Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

You made it right on time. I'll give you a second to get ready. Good? I am now calling to order the regular meeting of the Fairfield Planning Commission for September 9, 2026. Mr. Atkinson, can we please have the roll call? Yes.

Commissioner Cordero-Chen? Present. Commissioner Paul? Here. Commissioner Matthews?

Present.

Vice Chair Singh?

Present.

Chair Kennedy? Present.

All right. Thank you. Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Paul, will you lead us tonight in the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you.

All right, next is the approval of the agenda. Are there any changes to the agenda tonight? No, there are not.

OK.

Do I have a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. Thank you, second? Second by Commissioner Paul. It's been moved and seconded to approve the agenda as submitted. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous in favor? Motion passes. And now we'll go on to the approval of minutes of August 26, 2026. Are there any changes to the minutes by staff or commissioners? Seeing none, do I have a motion to approve the minutes? Thank you, Commissioner. Second. Second by Commissioner Matthews. All right, it's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes as submitted. All in favor? Aye. Aye. And nays? Motion passes unanimously. Now we'll go on to public comments. This is the time for the public to speak on items that are not on the agenda but within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, provided that no action may be taken on off-agenda items except as authorized by law. Off-agenda items from the public will be taken into consideration without discussion by the Commission and may be referred to staff. Comments will be accepted in person or via Zoom. I have no hands raised and I have no comments for public comment. now at this now for public comment instructions to speak on the an agenda item in person please complete a speaker's card and give it to the to the secretary before the meeting or at the latest prior to the time for the public comments on that item when joining via zoom please use the raise your hand feature or press star 9 on your phone to request to speak you will be called on by name and you will have three minutes to speak um i will now open the public comment here there isn't any so we will go on to scheduled matters next item on the agenda is public hearings for each agendized item there will be a presentation by city staff for items that involve application requests i will open the public hearing and ask the applicant to address the commission if they desire then commentators via zoom and in-house have the opportunity to provide public comment i will close the public hearing after all comments have been provided and after all our questions regarding the testimony during the public hearing have been answered. After the public hearing is closed, the commission will deliberate on the item and may have additional questions for staff. We cannot take any additional testimony or questions from the public after the public hearing is closed. And each commenter will have three minutes. And the two exceptions to that are the applicant, the two parties involved, and they'll each get 10 minutes to speak on that tonight. So the public hearing tonight is item number H1. It's an appeal from Adam Grossi of Premier Pawn and Jewelry requesting its Planning Commission overturn the zoning administrator approval of a use permit and minor discretionary review for Camacho recycling at 1950 North Texas Street. Our presenter tonight is Melissa Friar. Welcome, Melissa.

Good evening, planning commissioners and members of the public. My name is Melissa Friar, assistant planner, and I'll be presenting the Camacho recycling appeal. This is a brief overview before I delve into project specifics on March 24th a use permit and environmental review application Was received to operate a small recycling facility at 1915 North Texas April 30th a minor discretionary review application was received to supplement the submittal and July 27th, the zoning administrator hearing was held. Approval letters were sent the next day. And August 4th, the staff received an appeal application from Adam Grossi. SO THE PROJECT PROPOSES A WAY AND PAY CRV COLLECTION SITE. BOTTLES AND CANS WILL BE STORED IN THE SHIPPING CONTAINER AND THE CONTAINER IS SWAPPED OUT WHEN FULL. PROJECT PROPOSES TO HAVE ONE TO TWO STAFF MEMBERS ON SITE. THEY WILL ALSO HAVE A SOLAR CAMERA TO DETER LOITERING AND SECURE RECYCLABLES AND THE OPERATOR IS CAL RECYCLE CERTIFIED. The location is at 1950 North Texas Street in the parking lot of Super La Favorita. The zoning is Commercial Thoroughfare and the general plan designation is North Texas Mixed Use Corridor. Both designations call for supporting retail and service uses that cater to the daily needs of residents and the proposed project is consistent with that. THE USE WILL IMPROVE RECYCLING ACCESS DUE TO A CENTRALITY ALONG THE NORTH TEXAS CORRIDOR AND PROVIDE RESIDENTS PRESENT AND FUTURE WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO RECYCLE ITEMS FOR CASH. Here's the site plan. The location in red was the originally approved location before the zoning administrator hearing. During the hearing, neighboring business owners were concerned about the adjacent restaurant uses and its compatibility. Upon discussion, the attendees and the applicant identified an alternate location in green and that one is the final approval in addition to the container placement other concerns that were brought up were blight and littering increased loitering Small recycling facilities are already regulated by zoning ordinance section 25327. On this slide, just a few of the policies are listed that would apply to the proposed project, such as no blocking required access or traffic disability. Container cannot be located within 150 feet of residential. Site must be clean at the end of each business day. No power equipment is to be used in operations. Material shall be stored in containers when staff is not present and operation hours are limited from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. In addition to zoning ordinance policy, staff provided additional conditions of use to address possible concerns and prevent nuisances. Here are a few of those conditions. Loitering is prohibited. The owner operator shall police the area under their control to prevent loitering of people on the premises. Graffiti must be removed within 48 hours. The collection facility cannot relocate on the property without written consent from the planning division. And on top of that, staff provided conditions of approval on the minor discretionary review application as well. Some of those conditions of approval include design features. The proposed design has to be in use at all times, even when the container is swapped out. reflective safety stickers to improve traffic visibility, paint it to complement the existing buildings and comply with reciprocal easements for access and parking. Other considerations that went into for the approval. The proposed use is trending with expanding state regulation to increase bottle recycling. There are no recycling collection facilities in Central Fairfield. It increases the opportunity for residents to get cash, which in turn helps reduce littering of plastic bottles, cans, and glass. And as a last record, a use permit can be revoked when the operator is consistently non-compliant with these conditions. The next few slides are just a summary of what the appellant's claims are one of the concerns is that the container is too close to the business premier pond it harms his business image and should be located closer to super la favorita the location as it is meets zoning rules and it cannot be moved closer due to the 150 foot residential buffer Another area of concern was a quality of life issues the recycling center will worsen homelessness graffiti trash. Staff responses that conditions are added for cleanliness. The project already proposes staffing cameras. There's limited operation hours and again last recourse is the permit can be revoked if consistently and noncompliance. Another claim the operator acted improperly by placing the container early on the property without building permits or business license and allegations of water siphoning. STAFF WAS MADE AWARE OF THE CONTAINER AND SPOKE WITH THE APPLICANT IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC HEARING. STAFF TOLD THE APPLICANT THAT OPERATIONS WILL HAVE TO CEASE UNTIL THE APPEAL PERIOD IS OVER AND THEN THEY MUST OBTAIN ANY BUILDING PERMITS AND BUSINESS LICENSE. While the allegation regarding water siphoning is concerning it is considered a private sitter met civil matter between the parties and is outside the city's regulatory authority. The appellant also brings up that the container violates the CC and ours. City staff does not enforce privacy CNR is we look at the compliance of zoning in general plan which we find that it does and it also supports the RV road cycling requirements. The proposed project is categorically exempt under the California environmental quality act section 1, 5, 3, 1, 1 accessory structures. The container is a minor and non-permanent and it is accessory to existing commercial. It is staff recommendation that the planning commission denies the appeal and upholds the approvals for the use permit and minor discretionary review. Thank you.

Great. Thank you very much, Melissa. Now time for questions for staff. We'll start at the end, Commissioner Cordero-Chen. Do you have questions for staff?

So one of the questions that I had or that I was thinking through was better understanding if there's a subcontract or a formal contract in place between Camacho's Recycling and Super La Favorita owners to better understand like the use of or like addressing say for example like the like the water siphoning so will they have access to water from where the lease is actually or where they're going to be on that property Is there going to be any designation on where, if they can use a dumpster that's on site for any of the illegal or prohibited dumping that is happening? Or could happen, I'm sorry.

I will defer to the applicant on if any, I guess, agreements exist between them and the property owner.

We can ask that one to come up.

Yeah.

We'll ask those questions when they come up to speak. Anything else. Commissioner Paul.

Yeah, I do have a question. What's the proximity of the appellant to the those containers of how far is the business of the appellant to those containers.

this site plan just shows the um parcel boundaries for la favorita um but okay it's kind of hard to you have any any footage of how many feet away or i'd say maybe 15 to 20 feet 20 feet okay

I have seen one recycling center on Peabody Road, and I think that's the only one on this side of the city. And if we go pass by the Peabody Road early in the morning or late in the evening up close to 5, and they have, it's a bigger place, bigger place. There are almost 30, 40 cars inside, and all the cars are lined up even on the Peabody Road too. So in that case, if... too many cars, too many people come to recycle there. So how would you control all that traffic or all the parking lot will be full to me if it is being allowed in a parking lot like the supermarket, even all the people coming to the supermarket, they may not have any parking for them as well. So how do we justify that?

So a traffic memo was. Submitted with the application was routed to our public works assistant traffic engineer and there was found to be negligible transportation effects.

Commissioner at 10 again.

I wanted to know the size of the green parcel that's up that's now been approved. What is the size of that parcel?

I'm sorry. So it's not a parcel. It was just had to make it bigger to show like where it's at. The container approximately covers two parking spaces.

And what is the size of that? Because I remember from the documents they were saying that it had to. It was like 750 square feet.

So it can be 750 700 square feet, but this container that they're talking about is 20 by 8 in my neck. It's a thank you. So it's a small. It's a small shipping container, so it's 160 square feet. Thank you, sorry. Commissioner Matthews.

The 150 foot. Requirement. WHO HAS AUTHORITY TO WAVE THAT?

THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE A VARIANCE THAT EITHER THE VARIANCE THAT EITHER THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OR IF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OR IF IT'S IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING IT'S IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER. COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER. AS PART OF A VARIANCE THERE'S AS PART OF A VARIANCE THERE'S TYPICALLY A HARDSHIP ASSOCIATED TYPICALLY A HARDSHIP ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPERTY TO WHERE THE WITH THE PROPERTY TO WHERE THE APPLICATION OF THE ZONING an applicant or a property owner from exercising their rights.

Would you mind going to the aerial? So obviously there is an existing dumpster on the side backing up to the residential area. Was that just an existing condition?

SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE CITY DRAWS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN.

DEMSTER AND RECYCLE?

CORRECT. ALBEIT, THEY MAY HAVE SIMILAR IMPACTS.

I THINK WE'LL MAYBE GET INTO THIS LATER IN THE MEETING, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IF THERE IS AN OPTION TO EXPLORE WAVING THE 150-FOOT REQUIREMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL WHICH WOULD ALLOW IT TO BE IN A MUCH BETTER LOCATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR CENTER.

I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY A VARIANCE REQUEST AND I'LL TURN TO MY CITY ATTORNEY MOMENTARILY IF THAT'S INCORRECT. BUT I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THE CITY DOES HAVE THAT 150-FOOT BUFFER FOR THE REASON THAT IT IS, THEY ARE RESIDENCES.

I understand. And I further understand that that would be a separate application that either the applicant or one of the parties would have to make and is not part of tonight's purview. But I wanted to raise that as an awareness issue. THE OTHER FACTOR IS THAT I UNDERSTAND THE CITY IS NOT IN A POSITION TO DEAL WITH PRIVATE CC&Rs, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHEN THE APPLICANT COMES UP, WHAT EFFORTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE WITH THE PROPERTY MANAGER TO ENFORCE THOSE CC&Rs. SO WE CAN DEAL WITH THAT LATER. I WOULD, MAYBE NOT RELEVANT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS THE WHOLE WATER SIPHONING THING AND MAYBE WE CAN GET MORE INFORMATION FROM THE APPLICANT AT A LATER TIME. THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS.

Yes, thank you. And then we touched on the dates in the presentation as well, but I just wanted to get more into the specifics of the dates. So on July 24th, or I'm sorry, on April 30th, yes, on April 30th, a minor discretionary review application was received. And then on July 27th, there was the zoning administrator's public hearing. And then please feel free to interrupt me if this is going to go or if this question is better focused towards the applicant. But there were some pictures attached to the appeal dated July 25th, which is in between here. And those pictures had, or actually, those were pictures of the container itself with an open sign on it so was this container operational before the minor discretionary review yes and that was one of the claims that the appellant brings forward i had on the slides that they that essentially they're a bad faith operator or actor sure OK, gotcha, gotcha.

And we did have conversations following the zoning administration hearing that it was brought to our attention that they were operating and they weren't supposed to.

Sure. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate that. And then also at the zoning administration hearing, I believe it was, was it Ricardo, or I see Mr. Ricardo and Edwin Camacho as well as six members of the public were in attendance for that, but not the applicant here today. They were not at that zoning administration hearing. Not the applicant, I mean not the appellant, I'm sorry. Yes.

Okay. I did want to add the following day, the appellant did stop by City Hall. Yes. I had a conversation with him. He had the public hearing notice, acknowledged that he had missed the actual hearing, but did express concerns with the proposal, in particular the location. And that's ultimately how we got to the appeal. He was aggrieved by the decision and elected to file an appeal.

gotcha understood so so at that zoning administrator hearing that is where the location was changed from the red to the green at that hearing that's what was uh that was one of the conclusions there correct okay received thank you all right i think i just have two quick questions um the conditions of approval that are on there were based upon um the hearing and the public comments correct

and like the changing of the the change in location things like that yes most of them thank you and then um i noticed multiple times it said the permit can be revoked if there's uh consistent issues with that correct and that would happen through code enforcement so in in the event that let's just use a hypothetical um

business or an operator that has a use permit if there is documented cases of violations of their conditions or any other local state or federal laws we would receive any complaints and we would file that documentation and you know similar to any progressive disciplinary process we would build a case and if it rose to the level of Revocation being necessary. Of course. There's also like one-off like very egregious offenses that would probably escalate a revocation it would go before the Planning Commission for a revocation, but the enforcement and Determining if there are violations That would go through code enforcement IT COULD GO THROUGH CODE ENFORCEMENT OR SOMETIMES WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WILL FILE A COMPLAINT DIRECTLY WITH PLANNING DIVISION STAFF. THERE'S ALSO THE POSSIBILITY THAT IF STAFF IS OUT AND ABOUT AND WE OBSERVE ANY VIOLATIONS, IT WOULD BE PRUDENT OF US TO TAKE NOTE OF THAT AS WELL FOR DOCUMENTATION. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS? I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. And will the applicant, Adam Grossi, please come up to the lectern as your opportunity for you to provide the commission with the basis for your appeal request.

Okay. Thank you to the commission for allowing me to speak. I own the business Premier Pond and Jewelry in the building located in 1962 North Texas Street. I was traveling when the notice was sent for the original hearing. I didn't get the notice until the day after, and I believe my interests were not really taken into account in the first hearing and in the location of this recycling facility, so I wish to correct that here.

Now, my business is a pawn shop.

In California, pawn shops mostly function like jewelry stores. If you go into my business, you will find a nice showroom full of glittering jewelry, diamonds, gold, watches. Additionally, we deal in high-end handbags and coins. The use you should compare me to or to liken me to is a jewelry store. And jewelry constitutes 90% of what we deal in. Now, a recycling facility in this shopping center, particularly located right in front of my storefront, just a few dozen feet in front of it, would clearly impinge on my use as a jewelry store and therefore would violate Section 25.40.6 of the Fairfield Zoning Ordinance. Now, even if there are no code violations, the nature of this facility, the dumpster bin, trash accumulation, bags of cans and bottles, When these things open up during the day, you saw the size of the actual bin. The actual amount of space they will occupy during the daily use will be many times that. You only have to go on Google and look at their other locations in California to see that, the photos on Google Maps. You can imagine Some of the trash bins, all of that piling up during the day, being dragged around. And nearby in my jewelry store, I'm trying to sell diamond rings to newlyweds. I'm trying to be able to sell a fancy watch or a Chanel handbag. It is clearly an impingement on my use. If there was a jewelry store right where I am, if there's a Zales Jewelers, if there's a Ben Bridges Jewelers, Of course you would not allow a recycling facility right in front of it. Can you imagine such a situation? But not only that, there is reason to suspect that there might be code violations and larger issues of homelessness, trash buildup, loitering, dilapidated structure and area. I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars renovating and updating my building to be able to sell and deal in jewelry. We buy, sell, and pawn it. Expensive showroom, expensive jewelry displays, signage, security. I just got a new roof last year. I've been a good citizen of this city. And I think it's wrong to undermine that by allowing a recycling center right in front of me. Now, you might say, well, it's got to go somewhere. The city needs it, and there's going to be issues wherever it goes. So we might as well put it where, you know, in this shopping center. The thing is there are many other places to put this type of facility. If you look at Camacho Recycling, they have five locations in California. and you can look on Google Maps, three of them are located right on gas station property. They're just right tucked in behind the gas station building. Two of them are located right next to liquor stores. Okay, so it's a good business decision to locate near, you know, businesses and locate on their property, which can innately tolerate better the downsides of this type of facility. Maybe a gas station, a liquor store, a collision center, maybe a tire center. I mean, there are plenty of these businesses in Fairfield where they could locate. And in my appeal, I mentioned large parking lots. They could be located not 20 feet from me or 150 feet from a residential, but hundreds of feet from any storefront or tucked away behind those buildings, tucked away behind where cars go and customers go for these businesses. The way this should go is, you know, they pay rent and try to get standing on a facility where that business itself is the one to deal with the negative consequences and also reap the rewards of whatever monetary compensation they give, rent or so forth. The problem here is the business that stands to gain from this is 1950 North Texas Street, and they located the facility on the outer edge of their property line right near me. I have to deal with all the drawbacks. That is unfair. Now, by the way, as far as the video footage of July 25th, camacho recycling has shown themselves not to be good actors they did put their facility in without a permit they did steal water and there was trash build up and i have the photos of that the guard that confronted them is right here if you want to talk to him his name is mark um The July 25th video was footage from my video system, which I accessed later. I didn't access it on July 25th. I accessed it a few days later. For the CC&Rs, my lawyer sent a notice to Camacho Recycling that they violate the CCRs. There's nothing we can do until they actually put a facility on the premises. I mean, there's no harm yet. but we do intend to pursue legal action in that case. Now, I've tried to get in touch with the owner of 1950 North Texas Street to no avail. So, you know, if you're dead set on giving this permit to Camacho Recycling. Well, first of all, the nature of this shopping center is that it's going to be unfavorable to the rest of the tenants here. The problem is we've got a central parking lot where Camacho is going to have to be located somewhere there very visible. okay, where all of our business customers and employees go. And then there's businesses around, but we each own our own parcel. So a business has decided to put Camacho on its parcel, but the rest of us have to deal with the negative consequences. That's the wrong way to do it. Now, I would say if the council decides to grant a permit, despite what I've said, it should be located next to 1950 North Texas Street. They're the ones that are benefiting from this. They should deal with the drawbacks. If Camacho isn't a good steward, they can be pressured by 1950 North Texas. It aligns incentives. Now, for the idea that if they commit violations, you can always get code enforcement or the police, I hope you all understand the nature of doing business in this city or in any city. It's very unlikely and suspect to try to get the authorities to come and rectify some issue that happens like loitering or trash or they're blocking the thruway of cars or homelessness or something. The authorities don't actually do much to deal with that. If I have a homeless person on my property, I cannot just call the police or code enforcement to come save me, to remove them. It doesn't work. So I have to deal with them myself.

30 seconds.

And so the problem is if Camacho Recycling has, when it's where it is now, if Camacho Recycling does something, I can't pressure them. They're not on my business property. It's going to be a back and forth conflict forever. So I believe it should be put as close to 1950 North Texas Street as possible. And there is places to put it in the driveway aisles that still have 150 feet away from residents. You can just look on the map.

Thank you very much. Will Mr. Camacho please come forward to the lectern? This is your opportunity to provide the commission with a response to the appeal.

Good evening to you all. Thank you for taking the time to present my business and hear me out. My name is Edwin Camacho. I'm the applicant's brother. Unfortunately, he couldn't make it today, but I'm also part owner of Camacho Recycling. So we have currently seven locations all across Northern California. Three in Chico, one in Magalia, one in Davis, California, one in Sacramento, and one in Santa Rosa currently right now. To describe my business, think of us like a small kiosk, just only more efficient, faster, and more convenient for consumers. So I don't know if you all know, but California has a auto deposit system. where consumers pay 5, 10 cents bottle deposit fee. When you go to the grocery store, your local gas station, your local liquor store, consumers pay a 5, 10 cents fee per bottle. And what we are is when we come in, we pay that $0.05 and $0.10 fee back to the consumers so they get their bottle deposits back. I know there are supermarkets who technically they can take CRV, but the inconvenience of that is that consumers can only bring up to 50 bottles of plastic cans, 50 bottles of glass bottles, and 50 50 bottles of aluminum cans. So the most they would get is $5. What we would do is, there's no limit with us. They can come bring up to 100 pounds of aluminum, 100 pounds of plastic, 100 pounds of cans with us. Hence the grocery stores, they're limited to 50 count of each plastic cans and glass. So technically they can recycle at a convenience store or a supermarket, but it's not convenient for them because they don't get most of their CRV back. So describing my business is we like to operate on a small 8 by 20 foot shipping container recycling center. We like to operate different than other recyclers, than other traditional recyclers. We like to decorate our container looking professional, nice, modern look to it so that we don't just look like just a recycling center. We look more modern, professional. I know there's a misconception on recycling. When people hear recycling, they think of immediately homeless or loitering or trash. And unfortunately, that's not the case. I believe 90% of our customers and the consumers, they're regular families like us. They're people. I understand, you know, homeless, there are some homeless that recycle, but most of our customers, they're regular families just looking to make an extra source of income to provide for their families, their kids, just to save up some extra money for their gas, their groceries. You know, that's the beautiful thing about it is that people come to us, they bring the recycling, right? They bring their bags of recycling. If they're not sorted, we would help them out. They can sort their material, their plastic, their cans, or their glass onto our small bins. What we would do is we'd have two employees, professional employees, so our facilities are manned at all times. They would dump the material inside our bins. We'll sort them out from plastics, cans, and glass, and we'll weigh them out onto our small scale that's inspected regularly by the county weights and measures. And then we'd weigh out the material, and we'll log on our log sheets their weight, and we'll pay them per pound. So they're limited to 100 pounds of aluminum, plastic, and glass. their payout would be pretty good. And another convenience is we would pay them cash for it as well. Another point I'd like to mention, like I said, we work differently than most traditional recyclers. We understand that recycling centers and recycling can come off as dirty, but we have a strong reputation of cleanliness, professionalism, and well-maintained centers that we have already established. like to also say that well responding to you know the sorry so so think of us is like like a kiosk but just more efficient and fast So the supermarket, Super La Favorita, we are in the property of La Favorita because we had the opportunity. The owner of La Favorita gave us the opportunity to be placed at his property. In order for us to qualify, we need to be within a mile or near or at a beverage dealer. So supermarkets right now, they pay a $100 fine a day for not having a recycling center within a mile of their property or in their property. So, us being at La Favorita, La Favorita doesn't have to pay a $100 fine a day because of not having a recycling center. So, it would be beneficial for La Favorita and nearby grocery stores within a mile of 1950 North Texas Street. i believe there's the grocery outlet the food for less all those grocery stores they wouldn't have to pay a hundred dollar fine a day because of us being at 1950 north texas street i'd like to also say uh responding to the the appealant Honestly, I don't think it's fair to judge a business if you don't have any knowledge or if you don't know what we do and what we're about. It's like me saying, it's like me judging your pawn shop, it would be like me saying Like me saying, you sell stolen gold or stolen pawns. So I don't think it's fair to judge our business. At the end of the day, we like to work with all the other business owners as well. I like to say there's solutions to everything. you know obviously like there's a stigma on homeless and stuff like that but we're we are there to do business but we're also there to clean up the area clean up the city and overall it will be beneficial to even the business owners and the opponent as well since we do pay the consumers in cash so what they could do with that cash is they can go back and spend that cash inside his pawn shop spend the cash on the other nearby businesses or any other businesses around. So I believe there's a stronger benefit of our small recycling facility than the nearby businesses. Another thing I'd like to note is that we are, to respond to your question, Ms. Hannah Chen, I believe you said where will we be getting water or what agreement we have with the owner of La Favorita. Right now, currently, we have an agreement. We are paying him rent. The water, we will be able to use their water for that. Mr. Shashipo, to answer your question, I know there's a recycling center already in Fairfield, and I believe you said, what will we do with all the traffic? Say, if we are busy, I'm not sure if the other location is busy, but usually our customers, they're in and out within five to ten minutes, so our two employees are We'll help out the customer, unload the material onto the truck, weigh them out, pay them cash quickly. Hence, we're a convenient small recycling center. So the most the customer will be there is five to ten minutes, and they're in and out. If there is long lines, we'll make sure we'll coordinate our employees well to make sure they park where they're supposed to park. They're not blocking any traffic way.

30 seconds.

Okay. And to end it, I'd like to say recycling is a very needed business, you know, and I would like to say we would operate clean, efficient, and we would like to work with everyone. And that's it. Thank you. Thank you very much.

I can add one small thing.

Sorry, I also would like to add, I don't know if it will help. I have over 200 signatures of residents.

We'll go ahead and take those. Thank you. I do have a question.

Now we go on to public comment. I don't have any cards and there's nobody online. We don't have any speakers online. Now, staff gets their first chance to respond to any issues raised by both parties.

I'm happy to provide a response and then feel free to supplement. So first and foremost I want to say that We appreciate the appellant's business in Fairfield and the concerns that he brought forth to staff and to the Commission. He cites several concerns. I do want to say that a lot of the concerns regarding This recycling center, the small recycling center, worsening quality of life conditions in and around the center. I do want to say that a lot of this is speculation without clear evidence that this will worsen those issues. Nonetheless, I do want to note that, as Assistant Planner Fryer noted, And as evident in the packet, there are multiple use permit conditions as well as zoning ordinance regulations that do address the types of issues that could come up, whether it's speculation or real. There are multiple use permit conditions and regulations that deal with loitering making sure that the site is cleanly on daily basis setting hours of operation so that this is something that would you know start at the wee hours of the morning and go late into the evening I also want to note that this is a small recycling center so that is there is a distinction between with a small recycling center versus an industrial scale recycling center. So when we start to talk about compatibility issues with retail and those types of uses, I would say that the concern and the argument that a recycling center is incompatible with a shopping center it's an industrial scale yes that that has merit and that's not allowed by the zoning ordinance this is a relatively small structure so staff you know it's evaluation of the application we determined that it was consistent with not only the zoning ordinance standards but with the general plan itself What I'm going to say next is also a little speculation, but I think that it should be considered. I think there's a lot of emphasis on this small recycling center being an impediment to commerce within the shopping center. And what I will say is it does serve a need that is not met for several miles. It could serve to draw people to the shopping center that may not have otherwise elected to come to the center. And that could serve as a benefit to other businesses within the center. and coming to the recycling center to find out, oh, there's some awesome restaurants over here, or there's a grocery store that has a meat market. So the same way that it's argued that this can be an impediment to business, that argument can be flipped around and seen as, well, it's also attracting people that may want to do business in the center. And then as far, there was a brief mention of traffic impacts. And as Assistant Planner Fryder mentioned, there was a traffic assessment that evaluated impacts and demand relative to traffic standards. The last thing I'll note is the appellate made an argument about CC&R, so those are conditions, covenants, and restrictions. As we mentioned at the beginning of the presentation, the city does not enforce private property or land use restrictions. I think the central claim that the appellate made is that The location of this structure is not a buildable area. The city of Fairfield looks at our zoning regulations and our general plan guidance for evaluating a project. I just want to reiterate that you know the city we we are definitely concerned about you know potential impacts as far as like code enforcement so we we do take very very seriously you know those concerns I do want to note that as part of our internal review of This application was routed to our police department. We did not receive any concerns. So we do take that into consideration when we're evaluating applications. And that concludes my comments. Thank you so much.

Great. Thank you. At this point, I'll ask Mr. Grossi if you want to return to the lectern and to respond to any of the new information. or issues that were presented during the public hearing. And you have up to five minutes.

OK. Thank you. For the Camacho proposal, he says it's not fair to judge a business. He says they're clean and they're respectable folks, but their actions belie that. And I already alluded to that. If they're so clean and respectable, why did they put the structure and the property in the first place without any Permit, why did they steal my water? Why did they allow trash to build up? So look for actions don't look for words He said that he will process a large amount of cans the grocery store doesn't allow so much That goes to Shashi's idea that this is going to be a sprawling thing Again, it's going to be right in front of my my business lots and lots of cans lots of things driving around and none neither Jonathan nor Melissa dealt with the idea that this violates my enjoyment of my use as a pawn shop and jewelry store after this I'd like Jonathan and Melissa to just speak directly to that now I think it's pretty clear that it does because you know anyone who you know thinks that well You know, if there's any coding violations, we'll take care of it. But the main use of this thing, without any coding violations, just the basic use of it will violate my business's use. And therefore, it should not be allowed.

And then the other thing that wasn't talked about was the location.

Again, why is it located right in front of my business? Why is it not put in front of 1950 North Texas Street if you're going to put it somewhere? All the reasons I mentioned are still valid. The fact is it's put near mine because, you know, at the last hearing they wanted it to.

And that's the only reason.

Camacho says, it's just a quick, fast kiosk. I would urge you to just look online at the photos of the business. Again, don't believe what people say. Believe the photos. Believe actions. You can see it sprawls out on their Google Places page. When they're open, they've got trash bins all around and bags of cans. You can imagine my customers coming to me to try to buy gold, to try to, with their loved one, buy a nice gift. Obviously, this is an impingement on my use. You know, I don't think you would ever allow this to be near a jewelry store, and so it shouldn't be next to mine. You know, other businesses haven't spoken up in that they want it. There's the idea that this is good for business. No, no one actually has come up here and said it's good for business. From what I understand, in the last two years, residents have come up complaining, other businesses, other landlords. And I would have, too, if I knew the hearing was going on. Let us understand our own businesses, OK? We know what's good for us. And we know the kind of thing this could bring. again with the regard to code violations you cannot as a practical matter as a business owner you can't just rely on putting a bunch of restrictions these little code things with a business oh it has to have the camera working it has to have this and that and expect that it's just going to happen like that um The way you're going to enforce this business to be a good neighbor and to do well is by the landlord and the business who owns the property being directly affected in their pocketbook with their customers if it doesn't turn out very well so they can evict them. Okay, so if homeless and trash builds up, it's on their property. Now, why would homelessness and trash build up? Because, you know, people bring a bunch of cans and trash and they separate it out and then they leave the trash. Because homeowners arrive there in the afternoon and sell their cans and then they stay there and camp out in front of my business. Maybe because they go there at night and then camp out of my business waiting for the day where they can sell it. There's also the point that wasn't talked about where no other of Camacho's businesses are like this. They're all located at gas stations and liquor stores. none of them are in the middle of a shopping center next to like a jewelry store they can find a way to do it in this city doing it that way there's lots of other places they could go thank you thank you sir

And now, will Mr. Camacho return to the lectern? This is your opportunity to respond to any new information or issues presented during the public hearing. Thank you. Thank you.

To respond to the opinion about, he mentioned that it was something about stealing his water. I'm confused. I honestly don't know what he's talking about. It could be anyone, you know, that across the street or someone nearby that can steal someone's water. I'm pretty sure anyone can steal something outside. Also, I would also like to apologize because we actually did place the container right after we got the approval of the use permit. We did place the container. Our signs did say open and we were we were open for that day and Mr. Jonathan brought it up to our attention and we immediately seized operations the same day, so I Took out the container and it's in my property now, so we're not operational at all also He did mention that it would be right on his property, but we will be on Super La Favorita's property, so it wouldn't be right in front of his store. It would be actually kind of further away from his store. It wouldn't affect his business since... our business would be operating you know would be from a separate side if there are any you know proposed locations any other locations to where that like it wouldn't affect anyone we're open to any other you know locations we can on the property where we can place it but we do we did agree on that would be the best location for us So we're a small CRV recycling, so we only take CACRV, empty beverage containers only. So we only take aluminum cans, plastics number one through seven, only empty beverage containers, no processing, no scrap, no processing of that nature, none of that. So simply empty beverage containers. The facility, once the container is full, it will ship out the container. We'll load the container. empty it out. So depending on whenever it gets full, everything would be stored inside the container. So there would be no trash, no debris, none of that nature outside. Everything would be stored inside the container. Hence, that's why we operate definitely from other recycling centers. We like to keep everything clean, everything stored, nothing outside the containers at all times to keep everything clean. I believe there's solutions to everything. We can work with the nearby businesses. We're here for the long run. We're here to work with them. I have been to that property recently. You know, right now, we're not operational, but I have seen already homeless there, loitering, right? So it's already a problem, but we like to say, you know, we're here to help you guys out. We're here to clean that up. You know, we're here to clear out loiterers, trash. That's why, you know, we got the opportunity of the owner, the favorito, to be there. We told him we're going to, you know, clean the property, make sure everything is, you know, nice and organized. So every business doesn't have to worry about loitering, trash. I know I can say this, but I like to speak with actions, not words. So at the end of the day, if we do get the opportunity to be operational, we like to demonstrate that with actions. Recently, I was in Fairfield at the supermarket and other convenience stores and people's residence, and I was able to obtain more than 200 signatures of residents in Fairfield and also their phone numbers as well. I know I can just write a name and someone's signature myself, but I made them write their phone numbers as well, so this is real. This is over 200 30 seconds this is over 200 residents that actually want this business at the property you know it was hard to do but thankfully i was able to do it i don't know if this will help but this is residents nearby in the property wanting this business i'd like to end it off saying you know thank you for the consideration and thank you

Thank you. You can hand those signatures to us. Thank you very much. All right. I will now close the public hearing. There are no hands on line and no other speaker cards. And return to Commission for deliberations. We'll start with you, Commissioner Cordero-Tem.

AND IS IT OKAY TO ASK A QUESTION TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT? ARE THERE ANY OTHER PLACEMENTS IN THAT PARCEL OR IN THAT LOT THAT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED, ANYTHING ELSE THAT HAS BEEN TALKED THROUGH OR PROPOSED?

YES, SO IT'S KIND OF HARD TO show on the the diagram um so one two three so the last three rows are not eligible for location because of the 150 foot barrier to the east it's apartments on behind that wall so that leaves only the first three rows the first row is right off of north texas that's the primary ingress and egress into the parking lot so I GUESS OUR INTENTION OF LIKE ELIMINATING THAT FIRST ROW IS IS JUST TOO MUCH TRAFFIC. AND THEN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND CONDITION SAY THE CONTAINER CANNOT IMPEACH TRAFFIC OR VISIBILITY. SO THAT LEAVES THE SECOND OR THE THIRD ROW. WE DID HAVE IT AT THE THIRD ROW. BROUGHT IT AT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S HEARING. unfavorable to the rest of the neighboring businesses and someone else pointed out like hey can you go here the applicant was amenable they brought it forward to the property owner and the property owner agreed and that's how we got to the green point today but because of that 150 foot barrier a lot of that parking lot is not not usable

Okay. Commissioner Paul?

There are a few things Zeppelin brought to our notice, and one is that his business is like 20 feet away from the recycling center. And on the other side, we are saying that recycling center can't come within 150 feet of the residence. So why I don't find much logic in this, well, A person who has an established business, he has spent millions of dollars to establish that business, and you are putting a recycling center next to his business which is only 20 feet away. To me, it's more inconvenient for him. The kind of clientage he has, they won't come to his business at all if such a recycling center is brought right in front of his business. And in sunshine or rain, people will look for where they can stand, and his business is close to that. And looking at that, like he already told, Mr. Camacho told that he had got 250 signatures from the vicinity. They would love to have this business open for them. Keeping in that view, I think North 250, there might be thousands of customers. They would love to come to that place. And it will be overwhelmed all the time. Not only that, on North Texas and West Texas, we see the homeless people. They're carrying their bags, and then the shopping carts, they're carrying all the recyclable items. They'll be there all the time waiting for them to open, and they'll be right in front of his business. So to me, if we can relocate it or find an alternative place for the recycling center either in the same plaza or in front of the other plazas, I think that would be much better.

Thank you. Commissioner Matthews?

So I'm sympathetic to Mr. Crossey's situation. However, we're a society of laws and regulations, and based on everything that I've heard tonight, this still fits within city regulations and requirements. I would encourage the parties to reconsider, if you wouldn't mind going to where you have the red circle.

The red square and the green square.

Yeah, red square, thank you, not a circle. Either that location or advancing that closer to the market, would, in my opinion, be preferable. However, that's a matter between the parties, not a matter to be considered by the Commission. In my view, the Commission here needs to look at, does it fit within the regulations, statutes, and otherwise? AND THEN CLEARLY AGAIN THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN COVERED BUT THE COVENANTS CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS WOULD BE A PRIVATE MATTER THAT IF THEY DON'T FALL WITHIN WHAT'S PERMITTED THAT'S AN AVENUE FOR THE APPEALANT TO CONSIDER, BUT I DON'T SEE THAT WE AS A COMMISSION REALLY HAVE MUCH TO CONSIDER OTHER THAN WHAT I'VE ALREADY EXPRESSED.

THANK YOU. Thank you, Chair. I would like to co-sign Commissioner Matthews' comments here as well. If we're viewing this through a land use lens, this use is conditionally allowed, and it meets the objective standards for the use as well as the permit here as well. Staff has reviewed the project against Section 25.32. I'M SORRY, .7 AS WELL AS 25.22.3 AND FOUND IT COMPLIANT. And with that, I believe that there needs to be a mechanism to enforce the conditions for this use permit themselves, or actually for the use permit itself. And so I actually have a question for Mr. Ricardo or Edwin. Are we able to ask questions at this time? I'd have to open the public hearing.

You have to open the public hearing to do that.

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and reopen the public hearing for questions to both parties. Yes, thank you.

Yes, Mr. Camacho, please. Yes. What are your intended hours of operation for this facility?

So my intended hours of this facility would be from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and Sundays, 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.

And then will there be staff on site during those hours?

Yes, sir. The facility will be manned by two employees from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. every day.

OK, gotcha. And then I noticed that for this facility itself, one of the conditions here is that there is to be a temporary deposit container for collecting recyclables. This is condition five of the use permit. But for that condition, Will there be an unattended container for people to drop off? No, no, no.

Our facility will be manned at all times by well-trained employees. The employee is responsible. The two employees are responsible to keep the area clean at all times and to help out customers unload their CRV material so the container would not be just there by itself with no one unattended. All the material would be stored inside our container at all times and when the containers full would bring a truck the truck would load out the container and empty out every single day or We would we would replace the container and drop another empty container Thank you All right.

Thank you. Didn't commissioners have a question for?

Okay And mr. Camacho, I have another question for you And for what best practices do you all have in place? Say that your employees arrive, there is trash or other debris that's left outside of the container that are not what you already can deem like recyclable for your business. What do you all do with those materials? 100%.

so what we like to tell each each each and every one of our guys is that half of the job is to keep everything clean and well organized and half half of the job is to help with the customers and uh by uh by crv so what we do is we like to place we install cameras at all times so say if you know after hours there's stuff going on we physically can see on our phone what's going on all the times even after hours over four hours so if we see something going on we have contact with la favorita And we also can see through our phone or our camera so that if we see something, we immediately, you know, go and take care of it. Let's say if someone is waiting past the hours and there is trash, which our employee, you know, he would immediately take care of it. He'll throw out any trash that is left, but... I wouldn't say there wouldn't be any trash left outside before hours. I know it can, you know, I can't really prove that. You know, someone can just drop the trash outside of their storage container. But, you know, at the end of the day, the customers don't protect it themselves because they would get money from us. So I would like to say the customers and the consumers, they would protect the property, keep it clean. But what we would do is we would...

after hours and before hours we like to pressure wash the property uh clean before operating and after hours we like to you know clean up again to make sure everything's uh clean at the end of the day great thank you um since the public hearing is open i do have a um someone who'd like to speak if you'd like to come up fill out a speaker card um i'll let you do you can do that afterwards but go ahead and come up now and then we'll get you a speaker card and you have three minutes.

One second. My name is Akram. I'm the owner of the property next door, 1970. It's a shopping center. This is literally feet away from the Ritz Square originally.

That's where the- Talk a little closer to the microphone.

SIDE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE. I HAVE SIMILAR CONCERNS. I PUT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY, WORK WITH THE CITY COURT ENFORCEMENT TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY, PREVENT GATHERINGS OF HOMELESS AND OTHER ILLEGAL GATHERINGS ON THE PROPERTY. WHEN I HEARD THE PROPOSAL OF MOVING THE CONTAINER CLOSER TO MY PROPERTY, It's still close to mine and close to his. It still poses the same concern to us. The biggest beneficiary of this is La Favorita. We don't mind if they push it down further to closer to their property. It is really unfair that we put millions of dollars Purchasing these properties, we're spending hundreds of thousands to maintain those properties. The closest business on my property to that old proposed location is a restaurant. The dining area is literally like viewing that recycling center was to be put there. So moving it to that spot, It's unfair. It still poses the same concern to me as does Mr. Grassley. So, once again, if you guys want to go ahead and approve this, please have it just moved closer to La Fabrita. He's the one who allowed them there. Therefore, that shopping center is close to where my shopping center is like literally like feet away from elementary school and it's also feet away from the proposed center that they're building right now. That's all I got to say.

Great. Thank you very much. Seeing no other comments, no other hands raised, I will close the public hearing again and return to the commission. Any other questions? Okay. So I just have a couple things I want to reiterate Commissioner Singh and Commissioner Matthews' comments about. It's about land use. I know the appellant talked about 1950 North Texas Street, it this p where they're proposing it is on 1950 North Texas Street it's not the location that everybody would prefer I think it's by the sounds of it even this planning commission but some of the things you know all product must fit within the structure itself that's mentioned multiple times within the within the conditions of approval. It is a private property rights issue, and as Commissioner Matthews stated, that if it's a CCR issue, that's obviously a private, something between you and the other property owners to fight over, so to speak. And not for us to judge on that. I think there's enough conditions that have been put forth here. My suggestion might be for all the parties to get together and If it means coming back to this body for a variance, then that's something that I would encourage you all to talk it over with. But seeing no other comments, we will GO AHEAD AND HAVE A MOTION. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 20 PC 2026-02. I WANT TO HAVE SOME COMMENTS. YES.

I believe that the conditions for this use permit are really important because that's where we do have some purview, specifically condition five, seven, and eight of this use permit. For condition five, it says when the site is not attended, the facility may provide temporary deposit containers for collecting recyclables provided they are constructed with durable, waterproof, rustproof material and whatnot. That's saying that there is going to be activity at this site outside of or likely outside of staffed hours. So after 5 p.m. when staff leaves, there is a container facility for people to visit this center with and then i really appreciate the clarification mr camacho you said hey no we intend to run this operation from nine to five and i do want to strike condition five of the use permit to reflect that accuracy so we have that understanding that would be number one number two is that condition seven It says that the collection facility site shall be cleaned at the end of each collection day and free of debris and loose materials. So there is an obligation to maintain cleanliness at this site. If there is trash at the site, then that is a violation of one of the conditions of this use permit. And also condition eight. which is that the facility shall operate only between the hours of 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. I appreciate your clarification here today that, hey, we're only operating from 9 to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and then on Sunday it's going to be 9 to 2 p.m., and those are going to be fully staffed hours. That condition 8 needs to be – condition 8 of the use permit needs to reflect that. Yes, so it needs to be modified. So really only two modifications. Modification on condition five to strike it completely and then modification on condition eight to have hard staffed hours, which is nine to five and then nine to five Monday through Saturday and then nine to two on Sundays. Great.

Now, I'm going to turn it back over to Mr. Atkinson here so he can address 5, 7, and 8 because I think those were conditions that the city put on them.

Yes, thank you. Sorry, just bear with me. I'm going to pull the section of the code that deals with small recycling facilities because condition 5 in the use permit is essentially... code requirement that we we lifted and made an operational requirement for the use permit and I do want to note that small recycling collection facilities it may PER THE DEFINITION IN OUR ZONING CODE, IT COULD INCLUDE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED, BUT IT ALSO MAY INCLUDE A REVERSE VENDING MACHINE. MY SPECULATION HERE IS THAT CONDITION FIVE, WHICH IS LIFTED FROM THE CODE, IS more so like a catch-all for like an unintended type of facility. So we could absolutely strike that from the use permit if that's the desire of the commission. And as far as...

Eight hours of operation.

Yes. So... AS FAR AS HOURS OF OPERATION AS FAR AS HOURS OF OPERATION GOES, ONCE AGAIN, FOR NUMBER 8 GOES, ONCE AGAIN, FOR NUMBER 8 GOES, ONCE AGAIN, FOR NUMBER 8 IN THE USE PERMIT, THAT SETS IN THE USE PERMIT, THAT SETS IN THE USE PERMIT, THAT SETS LIKE BROAD PARAMETERS SET BY LIKE BROAD PARAMETERS SET BY LIKE BROAD PARAMETERS SET BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THE ZONING ORDINANCE. IT IS WITHIN THE COMMISSION'S IT IS WITHIN THE COMMISSION'S IT IS WITHIN THE COMMISSION'S PURVIEW, COMMISSION'S PURVIEW, to reduce those hours or have those hours reflect what the applicant is proposing. I think the applicant sounds like the applicant is amenable to that since that's what they're proposing. But those are just the general operating hours, more so preventing really early operation or operations late into the evening.

Thank you. Thank you. Did you want to?

So what I think the appellant's concern is the likelihood that there will be unhoused individuals that will come at off hours and hang around. Is there any way that we can bolster the conditions, the use permit provisions that would add requirements to address that issue?

I do want to note condition 16 of the use permit does explicitly state The owner-operator shall post and maintain professional quality signs facing the parking lots that read as follows. A. No loitering, no littering, no drinking of alcoholic beverages. Violators are subject to arrest. And B. No legal dumping, no electronics, no hazardous waste. CRV items only. Please sort your items. So it does provide some... discouragement regarding those types of activities. The only other thing I could think of is if the property itself has no trespassing signs posted. But I mean, I do think that respectfully, I think some of these are worst case scenario, like speculation.

Are you going to make a motion with those copyouts?

Okay. I'll bring it back to the commission. Do I have a motion to approve resolution PC2026-02 or go ahead.

Yes, I'd like to make a motion to approve Planning Commission Resolution PC 2026-02 with the zoning administrator approvals for the use permit minor discretionary review as well as the environmental review. for Camacho recycling with two modifications first modification being for condition five of the use permit to be striked entirely and the second modification to condition eight TO STATE THE FACILITY SHALL OPERATE AT STAFFED HOURS BETWEEN 9 A.M. AND 5 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY AND STAFFED HOURS 9 A.M. TO 5 P.M. ON SUNDAY OR HOWEVER IS MOST GRAMMARICALLY CORRECT.

THANK YOU. CAN WE DO A MOTION TO

right now they have a motion on the table to strike condition five in its entirety and to modify condition eight based on the hours of stated staff hours i think commissioner

Paul is asking. To relocate it, but in a condition. I mean, last time you did relocate it via condition, right? Yes. So it's possible to do it via the conditions.

It's possible. It's just not clear where it would be essentially relocated to. So we'd be seeking direction from the commission if that is to be entertained. I don't know if this is the appropriate time to say this, but there is a condition, Condition 12, that says that it shall not be relocated on the property or altered without written approval from the Planning Division. So it does allow some wiggle room.

So there's basically two options. You can do an addition to his motion that he accepts that it would be moved, or we approve it It's the second that that the Commissioner Singh is done, but yet in we could send send it back because 12 says it can be moved with Planning Department discretion. We you can. We could encourage them to try to find a better location on the site. Either way. And that would give to you.

So to me, yeah, I'll go with him with the modifications, but if we can add that too, if there's possibility, all the parties come together and if they can move the site to either side. Do you want me to different side?

So can I ask a point of clarification?

OK, I was going to try to clarify it, but go ahead. OK, so the way the way I'm reading it is. Approving Resolution 2026-02 with three conditions. Number one, strike five. Number two, with eight, tighten the hours that they cannot go beyond maximum of nine to five Monday through Saturday and 9 to 2. I think you mentioned 5, but 9 to 2 on Sunday based on the applicants stated. And then you would like to encourage the parties to find a more suitable location that planning department will approve. Yes.

And my point of clarification is

as this commission can certainly encourage but we can't require correct yes okay so with and you do agree with his addition that encourage them to work with planning department for a better location yes yes of course i agree all right so do i have a second okay commissioner paul seconds that motion all those in favor aye aye aye opposed The motion passes. Thank you very much. We'll just take a quick minute while you sort those out, then we'll go on to the reports. Okay, now we'll go on to Director's Reports. Mr. Atkinson, do you have any items for the Director's Report tonight?

Yes, I have a handful of items and pardon all the coughing a few minutes ago. I apologize for that. Tis the season, apparently. SO I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT AT OUR LAST MEETING I MENTIONED WE HAVE A HANDFUL OF ITEMS THAT COME IN BEFORE THE COMMISSION FOR BASICALLY THE FALL. SO I JUST WANTED TO DAYLIGHT THAT AT OUR NEXT MEETING, WHICH IS SEPTEMBER 23rd, THERE WILL BE A PRESENTATION ON WHAT HAS BEEN DUBBED THE SOLANO REL HUB. SO THAT IS THE AREA AROUND THE SUSUN FAIRFIELD TRAIN STATION, PART OF THE CAPITOL CORRIDOR. The city received some grant money a few years back to study the feasibility of development and with connection to the transit station. So we do have a presentation from a consultant on the 23rd. And our city attorney will also give a CEQA presentation to the commission, similar to your Brown Act training about a month ago. And then we're really starting to kick off the general plan implementation, the second phase. So there will be at, THE OCTOBER 14TH MEETING WE'RE PLANNING TO HOLD A STUDY THE OCTOBER 14TH MEETING WE'RE PLANNING TO HOLD A STUDY SESSION FOR THE COMMISSION TO SESSION FOR THE COMMISSION TO REVIEW THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS REVIEW THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE GENERAL PLAN THAT WILL RESULT IN GENERAL PLAN THAT WILL RESULT IN NEW ZONING DISTRICTS. NEW ZONING DISTRICTS. SO REALLY THAT'S JUST TO GIVE A SO REALLY THAT'S JUST TO GIVE A REFRESHER ON WHAT THE GENERAL REFRESHER ON WHAT THE GENERAL PLAN ENVISIONED. PLAN ENVISIONED. AND THEN MOVING ON TO THE AND THEN MOVING ON TO THE OCTOBER That's where the zoning ordinance amendment package for the new accessory dwelling unit regulations would come back to the commission. So we appreciate all the feedback that was provided at the last meeting. So that would be coming back to the commission for a formal recommendation to the council. And then In November, and that's the next item I have here, is we would be bringing forward a zoning ordinance amendment package to review the new zoning district. So there will be a handful of new zoning districts that come out of the general plan implementation. We will be bringing at least two or three new zoning districts for formal review by the commission. And there are still a handful of developments that are getting close to moving to the commission, but they're not quite ready. So I did want to call attention to the month of November. So November is a little tricky because the first regular meeting is November 11. And that is Veterans Day. So that meeting is canceled. And then the next regularly scheduled meeting would be the 25th of November. And that is the day before Thanksgiving. So it's really not practical to have a meeting that day. So we would be looking at holding a special meeting and we would want to pull the commission for availability. So right now we're looking at November 10th and that is a Tuesday. So that'd be the day before the regularly scheduled meeting that's canceled because of Veterans Day. So we will send an email to the commission to pull availability for November 10th. And then the last thing I wanted to note is still on the topic of the general plan implementation. The planning division is currently planning a workshop for late September, and that would be regarding just some outreach regarding the new zoning districts that will come from the general plan. More information will be forthcoming across multiple platforms of communication. And that concludes my report.

Great. Thank you very much. Commissioner's reports. We'll start with you, Commissioner Chen.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT, BUT I DID WANT TO SAY SOMETHING JUST REGARDING SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS TONIGHT. I KNOW THERE WAS A LOT OF SPECULATION AROUND HOUSING AND UNHOUSED POPULATIONS AND ALL THAT. I WANTED TO JUST REMIND FOLKS OR BUSINESS OWNERS THAT WE DO HAVE TWO REALLY GOOD RESOURCES HERE IN THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD. We have the homeless intervention team from the police department as well as for Solano County. We do have coordinated entry from abode services and they do do street outreach. And I know that these organizations are really proactive. They want to be working with businesses. They want to work with supporting you all making things livable shoppable and really supporting populations that are dealing with um with um homelessness as well so we can share those resources as well to support our business owners and um maybe even the parties that were involved with the with the decision here tonight great thank you commissioner paul nothing commissioner matthews

ONE OF THE RESOURCES THAT WE AS COMMISSIONERS HAVE IS A STATE LEVEL COMMUNITY PLANNING. ONCE A MONTH THAT'S HELD. ACTUALLY TODAY WAS ONE. ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT THEY BROUGHT UP ARE NEW STATE LAWS REGARDING ACCESSORY UNITS. AND I'M SURE THAT YOU'RE ON TOP I WOULD JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT WHAT YOU DO BRING IS THAT THERE ARE LAWS THAT ARE ABOUT READY TO BE SIGNED THAT HAVEN'T BEEN SIGNED. SO I MENTIONED THAT. AND THEN JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER CHIN'S COMMENTS, THE HIT SQUAD ACTUALLY GAVE A PRESENTATION AT OUR ROTARY CLUB AND I ECHO THAT THAT'S A GREAT RESOURCE THAT'S READILY AVAILABLE TO ALL CITIZENS AND ENCOURAGE THEIR USE.

GREAT. THANK YOU. AND COMMISSIONER SINGH, I KNOW YOU HAVE SOMETHING.

Yes, I just wanted to say that I will be resigning from the planning commission. So this is my last planning commission meeting. Reason being is that I have accepted a new role as the commercial real estate development manager for a national firm. And the schedule directly conflicts with every single planning commission meeting. Did look at the possibility of attending more remote sessions and whatnot, but it was not feasible. And so this commission deserves incredible detail, incredible attention to every single hearing and agenda item. And so I just wanted to say that it's been an honor serving on the dais here. I am beyond impressed with the competency and professionalism of staff and actually with every single commissioner here. I think that as part of the selection process, the depth and expertise behind every single commissioner here is incredible. And so it's been an honor to serve here. And so, yes.

Well, thank you very much. We will certainly miss you and your insights. So speaking of everybody here, we're all going to miss you and wish you the best of luck in your new endeavors. I only have one thing tomorrow morning, 8 a.m., Travis Credit Union, 1340 Gateway Boulevard is having a Fairfield-Susun Chamber of Commerce is having a mixer in the morning at 8 o'clock. So if you're not doing anything at 8 o'clock, stop by Travis Credit Union. And with that, we will adjourn until September 23rd, 2026.