Residents press Regentex, EDC and city for solutions to noise, light and dust behind Antler Circle

Residents who live along Antler Circle and nearby streets told members of the Hollywood Park Economic Development Corporation on Feb. 1 that noise, bright lights, dust and visible trash from a life‑science facility at the rear of their properties have become persistent problems that hurt quality of life and the ability to sell homes.

The complaints centered on the parking area and dumpster operations behind Regentex (a retail/real estate division of Tygo Biosciences at the site). Celeste Quinones, the company’s facilities operations manager, told the EDC she is “open to discuss all options” and said Regentex purchased the property in 2023 and brought it into operation in 2023–24. She said company leaders are reviewing possible enclosures, parking‑lot work and other steps but that “those are big conversations” and “nothing’s set in stone.”

Neighbors described repeated nighttime disturbance and a permanent adverse view from the rear of their homes. “The back view is a deal breaker,” said Rosemary Duke, who lives at 111 Antler Circle and said her house has been shown many times for sale without a contract because of the rear view. Miguel Duran and other residents said bright lighting shines into bedrooms, dumpsters are noisy when emptied late at night, and unpaved back lots create dust. Several residents asked the EDC to consider funding or engineering help to create a visual and acoustic barrier.

Why it matters: residents said the combination of light, noise and the visible activity behind their yards has reduced privacy and, in some cases, curbed prospects for selling properties. EDC members and city staff said the town could contribute as part of a business‑retention incentive if an engineered plan is presented, but that ownership, easements and engineering constraints will shape what is feasible.

What the company said: Celeste Quinones identified herself as “facilities operations manager for Regentex,” the property owner/operator. She said the facility runs 24/7, operates 14 clean rooms and that biohazardous waste is handled separately and not placed in general trash. She told the board Regentex met with two neighbors on Jan. 30, has restricted vendor access so deliveries do not enter the site before 9:15 a.m., and is checking whether the drainage strip between properties is company‑owned.

What residents described: Neighbors produced photos and audio excerpts and reported repeated garbage pickups, occasional early‑morning activity and loud backing and horn sounds from trucks. Several residents asked for at least an 8–10 foot physical barrier; the town’s staff noted that the city code limits fences to a maximum of 8 feet without a variance. Tim Rainey and others suggested acoustic panels or louvers and, separately, enclosing dumpster areas with masonry to reduce noise.

City and EDC response: EDC members and the mayor recommended an engineer study to identify practical mitigation measures (site grading, wall/enclosure type, drainage/easement constraints and lighting shields), and said the EDC could consider incentives if the business presented a specific proposal that retained jobs. City staff reminded the group that the town’s fence/sound‑barrier rules cap fences at 8 feet and that taller structures would require a variance from the city council.

Next steps and directions given in the meeting: residents were asked to supply dates/times and, where available, video or audio of specific incidents so Regentex can check its security footage and address particular vendors or shifts. Regentex said it would report back to its executives immediately and follow up with the town and residents. EDC members proposed a consolidated meeting including residents, the property owner and relevant city staff/engineers to scope options, estimate costs and consider phased solutions.

Ending: No formal action or funding decision was taken at the meeting. Board members asked staff to coordinate follow‑up meetings and encouraged Regentex and residents to exchange incident details so the company can investigate and propose fixes. The EDC said it would consider engineering proposals and potential incentive funding only after receiving a specific remediation plan from the property owner.