think what staff is recommending that we have that conversation to see if there's any daylight between you know what we've been communicated from those agencies to something that is a little bit more workable for the applicant. Okay. Chair. All right. Good question. I'll defer the council on that just because I'm not sure. Do we need public comment for this? Can I? As a public hearing item, I believe it does. Should we move to public comments? So staff are there any public comments that have come through? the should move to public comments notice the staff are there any public comments that come through no no public comments come through okay thank you to the chair I want to ask the applicant do you find any of this conversation confusing Well, I can't hear some of it, but I don't know. I thought I've come up with a pretty good plan to try to address the whole situation and not lose my business and lose my contracts with the state, but it is what it is. You know, I'm the puppet. So I have to dance to the paper, right? Yeah. I mean, I've tried to do a good job in this community doing what I do for 50 years, so maybe I've done something wrong. I don't know. Mm-hmm, vice chair. Yes. If I could respond. So stated that this permit was really drafted to give everyone flexibility and time for the applicant to resolve these issues. And so John did mention a potential addition to the language that would enable the applicant to resolve this faster. The other thing too is that these conditions were specifically drafted to give a maximum time. It doesn't mean the applicant can get these permits, get these passing inspection sooner, staff can respond sooner. So I think the alternative that John presented is also another option where the planning commission would have to give that authority to staff. But I think as long as the applicant can work with mental fire and the county health to show that all of these health concerns or environmental health concerns are addressed, then it would be bringing this permit, this project into closer compliance with what we need and are expecting based on those previous permits. So I think what you're saying, Elena could be summed up an emotion that Mr. Mennet is prepared to bring forth. Yeah, please. I propose a motion to approve this with the conditions that were discussed and give the staff the ability to allow the applicant and staff to work with a county and with Minlow Fired to come to a closer resolution. Very good. Second. Thank you, Richard. And we have a motion. We have a second. Any further discussion? Otherwise, we'll entertain a vote. All in favor, please say aye. I'm going to vote no, not to the multiple of words and I find it unsatisfactory. So that's why I won't vote no, I'll abstain. How's that? There we go. Way to take a position, Commissioner. Thank you very much. All right, so the motion carries. Thank you for the motion. Mike, I think at the end of the day, you're going to end up in a good spot because this is really just by, I mean, the way I see it is buying some flexibility in moving forward and getting everybody on the same page and with respect to what the the the the government side of the equation wants the regulatory side of wants and at at same time nobody's trying to shut you down. We recognize what you're doing. You're the only guy doing it if you don't do it who will. And you've got good relationships with the city. You here, Laura's almost sitting up here. So I think you're probably in better hands than you might recognize. So thank you for sharing your concerns. So I'm kind of missing what's the final conclusion? Can we accept vehicles tomorrow or not? That's what I don't understand. Not at the moment, we will have a conversation with the regulatory authorities and we can we can talk to you offline once this is over to kind of explain next steps. You should what? We can we can talk to you after the meeting to discuss next steps. Yeah, okay. Okay. So staff that means I can't bring my truck over for Mike to dispose of it tomorrow That's what I'm trying to ask no Not until we actually resolve this issue, but staff will work diligently with the regulatory authorities and Mike to kind of resolve this well and plus that I'm know that I'm gonna have the pros come in there and take care of it Absolutely, my guys are not gonna do it. So they're sitting in the sidelines if they don't have anything to do and that's a new car coming in. Let me ask staff if I may chair. If. The approval of the special use permit with the conditions that have been under discussion tonight, especially item exhibit C, is not satisfactory outcome between staff dialoguing with appropriate agencies and might being a conference. If that is not satisfactory, what recourse does infinity salvage have to be able to come back to us and reopen consideration? Well, what we stated earlier in the conversation during deliberation was that if the parties can't come to a resolution that we would just simply have a special meeting and would come back to the planning commission discussing at that time. Hopefully we'll have a lot more information to kind come back to the planning commission. Oh, discussing at that time, hopefully we'll have a lot more information to kind of explain to the commission where staff is and Mike would be free to come and speak as well. That would be good. Thank you. Any further business? They were shaking. They had no. They want to go eat. Lights out. We're pizza for everybody on the on the Vice to touch. I can't I can't tell you how that all work. Thank you. Thank you very much. And I wish everyone happy holidays and happy New York. Thank you.