Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Mobile Medical Imaging topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission postpones decision on PET/CT mobile imaging unit at 435 West Aton Road

6439555 · September 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Imperial City Planning Commission continued Conditional Use Permit COP 25-05 for a PET/CT mobile imaging trailer proposed next to a medical clinic at 435 West Aton Road to its Sept. 24 meeting after commissioners asked the property owner to notify nearby tenants and provide a tenant diagram and site measurements; the motion carried 3-0.

The Imperial City Planning Commission voted to continue consideration of Conditional Use Permit COP 25-05 — an application to locate a PET/CT mobile imaging unit at 435 West Aton Road — to the commission's next meeting on Sept. 24 at 6:30 p.m.

The decision followed a staff presentation and a question-and-answer period during which commissioners and members of the public raised concerns about pedestrian and vehicle circulation, disability access, tenant notification at an adjacent retail complex, and radiation safety. The motion to continue the item passed 3-0.

Staff told the commission the applicant, Dean Enterprises, seeks approval for COP 25-05 to install a professionally manufactured, self-contained PET/CT mobile imaging trailer next to an existing medical clinic at 435 West Aton Road (APN 064-351-0276). A planning department staff member said the project qualified for a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act under section 15311, Class 11, which covers minor accessory structures and temporary use items.

“The project is categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for section 15311, Class 11,” the planning department staff member said. The staff member also recommended approval but noted a revised site plan was submitted after the applicant determined existing power poles required the trailer to be moved farther west.

Representatives from CDL Nuclear Technologies joined the meeting to answer questions. Randy Baggett, who identified himself as senior project manager and regional director for CDL in the West, described the company’s role leasing and servicing the trailer. “He’s leasing it. So you guys are going to, monitor it, maintain it, service it?” a commissioner asked; Baggett replied, “Yep. That’s part of the lease that, we basically, are gonna oversee all the maintenance once a month, everything to do with it.”

Kendall Thiessen, a CDL representative joining remotely, described radiation controls and the isotope used for the cardiac studies. “The isotope is rubidium, which is a very short half life,” Thiessen said. “It’s 75 seconds.” Thiessen added that a licensed physicist prepares a shielding report with the manufacturer and that the trailer is licensed and inspected by the state for radioactive materials; staff said the state license was still pending initial inspection and would be available in the trailer and on request.

Members of the public questioned proximity to nearby retail and a senior apartment building. Applicants and staff provided approximate distances: about 15 feet from the trailer to the property line and roughly 70 to 80 feet to the senior housing building (measurements the applicant said would be confirmed during engineering and reviewed for the final site plan).

Commissioners directed staff and the applicant to return with additional information before final action: a list or diagram identifying tenants and tenant locations closest to the trailer, clarified site measurements, confirmation of proposed pedestrian and vehicle controls (concrete pad, fencing, bollards or striping), and clear tenant notification from the property owner. Staff said the conditional use permit would include a five-year expiration and that complaints or requests to extend would be reviewed before any extension.

The planning commission also voted earlier in the meeting to approve minutes for its July 23 and Aug. 27, 2025 meetings (motion carried 3-0). A separate hearing item (D-1) was not opened because of a potential conflict and will be noticed for the Sept. 24 meeting at 6:30 p.m.

The commission closed the public hearing on COP 25-05 and continued the matter to Sept. 24 with direction to staff and the applicant to provide the requested tenant notification and diagram, site measurements, and any additional supporting documentation for commissioners to review.