Commission continues contested tree-trimming/ag-service permit to Oct. 8 after neighbors raise noise, safety and traffic concerns

The planning commission on Aug. 27 continued a contested minor modification (MIM25-024) to special use permit PSP25-030 to Oct. 8 after sustained public testimony from neighboring residents concerned about noise, truck traffic and safety. Commissioners asked staff to facilitate a meeting between the applicant and neighbors and return with the outcome and any recommended permit conditions.

Russell Keshawa, project processing staff, summarized the application: the property at 13426 Avenue 232 is currently operating under a prior special use permit (PSP22095, issued in 2022 for a milk-trucking business) and the current owner applied to add a tree‑trimming service and to allow substantially more commercial trucks and workers on site. Keshawa said the applicant proposed up to 35 trucks and roughly 80 employees for the tree-trimming operation but that historically the prior use permitted five milk trucks and 10 employees.

Multiple neighbors described disruptive impacts. Kevin Bacher and resident Tara Dominguez said they recorded noise and documented after‑hours activity and high truck counts. Dominguez told the commission the operation sometimes runs after hours and that trucks beeping at night and weekend maintenance had occurred: “We have 10:00. We have the lights left on in the trucks. … This is not a Monday through Friday, 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. business,” Dominguez said. Keshawa noted that the applicant reported measures such as netting on fences, limited hours (6 a.m.–6 p.m. Monday–Friday) and dust suppression; the applicant also said he applies an oil-based treatment and periodically runs a water truck to reduce dust.

Planning director Aaron Bach confirmed for the commission that an approach lane or Caltrans encroachment requirements would be necessary if an approach lane were formalized at the state highway edge. Staff also confirmed condition 15 of the original permit addresses vehicle-safety approaches and remains applicable.

Commissioners and staff discussed whether the proposed change qualified as a minor modification or required a full amendment to the original use permit. Given the testimony that truck counts and operations have increased substantially beyond the original milk-truck permit, staff and several commissioners indicated the item may exceed the scope of a minor modification. To allow time for the neighbors and the applicant to attempt a negotiated resolution and for staff to review compliance and potential additional conditions (approach-lane work, noise/dust controls, limits on maintenance hours, truck-count enforcement), the commission continued the matter to Oct. 8 and asked staff to facilitate a meeting with both parties prior to returning.

The continuation preserves the applicant’s ability to operate while the parties meet and staff prepares any recommended changes to permit conditions. Staff was tasked with setting up the meeting and reporting back to the commission on Oct. 8.