Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. This is the planning commission of 01/21/2026. Happy New Year, everybody. Commissioners, it feels like it's been a long time since we've all seen each other, so great to see everyone in a full house today. Thank you, everyone. Would everybody please join me for 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,

Thank you, everybody. Now is the time in our meeting that we call citizen communication. So a roll call. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, Stephanie. I'm all excited. Yes. Let's, do a roll call, please.

Commissioner Herrera?

Here.

Commissioner West? Here. Commissioner Ross? Present. Commissioner Lainey? Here. Commissioner Barcelona?

Here.

Commissioner Hurst?

Here. Commissioner Reynolds? Here. Thank you for keeping me honest. Alright. So the next item is citizen communication. So that is if there's anybody here who would like to address the commission on anything that is not on the agenda tonight. We give an opportunity for people to speak on something not on our agenda. Is there anybody who wishes to speak under citizen communication? Okay. Hearing and seeing none, we'll close the citizen communication. Next up are the minutes. Commissioners, I was actually not here for that meeting in December. Do you all find the minutes acceptable? Is there any corrections or anything?

Everything's acceptable? Okay. Is there any objection to a unanimous roll call in order to pass the minutes? Okay. We will deem the minutes unanimously approved for December I mean, I'm sorry, for 11/19/2025.

The next item is our annual, election of chair and vice chair. This is where any of us who have an interest in chairing or vice chairing this August body speaks up and says they would like to do it. I will start by saying I have thoroughly enjoyed being your chair, and I do enjoy continuing if I have the opportunity. So it's been very rewarding to me, and I just really like running a meeting and like doing the homework that needs to be done to orchestrate the meeting. So is there anybody else who'd like to serve as chair?

Okay. Seeing and hearing none, how about yeah, I was like, no, please no. Then we can do it as a slate. Commissioner West, you've been our very able and wonderful vice chair and stood in for me when I wasn't here.

I got to host a meeting in November.

Are you interested in vice chair?

Yeah, I'd be interested

in continuing on. I do enjoy doing it as well. I don't

know that I'll ever beat my record for speedy meetings, but I do like to run through the meetings when we have substantial things like we did in November. So I'd like to continue on.

Okay. Is there anybody else who has an interest in vice chair? Okay. Well, it seems as though we have an option for chair and vice chair. Do I hear a motion?

So moved.

Okay. So there's a motion to, vote for, Eileen Reynolds as chair and, Dan West as vice chair. Is there a second? Second. Well, I mean, that was a tie, but I'm going to take it from I'm going to take it from Commissioner Laney. So we had so, with that, is there any discussion on the motion on the floor? Okay. Hearing and seeing then, all those in favor declare by saying aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Anybody abstain? All right. Thank you very much, commissioners. Congratulations, Commissioner West. And, we will do you right.

Thank you. The next item, our, Planning Commission recommendation of two members to serve on the historic district commission. That is a one year stint unless somebody wants to continue. I have had a, conversation with Commissioner Herrera. Our current two commissioners who serve there are Commissioner Herrera and Commissioner West. Commissioner Herrera is interested in giving somebody else an opportunity to work at the historic district commission. Commissioner Herrera, did you want to say anything about that service?

I've enjoyed it. It's been a very, interesting and very, very solid learning experience. I've learned a lot about the city, specifically the historic district commission. But I think it's time that I let somebody else have a good shot at

it. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner West, are you interested in continuing on the commission?

Yes. I would like to continue on on the commission. I've enjoyed doing it for the last seven years. I find it very rewarding to help protect the history of the historic district and make sure that anything that happens down there is in line with how we want the historic district to be preserved.

Okay. Well, thank you, Commissioner West. I guess what I'd like to do now is open it. Do we have any commissioners who would actually like to serve in the place of, the second commissioner on the historic district commission?

Yes. I would like to throw my hat in the ring.

Oh, yippee. Alright. Do you have anything to say about that?

So I have a master's degree in city planning. I am also I have an undergraduate degree in history. I studied architecture history during my master's degree. And I care very deeply about the history of the city and preserving it for future generations. So I'd be happy to serve on the historic district commission.

Commission. Very good. Is there anybody else with an interest in serving? Okay. Hearing and seeing none, I believe we have a slate. And that would be Commissioners West and Commissioner Ross to serve serve on on the the Historic Historic District Commission. May I have a motion?

So moved.

Motion by Barcelona.

Second.

Second by Commissioner Hurst. Any discussion on the motion? Okay. Stephanie, please call the roll. Commissioner Herrera?

Yes.

Commissioner West? Yes. Commissioner Ross? Yes. Commissioner Lainey? Yes. Commissioner Barcelona? Yes. Commissioner Hurst?

Yes. Commissioner Reynolds? Yes. Okay. Thank you very much. Commissioner West, commissioner Ross, thank you very much for being willing to serve us there. We know you'll do a great job. So thank you. All right. The next item is our item number one. Stephanie, would you please go ahead and read item number one for us?

Sure. Under new business, agenda item number one is d r c l two five dash zero zero one four four. Folsom Heights Villages one through six design review and determination that no further CEQA review is required under CEQA guidelines sections 15162A, 15163A, and 15164A. Your planner is Josh Kincaid.

All right. Thank you very much, Steph. Hi, Josh. How are you today?

Great. Thank you. Chair Rounds. Congratulations.

Thanks.

Yes. So, good evening, commissioners. Josh Kincaid, senior planner with the city here. And, first item tonight that we will be talking about is the Folsom Heights Villages one through six design review. Where's my pointer? Behind the back. Oh, there. Thank you. Alright. So the Folsom Heights subdivision is located along the eastern boundary of the Folsom Plan area, South of Highway 50.

You can see outlined in red here. The, subdivision map and design guidelines for Folsom Heights were approved by city council back in 2017. Elliot Holmes, bought the prop the property in 2021 and is now ready, getting ready to to develop the property. The single family portion of Folsom Heights is broken up into eight villages. Tonight, we're looking at the design review for Villages 1 through Villages 1 Through 3 consist of 134 units of, 65 by 105 foot lots with a single family specific plan designation and Villages 4 Through 6 consist of 161 units on 55 by 105 lots with a single family high density designation.

So, the applicant is proposing eight different master plans for per, per development type, the 55 foot and the 65 foot lots. There are four, California themed architectural styles that they're using throughout, villages one through six, Spanish Eclectic, Craftsman, Prairie, and Santa Barbara. They are looking at 16 different color and material options for these homes. They would be one and two story homes. The homes would have attached two and three car garages, and they would range from about 1,800 to 3,500 square feet in size.

And we did review the design of these homes against the Folsom Heights design guidelines, which they're subject to. So first we'll look at the 55 foot lots. There are four master plans proposed for these lots. Here's a diagram, showing how they they fit, on on 55 foot lots. And here's a street scene exhibit showing the four master plans in the proposed architectural styles, which for the 55 foot include the prairie, Spanish, eclectic, and craftsman styles.

Consistent with the design guidelines, we do see visually distinct roof forms here as well. So briefly, we'll look at each of the master plans. Here's plan one, the smallest of the proposed plans in the craftsman style. The lots facing open space and street corners also have some enhanced elements that are required. For craftsman, those include, siding under the roof gables, you can see kind of outlined here, and some additional painted window trim.

Here's the plan two, which has some second story elements that you can see here. Here, we see it in the Spanish eclectic style, which features some rounded openings that you see in the front, some window shutters. And window grids are also proposed as an enhancement for the lots that require along the sides. Here we see plan three, another two story plan with this is in the prairie style that has the wood or the the wood looking accents. And plan four, this is Craftsman again.

Another two story. And all all of the 55 foot lots feature two car garages, as you've seen here. So looking at the 65 foot lots, with these with the additional 10 feet in in width, the applicants proposing somewhat larger on these lots. And here's the street scene for that shows, the the four, master plans. And, again, they're doing Craftsman and Prairie, but in this case, they're also doing the Santa Barbara style.

So a little bit of variety here from the the 55, foot lots. And so here's plan one in the Santa Barbara style with the, stone accents. You can see it also features some, window shutter enhancements on the elevations that require them. Plan two here in Prairie. This style features, you know, the vertical siding that we mentioned before as as an accent as well as some stone on the, the front patio.

And here's plan, three in Craftsman. You'll see that some of these larger products have these three car garages, and staff did work with the applicant to break up the massing of those garages. As you can see here, the one car bay is is set back from the rest of the garage, consistent with the Folsom Heights design guidelines. That was something that was called out specifically in the guidelines that we, we made sure that these these these products showed. Excuse me.

Here's the last plan, Plan 4, in in Santa Barbara. Another thing staff worked with the applicant to do was to build additional patio space in the front, of the houses when the garages may otherwise dominate in order to be consistent with the Folsom Heights design guidelines and just to get some more, eyes on the street. That's what these these low lying walled areas that you can see, in the front of some of these plans are here. That was as a result of those, those discussions that we had with the applicant. Here we see the colors and materials.

Each of the four architectural styles have four color and material options to add some good variety, including roofing material and color, bold trim and accent colors, and a variety of accent materials. And you can see here when when stone is proposed, the applicants also provided several different varieties of of stone even amongst the individual architectural styles. So overall, staff did find that the proposed designs were consistent with the Folsom Heights design guidelines, and we've also provided standard conditions to ensure that the, that identical homes and identical roof forms are not repeated adjacent to each other, again, with the Folsom Heights design guidelines. That's something we check as the homes come in individually. We we track those along the way.

Lastly, the applicant submitted conceptual landscape plans that feature street trees and accent trees on each lot shown here as well as some water efficient front yard landscaping. These are the 55 foot lots and these, this is the conceptual landscaping for the 65 foot lots. Our city arborists did review these plans and has provided appropriate conditions for when final landscaping plans come in. So with that, we do recommend approval of the proposed design review as conditioned. I'll note that there was a formatting error, in the findings of the staff report, which which made the numbering off.

So, we've provided a green sheet that corrects that. And so, if you do want to go with staff's recommendation, please use the language that's here on this slide. We do have the applicant group here as well. So with that, we can take any questions from the Commission. Thank you.

Thank you, Josh. Commissioners, are there any questions for our staff about this item number one? Okay. I guess not.

All right.

Thank you, Josh. All right. Now we'll hear from the applicant. Please introduce yourself for the record and have the floor.

My name is Tom Gammet. I'm the director of construction for Elliott Homes. I appreciate everyone hearing this today. We're excited about this project. It's been in the works for a while now. Thank you, Josh, for your presentation. You handled that very well and explained it very clearly. Appreciate that. So again, this is something we've been working on for a while. I'm just really excited to be in front of you tonight and get started. We have our architect here also, JDA. You can answer any specific questions on the design. But we think it's a good design for the area. And the site's coming along very well. I'm sure you've all seen it as you've driven by up there. So we're at the point now. We're getting started probably around May. So we're excited to be here. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Commissioners, any questions for the applicant? Oh, we're going to make this easy on you tonight. All right, no questions for the applicant? Oh, maybe one. Commissioner Ross.

So I drove through some of the developed areas of the Folsom Plan, area. And I tried to get close to this development, which you can't because the roads are close. But I noticed in some of these projects, there are strips of grass in the front of the homes that it seems the homeowners have a hard time maintaining. And I was wondering about the size of the grass areas that you're recommending for this specific project. I do appreciate that you have given them sort of an organic form, which is really nice compared to some others that I've seen. So I was just hoping you could speak to that.

Yeah. I'm really glad you brought that up because this is actually one of our first projects that we'll be doing synthetic turf.

So it

will not be a maintenance issue at all with those.

And is that because you feel that buyers want to see some sort of green as opposed to just doing it landscaped and letting them come back and make it different later?

Yeah. It's mostly some people are better than others at maintaining their lawns. Let's be real. And there is water efficiency that we try to adhere to as well. Plus, there's been a lot of fire issues, as you know, in our area. So this is an item that is able to adhere to all those requirements. And it just looks really nice. We also, with our Palladio development here, we've changed all the natural turf there into synthetic as well with good results. And we just think it just creates a more consistent, nicer looking streetscape that is water efficient and easy to maintain.

So if I understand, if it were not to have that synthetic turf and it were to all be landscaped, you were concerned it wouldn't meet the water requirements.

No, we could do it to meet, but it's just a maintenance thing. And we've found that it just looks better over time with the synthetic. The options these days are very, very good. In the past, they weren't as good. Now there's so many very good options. It just looks great. And so we've decided to try. This is the first project we will be doing it on, but we're excited to try it. And we think it's just easier for the homeowners. And it does satisfy the water efficient as well.

Okay. Thank you.

And then also, Commissioner Ross, a couple of years ago I guess I can't say exactly when, but I know Commissioner Leary was on the commission. We kind of laid out a policy groundwork to not have any turf, any new turf on new projects over South Of 50 just because of the water issue. So I don't know. I mean, it has to be very low water intense as far as it goes. I'm having trouble remembering if it was anything we'd put in writing. But I don't know. Commissioner West, you might be able to tack your brain on that.

Yeah, remember having that discussion back then, too. I actually thought it had become a policy, but I don't think we created that. That probably hadn't been created by the city council. Yeah. But yeah, I remember a couple years ago we were talking that no project should have grass in the front yard anymore.

Yeah, here on out. Commissioner Laney?

This is more of just kind of curiosity question. With laying down the turf, I live over in South Of 50, full disclosure. So there are some beautifully kept lawns, even though they're kind of tiny to have an entire lawn mower for them. And then there's some other ones that are not so great. But also with the turf it's not necessarily it's not free of maintenance. And so I do see quite a few turf lawns that over the last couple of years are now starting to have lots of weeds and everything in there. I'm just kind of curious of is there a process where you're putting down something underneath the turf or is it just hey we're just throwing turf over the very wonderful dirt that we have out here?

No, I I get your point. It is pretty rocky up there. But no, there's actually the substrate is compacted. It's not natural soil that's compacted. You put a layer of permeable material that's compacted in there. Then there's drainage that goes through there, there's a weed barrier, there's a lot of things to help control that but you're right there is some maintenance with weeds over time inevitably will come up that they'll have to deal with but it's far easier what we've found. And what we've also seen I wanted to point out is a lot of the homeowners end up requesting to switch to artificial turf anyway and so this is kind of gets ahead of that and gives them that option but some maintenance yes but we find it to be less.

Okay, no I appreciate that you're going to do more than just put turf down, that there's some weed guard and some So compacted Okay, thank you. Absolutely.

That kind of conjures up a question for me too. Is there anticipated to be a homeowners association?

Yes.

Okay, good. Yeah, because that's one other thing we've found that we didn't make happen in some areas of South Of 50, and we kind of regret it.

Right, there will be.

Okay, very good. Okay, any other questions for the applicant? All right, thank you very much. Appreciate it. All right, right now it would be time for anybody from the public who would like comment on this item number one. Is there anybody in the audience please, come on forward? And I should have asked you to fill out a card for us, but you can give us your no, you can give us your full name and tell us your interest.

My name is Ellen Post.

So wait, wait, wait till we

get the mic. I'm Ellen Post. I don't know any of you this year. You would know me if, it had been a few years ago. So I live in the Stonebriar neighborhood in El Dorado Hills right next to the development where it snuggled up to all of us.

And so what we're asking is that the requirements that they mitigate lighting there are cars going through right now, and the road's not even finished. People are all over the place when they're not doing construction. And so we want to make sure that there's the right signs in place, gates in place that were all promised early on. And so like trees or bushes or maybe a wall or something, that would be very helpful. But just so you guys know that there's a whole neighborhood, two neighborhoods lined right up along that whole development. And so we want to get as much mitigation as we can.

Okay. That's it. All right. Thank you very much. And during our deliberations, we can ask staff to remind us about what requirements actually ran with the land because that was the case. Okay. Any other public comment? Seeing and hearing none, we will close the public comment. Commissioners, it's up to us to discuss and decide. But I would like to be reminded by our counsel about what it was that was committed way back when with Folsom Heights. I mean, some of the things I do remember some issues with the neighbors there.

There were, and we got a lot of public comment. And I think the ultimate conditions of approval on the map would flow to Elliott, who has now taken over the project. And so they are applicable still to this day. Some of them were early conditions. Some of them are ultimate conditions.

I don't remember offhand every single one and what they are. Josh might have that or possibly Elliot might know. But I think that is something that if there's something in particular that the neighbors are recalling that isn't in place now, absolutely they can let us know or it seems like they already are in communication with Elliot to work that out, but staff can remain involved to ensure that those mitigation measures are being followed through construction. Then it should really be completed by the time the homeowners move in, they will stay.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, that things that were agreed to back at the map would definitely carry through. And Josh, did you have something to add to that?

Just one thing to add. Condition number 13 does address exterior building and site lighting and being downward shielded and energy efficient, etcetera. So that that's a project specific, requirement. We we apply to every every subdivision, but, that's one that we have specific or, in this actual document as well, not just carried over.

Okay. Sounds good. Anybody else have anything to discuss about this project? And if there isn't, let's anybody have a motion?

Well, if I may, I'm not too happy with the turf idea, to be perfectly frank. I think it would look a lot nicer if it was all landscaped with plants. And I think it straps these homeowners with potentially a higher cost burden with their HOA to maintain turf. It's expensive. And I'm not sure it's so great for the environment here. And I have seen it not turn out great after a while. It's going to have to be replaced. Whereas if you put in drought tolerant plants, they can grow to look real nice in landscaping. So that is my only concern about this. Thank you for listening.

Thank you, Commissioner Ross. Anybody share that? Commissioner Lainey?

I think I would I mean, I'm torn with it. I think it is something that people like to see because we're used to and conditioned to grass. I don't have a personal affinity to grass and have removed everything on my own property but I know people have an affinity for it. I think mine lays into not necessarily for this project, but maybe it's a discussion for another time is if there's ever a time and maybe staff can speak to this where we go back through neighborhoods to take a look at the landscaping that is being put in and how often that landscaping is kept. I know just around South Of 50 there's a lot of dead trees.

There's very often times that just with the way that the sun is and how much water and everything else the tree went in, so it meant meant you know check the box but at the same time it's dead now. And my understanding is that the city does have a requirement that there's two trees and there's a lot of people who don't have two trees in there so are we setting the neighborhood up for success by having appropriate landscaping or are we you know just kind of checking the boxes so that we can move through process. That's more of a comment than an ask I guess.

Okay thank you Commissioner Laney. Anybody else? Okay I'll go ahead and make a motion. I move to confirm staff's determination that no further CEQA reviewed is required for the Folsom Heights Villages and please note Folsom is misspelled on that, Villages one through six design review project I know that was a test And approve the application for design review for said project DRCL25-one 144 based on the findings, findings A through J, and subject to the conditions of approval attached to the staff report, which are conditions number one through 17 attached to the staff report that's redundant as modified by the green sheet provided at the commission meeting. And so there's a motion on the floor.

Commissioners, is there a second?

I will second your motion.

Commissioner Barcelona, thank you very much. Is there any discussion on the motion on the floor? Okay. Hearing and seeing none, Stephanie, go ahead and call the roll.

Commissioner Herrera?

Yes.

Commissioner West? Yes. Commissioner Ross? Yes. Commissioner Lainey? Yes. Commissioner Barcelona? Yes. Commissioner Hurst?

Yes. Commissioner Reynolds? Yes. Okay. Elliot, you have your, subdivision. Congratulations. Thank you as always for doing business in Folsom. Alright. So that's item number one. We are off to the races with item number two. Worth pointing out. Steph, will you please go ahead and call item number two for us?

Of course. Agenda item number two, DRCL two 4Dash00106, Chabad Jewish Community Center design review and determination that the project is exempt from further environmental review under CEQA guidelines section one five one eight three. And mister Kincaid is your planner.

Alright. Thank you very much. Take it away, Josh. This is your show tonight.

Yes. It is.

Great.

Alright. Yes. We are looking at the Chabad Jewish Community Center design review. My pointer back. Okay.

So the, the two acre project site is located on, Hanna Way off of East Bidwell Street. It's behind the Willow Creek Professional Building, which is this guy here, and, it backs up to Willow Creek itself. We've got Willow Creek running along the back there on the trail. The site is zoned, BP, business professional, and, with a plan development overlay and there's an existing abandoned residence on the site that was built in the 1970s and the applicant's looking to demolish, that that that building to make way for their project. Based on the age of the structure, a cultural resource analysis was performed, but the structure was not found to be historically significant in any way.

So, we do support the demolition. So looking at the proposed site plan, the applicant's proposing a 23,000 square foot Jewish community center and associated site improvements, including landscaping and a 53 space parking lot. Planning verified that all setbacks and lot coverage standards are being met and the fire department and solid waste staff also reviewed the site plan and worked with the applicants to update the plans so that they have no issues with access to their services. As shown on this plan, the presence of the creek leads to some environmentally sensitive land and the riparian corridor boundary is represented here in pink. That's what that large area is and development has been designed to avoid impacts to that area.

Standard preconstruction surveys for protected species are also required as part of, the project conditions and the proximity to the creek also increases the likelihood of cultural resources being present. So, a cultural resource survey was also performed as part of this project and no resources were discovered as part of that survey. And the standard conditions, therefore, that we put on these kinds of projects are proposed regarding accidental discovery. So, now looking at the preliminary landscaping plan. Landscape planters are proposed within the parking area to provide shading for 52% of the total paved area with trees.

And the applicant proposes to provide landscaping composed of California native and low water use trees, shrubs, and ground cover. Outdoor features, also proposed here as part of some some landscaping include a plaza and courtyard area and a rear patio area to help connect the building to the the natural setting that surrounds it. Finally, the project is required to provide a 20 foot transitional landscape buffer from the parkway in accordance with the the Humbug Willow Creek design guidelines, which they have shown on the plan as well. They've also provided open view metal fencing facing the parkway consistent with the plan with the design guidelines. Excuse me.

Alright. Now, now looking at the floor plan. The 1st Floor consists of a synagogue, a, excuse me, classrooms, community gathering space, a social hall, a teen lounge and a nikveh which is a Jewish ritual bath. The 2nd Floor will have offices, conference rooms and four guest rooms. Operationally, the synagogue would be used once weekly, for religious services, and the gathering space is proposed to be used occasionally for community and cultural events.

The classrooms are proposed for children's religious education, and the offices are proposed to be used on a part time basis. And these uses are all allowed by right in the BP zone, I should mention. When looking at the parking associated with these uses, staff tried to balance, what typical use would look like versus use during larger events. We determined that the proposed parking lot can meet the parking requirements for regular use, and that for larger events and I should say and for some smaller events but for larger events we are requiring that the applicant provide a parking plan to avoid spillover into the adjacent streets. The applicant's currently working with Creekside Professional, building that I referenced earlier, with the ownership of that building on a shared parking agreement, and they're they're making good headway on that.

And, if they can, get that finalized, staff does support that plan. We also have it conditioned that if that plan for whatever reason falls through that we could accept an alternative plan for larger events as they, as they come through. All right. Now moving on to the more fun stuff. Here are the building elevations.

The applicant is proposing a building with, flat and low angled roofing and natural earth tone exteriors. The materials with masonry wood grain and concrete slab finishes. That was the front and rear elevation I should say. And here are the side elevations of the building. Due to its proximity to the creek, the project is subject to the Humbug Willow Creek design guidelines that I referenced earlier.

Staff did find that the incorporation of the earth tone materials, the some of the pitched roof elements, the varying architectural forms that we see here and the and and equipment screening away from, the parkway, all provide consistency with these design guidelines. Here are the details of the exterior materials, kind of the up closest of them, which include concrete slab, masonry veneer, hardy board, the hardy with the horizontal wood grain appearance, and the metal roofing. And finally, here are some renderings of the, of the project that the applicant provided as viewed from the front, that we see on the top and from the rear, that we see on the bottom. Staff believes this is very nice design and it has appropriate massing and building forms for its surroundings and we do support the plans, as proposed and conditioned. Environmentally, we had the cultural and biological resources reports that I referenced earlier ran and and based on the results of those reports and, the way the the project was placed on the site, we found that standard conditions regarding preconstruction surveys and accidental discovery of cultural resources, was adequate to address any potential environmental concerns without needing a separate environmental document.

Similarly, air quality, water quality, and noise impacts can all be addressed with standard conditions of approval or the existing requirements that that have been outlined in the staff report and and provided as conditions of approval. So, with that, we do recommend approval of the project as conditioned. The applicant group is here and we can take any questions. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much, Josh. Are there any questions for our staff? Commissioner Laney.

I'm curious on, how how is it assessed with the number of parking spaces because I did read the report and it says there's over 300% more you know parking spaces than what's actually needed but I think what really stumped me was kind of a focus on there being you know like six wrote down the notes but I didn't highlight them well enough that there's only 67 seats but what's the overall capacity of that facility because you know I know that property really well my office actually used to look right at it and I just know the traffic in that area is is already pretty impacted it's not a very big space and so I think my biggest concern is just the traffic and this being a gathering center, but then we're focused on 67 seats. Right. How do we how is that assessed?

Yeah. It was it was kind of a tough one to analyze initially. I know typically when you look in the code it says a a church or similar use, has its requirement per amount of seats in the you know, in the church. So if you look at this, that's a relatively small portion of the overall space that that is there. We know in discussions with the applicant that, and they can speak a little bit more to this I'm sure, that that the entire space is not going to all be used at the same time.

And so what we tried to take into account was some of the more intensive potential uses. So, there could be, you know, a use of the synagogue. We also have the community gathering space, the social space. So, what we did is we boxed out this area in here, looked at the, the the code standard for for social halls, that sort of use, and judged it against that and that's when we thought having a parking agreement for when it's being used for these larger events, was more appropriate to, to ensure that they wouldn't have that spillover and that's why we reached out to them and said, Hey, we think it would be a good idea if you could reach out to an adjacent property owner. That's what they've done.

They're, you know, in, in the midst of preparing that parking plan now for the larger events. But the primary use of this space is still the the synagogue. That's the weekly use of it. The classrooms don't have that many people. So it's really just during these larger events that it could have an impact and that's when we want to see the parking plan with the, you know, adjacent neighbors or a different kind of parking plan in place.

So I know that may be the intention, but if this was a fully programmed hopping facility, it's really used by the community, what is the capacity of the facility at any one time? If we were to just say from fire code, What's the maximum amount of people who could be allowed in the building at any one time and you know just because there is no there's not a lot of bleed out there you're up against a creek and you know a trail on one side and the tracks and then it doesn't have anything until I think you go to a dignity facility and that's a little ways away so just it is kind of boxed into a certain area so what happens if it is fully programmed and they're having great events and I hope that they're wildly successful, but it still just comes back to parking and traffic. Is it possible to accommodate that beyond saying, Oh, well, we're only going to use one section at a time? Because if they're successful, they'll be busting at the seams, right?

They could probably speak to a little bit more of what their operational goals are for the center. But, I mean, what we're looking at here is this additional parking, which is essentially available on on nights and weekends, to be available for larger events. That's the agreement that they're in the process of getting with with that that property owner. So that is really what's meant to capture the additional parking. When we look at we don't necessarily look at overall capacity of the building.

These are all allowed uses by right. And so we look at, you know, what the primary use is. We look at what the parking standard is for that community center, and that's I think it's based on it's one space per 30 square feet in the assembly area. It's it's something along those lines. So we we we reviewed it against that.

I mean, that answers my question. I'm not trying to give a hard time. Was just trying to understand if you have 23,000 square feet, but we're basing the parking off of 67 seats. That just seems a little want to question, like, what is the capacity? And you know how is that formulated not necessarily for this project but should that be reviewed based upon the capacity of the building and the intended because I understand the intended space but I also understand that that particular area if you have a new a new owner for the dentist office and they decide that they don't want to review renew the contract or they feel like it's problematic there's not many options out there and are we setting this applicant up for success is that even something that we should be questioning I'm just I'm just a little concerned with the amount of parking and that we're relying on another building to agree to that we don't have that agreement now and in 23,000 square feet versus 67 seats, it just seems like there's more questions there.

Right. And then, and I think one of the things to keep in mind too is that even at 23,000 square feet a lot, a good chunk of that is just these these classrooms, part time use offices, the, you know, rooms for guests during like a a wedding, I believe. So, a lot of the space is relatively low intensity use. It's really this area that we're mostly concentrating on in terms of potential parking impact. So that's what we what we really try to look at.

Yeah. Commissioner Ross,

I just wanted to ask a question about the guest rooms. Is it anticipated that people will be staying overnight in this The

I believe so. Yes. The applicant might be able to speak to that a little bit more. I believe it's associated with, with weddings, but they might be able to talk about that a little bit more.

Okay. And then I agree with Commissioner Laney. I was a little concerned about the parking. So thank you for bringing that up. And my biggest concern was it going across the way into the adjoining neighborhood and filling the neighborhood up. Because really, that's the only other place where people could park and then safely walk to this area. So that was my concern there. Thank you.

Yes. And I think for larger the way we try to word the condition for these larger events, if a parking plan is not, you know, put against the land basically and it is not in perpetuity, then if we start seeing spillover into the adjacent neighborhood then at that point we need to sit down with the applicant, talk about, you know, providing parking plans for the their events, if that's carpooling, if that's getting some sort of temporary agreement, whatever it might be. And so that's really why we put that condition in there is to try to capture that potential scenario of spillover.

And then on that condition, was reading that and I wondered, you know, to Commissioner Lainey's point, because we don't know how often these other parts are going to be used. If they do have a wedding and then let's say they have, like, four classrooms filled with, like, a school event, right, like, is there something way that we can word this condition that when events occur that are happening that they have to have, like a wedding. I don't mean the synagogue, but like if they have about 100 people wedding, they do have to submit a plan as opposed to, you know well, I think we are asking them to if they exceed 100. Right?

Yeah. They can't get this parking agreement with the

Right.

Adjacent property in place, then that's that is what we're asking.

Great. Great. Okay.

Thank you. On the parking issue, Josh, one thing I've thought, and I wonder about this from you, would there be any reason why we couldn't condition that the parking agreement be recorded? If they're successful getting a parking agreement, could we require it to be recorded against property so that we could because I, too, am concerned that what if that dental building changes hands and they are like, well, we don't want to have a reciprocity agreement. I mean, could we go ahead and condition that that be done?

It's tough because it's we're conditioning something off-site to occur. So we'd have to, I think, word it very At carefully if we did

the end of the day, we can't require the off-site property to record it. Right. We could and and even just to kind of for purposes of this particular discussion, this is not a use permit. This is an allowed use, and the number of parking spots are as determined per code. So to Commissioner Laney's point, Commissioner Ross's point, maybe we need to look at that again.

Under CEQA, everything's going the opposite direction, but we can always talk about increasing parking. But right now, the applicant has agreed with the proposal put forth by staff to come up with a parking plan and they're voluntarily agreeing to go along with that plan as good neighbors etc if push were to come to shove we do not have the authority to require it of this applicant and even less authority for an outside property owner.

Right. Okay. But that could be something that the applicant could ask the other property owner in conjunction with making the negotiation on the contract Absolutely. To do the parking. Yes. As I think that would protect them longer term.

It would probably be in their best interest.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Any other questions for our staff?

Was just going to point out that condition 60 already kind of talks to this, right? It says they have to record this with the city prior to certificate of occupancy. So we are actually requiring them to get to this parking plan or to promise they have to do a special event permit every time they have something that's 100 people or more.

Essentially, yeah. Mean, it's a matter of submitting to the city for approval for our records versus recording it on the land, I think, would be the

difference That's not

between

a

record recording

against the land. Okay.

Out of curiosity, what is the process for that? Because I assume that not every event is going to have a long lead time. And so if we're asking them to record or, you know, basically put together a plan, you know, how long does it take the city to be able to review that so that they can have an event, let's say, in thirty days? You know, is there you know, do they are we giving them are we I'm just looking for them to be set up for success. So do they have to, you know, provide that forty five days in advance, ten days in advance? Do do we have a process for that that's known?

I mean, we we do have our special event permit process, but this because it's on private property, it would not be subject to a special event permit itself. This is mostly just about when, you know, we have bleed over onto, adjacent properties that we would want to, you know, have those discussions with them. It wouldn't be as formalized as the special event permit process because, you know, it is the policy now not to do those on force private property. But it really it it depends on the nature of the event, the the complexity of what's being asked for. It's it's a little bit more of a holistic, process than something I think we can really super formalize.

Yeah, I'm just thinking that ifif we're asking that as a condition, for that to be, you know, thought through so that if they're at the point where they're like, Hey, we have an event. It's not going to work with the dental office for some reason. We need to move this through, we're not sitting here saying, okay, well we're supposed to, you you don't fit here, you don't fit here, you know, the condition can't really be met, so just making sure that everybody has their, you know, what is the process, who should they talk to? What if they're not special events, what are they? Where do they go?

I think if it comes down to there, you know, being a community impact that we're seeing, we can definitely, you know, get that process in place and and and working for, you know, for this property. I think it's kind of unique to this property because we do have, you know, churches elsewhere that are allowed by Wright that have very large events but they're, you know, they've only looked at a very specific parking standard as well so we want to make sure we're treating everybody the same too.

I guess my challenge is if we're making it a condition, is it a condition that we also have a plan for them to actually meet? So if we're asking them to do something and saying, It is a condition. How do they meet that condition? But if it's not a condition, we can't actually hold them to it, then why do we have a condition? So what areI guess becomes a circular argument for me. I'm trying to understand what are we doing? What's the point of the condition if they don't

have to meet it? Would it make sense to I feel like I'm really close. Would it make sense to put maybe a two week prior to the event sort of requirement in here to get to that sort of trigger point where they need to provide us with that potential traffic or, parking plan, if they don't end up with this long term

I think be for

you, think two weeks is reasonable. And it's already, tagged to planning. So it would be something they would submit to our office. We'd take a look, and we'd say, yes, this looks good, or no, you need to update it.

I think the bigger challenges tend to become when it's a traffic control plan and street closures and all that kind of stuff. And this is just what's your parking plan. So it is a much simpler thing to review, I think.

Yeah. So at least getting that trigger point in there might help a little bit.

Would there be costs associated with No. Okay. Thanks.

So why don't we tackle that during deliberations? But thank you for the ideas. And I think, when we bring the applicant on, I had the pleasure of speaking with the applicant this afternoon. I learned a lot more about how they use the property. And I felt better about some of these items you're bringing up. So hopefully, you'll find the same.

Well, now I have a question.

Go ahead, Commissioner Varcelina. Come on.

Just keep scrolling. We have a lot of other houses of worship in Folsom that are in constrained parking situations. Do we have conditions upon those?

I think it probably depends on if they were required to come through a use permit process. My guess is that if they weren't, then it was just the standard per seat parking requirement that they were required to demonstrate. I think what's unique about this property is that it is not a large congregation and it's not

Right.

The the synagogue is part of a overall whole. And so it it sort of flips how we look at the parking requirements for a place of worship, which is you know, kinda gets, I think, to the commissioner's point about does this parking standard really fit for this particular use here? Really doesn't, but it's what we have right now. So I think this is it's kind of a good model to sort of think about stretching the the definition of what it is to be a house of worship and what is all involved in that.

Yeah. I just wanna be certain that, we're not imposing separate conditions on, certain houses of worship that don't exist elsewhere in the city.

Yeah. Agreed. Good point. All right. Anything else for our staff? Okay, hearing and seeing none, we'll bring up the applicant, please. Just introduce yourself. And if anybody would like to speak, we do have little cards back there that you're welcome to sign and give to the officer up front. But go ahead.

Good evening. My name is Yossi GROLSBAM, Rabbi Yossi GROLSBAM. I'm the rabbi in the local Jewish community. We have a number of members of the community. And Jim Eilering is going to answer any of the technical Very briefly, I'm happy to give as much more information as you'd like.

We're part of a global movement in the Jewish community of, trying to encourage acts of goodness and kindness. So we're a Jewish organization. Our focus is within the Jewish community, but we want people to do goodness and kindness wherever they are, whoever they where whatever their background. And I should mention that we were the design was was done by JDA as well, dominating tonight's meeting. But and and I noticed so far everyone that I've spoken to about this project, anyone I've shown the design to has been impressed with how well it fits with the area and how welcoming the the space feels.

The design is intentionally a welcoming design. We want people to feel welcome and and feel like it's their second home. The entrance is unique in a particular with a particular intention. The sages talk about or actually, the prophets talk about the windows of the temple having a narrower inside and a wider outside. So going back to the temple in Jerusalem February ago, it was deliberately built in such a way to demonstrate providing light to the world, being a beacon of light.

And the entrance over here is also built in such a way which is a little bit narrower on the outside and widening on the outside sorry, narrower on the inside and wider on the outside to give that symbolism of being a source of light to the community. And that's our intention. Just to comment on a couple of things that were being brought up about the parking. First of all, on Saturdays, not everyone, not exclusively, but a good percentage of the community will walk to synagogue. They won't drive.

So when there's services on a on a Saturday or on a festival, a lot of times people will will be walking there. In addition, that's also part of the reason for the guest space. If people live a little too far, and they don't want to drive on the Sabbath or on a festival, they're able to stay overnight and then they're able to avoid violating their religious principles. Questions, comments?

How is your parking agreement Rabbi, how is your parking agreement coming along?

Jim is the one that's working on that. I let him say about that.

Yeah, come on up. Yeah. Thank

you. Eilering. And I've been working with, the, property management, company that, manages the building back there. They actually have a need, and they were excited when I called to talk to them about it because they're of, expanded to the limits right now too, and they park on the cul de sac there. And she thought it was a perfect fit because they're working all day, and most of the activities are in the evening or weekends, you know, for the synagogue and the community center.

So it it's always available at the right times. So it worked out real well. We probably would have had one by today except that, they wanted to make sure they had a little closet. We clean up our mess, and they clean up their mess because they wanna use our parking lot too. So that that's being finalized now at this point.

Do you think, based on your negotiations, that they would be amenable to recording the document?

Possibly, yeah. Because if they have to get rid of it, it's a possibility.

That might be something that

Yes. And I'll bring that up to the manager for it.

Very good. Are there other questions for the applicant? Anybody? Okay. Guess, rabbi, if you don't mind, I have one that I think was interesting to me. I asked the rabbi earlier today if they would be renting this space out for those who are not within their Jewish faith. And I found it to be a very interesting answer. I mean, would you like to answer that? I'd appreciate that.

The space definitely would be available for anybody from any background. But because it's a kosher facility, the kitchen would have to remain kosher, so it would have to be a kosher certified event. So if someone has the interest in putting on some type of kosher certified gathering of some sort, I mean, I don't see necessarily why that would be of interest to someone that's not in the Jewish community, but it definitely would be available to them.

Right. So that's where I found it interesting that I don't think there will be a huge number of events there if people aren't of the faith. But as you mentioned to me, it's also the only kosher kitchen that will exist in Sacramento once it's done,

Commercial kitchen, yeah. Commercial kitchen.

Any other questions for the rabbi or anybody? Okay. Thank you very much, rabbi.

Thank Appreciate

you being here.

Thank you all.

All right. So with that, we will go ahead and open up public comment. Is there anybody here from the public who would like to comment on this item number two? Okay. I see people in the audience. I'm assuming you're supporters, so thank you very much for being here. Appreciate that. Okay. Nobody's coming to the dais, so, we will close public comment. Commissioners, that leaves it to us. Comments, concerns,

discussion? I would like to say that I think this is a very beautifully designed building, and I think it's going to And fit really well in the I appreciate effort you put into preserving the oak trees and protecting the wildlife behind. I mean, I could see a lot of thought was put into how this was developed. So kudos. And I would like to make a motion. But am I reading something specific for that?

Josh, you wanna put it up there? Please. Thank you, Josh. Yeah.

Hopefully, no type of this time.

Move to confirm staff's determination that the Chabad Jewish Community Center project is exempt from further CEQA review and approve a design review application for the project located at 795 Hanna Way, DRCL 24 Dash 00106 based on the findings findings a through l and subject to the conditions of approval attached to the staff report conditions one through 61 60. One through 60. Was there

I just noticed I noticed the repetition again.

Okay. I'm sorry.

Oh, I'm sorry. Who said that? Commissioner Hirsch, thank you. Okay. We have a motion to second.

I I as far as comment on the motion, I too think that it's a beautiful building from the rendering. So I I I wish you guys every success because it looks like it'll that area and that cul de sac. And I do encourage you, to the best of your ability, to get the parking agreement recorded if you can so that you, as the community there, will have some reassurance that if that other dental building changes hands, that you are able to continue that parking agreement. But yeah, I think overall it looks like a pretty neat project and such an improvement to what you have now. Anybody else have any comments out of the motion or any discussion?

I do very much appreciate that the parking agreement looks like it's going to be symbiotic. So if the dental office and that facility needs it and then this facility needs it, I think that goes a long way to kind of making me feel better. Because worked for eight years in the adjacent property the traffic can be a little crazy right there so adding in a facility that doesn't have parking it doesn't have a plan was concerning but I appreciate that you guys were thoughtful in that and had some good answers to my questions.

It's kind of a win win for both property owners.

They need each other.

It's good. Yep. Okay. Very good. Anything else? Okay. Hearing and seeing none, Steph, please call the roll.

Commissioner Herrera?

Yes.

Commissioner West? Yes. Commissioner Ross? Yes. Commissioner Lainey? Yes. Commissioner Barcelona? Yes. Commissioner Hurst? Yes. Commissioner Reynolds? Yes.

Alright. That motion passes. Commissioner, Rabbi and, and all of you who are here to support, congratulations, and we look forward to seeing this building progress. Have a good evening. All right. Thank you very much. And the next item, we are over to principal planner's report. Jessica, you got something for us?

Yeah. Real quick. So I wanted to report back, that the city council approved the, proposed inclusionary housing ordinance changes and approved a resolution that would change the fees, to $3 a square foot, for the inclusionary housing, fee, for ownership projects still only, not on rental, and that there would be no fee for units under 1,500 square feet. So that's how that kind of all shook out, when it went to the city council. So no more chasing around how much the various, units are selling for.

So, I know our our housing manager was very excited that this passed. Our next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled, for March nope, February 18. We have three potential items. We have a proposed cell tower on Levy Road or Levy Road. I've heard it both ways, at a, self storage facility.

Proposed Dutch Brothers Drive thru, in the South Point Plaza. So that's kind of East Bidwell and South Point, pretty far down there. And then, amendments to the accessory dwelling unit, ordinance, of the zoning code to conform to state law. We got HCD kind of wagging a finger at us, so, we need to to bring our ordinance up to up to snuff. And just my usual question, is anyone expecting

to be

absent for next month that you know of? No? Okay. Great. And then the usual, report on design reviews. Since November 18, which was the last time, you all met. We had two nonresidential minor modifications, one residential and one nonresidential accessory structure, one custom home, and two residential accessory structures. So, pretty quiet, but it's picked up. So, we've actually seen quite a few more in the last month actually coming in.

Good. Yeah. It's busy.

I have a quick question for you on the ADU thing. So you're going to present to us amendments that you'd like to see approved that night? Is it more of a workshop style?

I'm going throw that to Josh because he's actually working on that.

What is it you anticipate from us that night on ADU?

A recommendation to city council.

About how to amend the ordinance. So we're just going to do a one off on that.

Right. We're going to come with a repeal and replace basically to try to tighten up the the ordinance to get it in conform with the state law and to address some of the issues that we've seen with the ordinance over over the past several years of implementing it. We're gonna present that to both Planning Commission and Historic District Commission for recommendation to city council, but one meeting each.

Okay. Alright. So I I was just curious because it seems like we went through an awful lot of meetings to develop the original. Yes.

So this one doesn't have a lot of new

Okay, but it's

new ground being broke, there are just modifications that

we're Okay, and largely because of new state laws that tweaked the things you had

to do. Yes, but we are using that opportunity to also try to address some of the glaring

Things we've run into.

Things that we've run into along the way.

Okay.

And it's not going to be the wholesale change that you saw several years ago. It's going to be changing the maximum number of feet, maximum number of square feet, things of that nature that are within the realm of what you're used to seeing. But state law has changed over the years, we just need to catch up with where it is.

Okay. Commissioner Hurst, do you have some?

Just out of curiosity, would it go before planning first or the historic commission?

Timing wise, we're looking to get it in front of the planning commission first on the February meeting, and then the, historic would be the, I guess the first meeting in March, the March. That's the current goal. We'll see where we get. But that's just as it goes, that's the order. But both recommendations would be given to city council, though.

Okay. That makes sense. Thank you.

And are we under a deadline or anything from HCD?

Not a hard, hard one, but it is as soon as possible. They wanted a timeline from us as to when we were going to get those changes implemented, and they wanted to approve that. So they they are watching.

Oh, okay. Well, they're on it. Okay. Alright. Is there anything else under the good of the order? Commissioner Barcelona.

How are things progressing with the Prairie City, road expansion?

So there are ongoing discussions with the county, about the, effectively the width, the street sections for Prairie City Road. I think the county had a six lane road all the way through. In their general plan, we have four lane, once you get past a certain spot. And it sounds like they're open to the four lanes. I think we're working on getting a memorandum of understanding together with them to kind of formalize that so that we can give the applicants down there a little more comfort as they start really sketching out the subdivision maps down there and working on all of the infrastructure that they need to put in.

Did you have anything in particular on that?

No. I just wanted to know what the progress was. Do you think with Tyker wanting to use that road every day, four lanes is going to be sufficient?

We've it's it's been an interesting discussion. I think, there are it there there is a an agreement, that the city receives a certain amount of funding for, they call it quality of life improvements related to the truck traffic from the the mines from the quarries. And I part of the discussion was, you know, the potential if we do four lanes, you could do thicker the thicker pavement, more sound wall capability, more landscaping. The county seemed to be comfortable with four lanes and still have the truck traffic that's expected from the quarries and with the Folsom Plan Area traffic as well. So it seemed that everyone thought it's doable.

Yeah.

Okay. Are

they still looking at doing the truck traffic lower? There was a cross section that they showed where the trucks would be submerged below level and then the street traffic would be on top.

The MOU is it would move away from that. Okay. And so it would be four lanes all all at the same level. You know, again, trying to rely on some of these other methods to reduce the impacts of these trucks going by. There was even discussion that the depressed lanes could actually kind of funnel the noise up, and that would sort of defeat the whole purpose. Just the sheer cost of putting all that in, it's hard to know how how we would make that work, either the city or the county.

I just thought that was a unique concept. When they showed that, it was like, woah. I've never seen that before. Yeah. Yeah. So thank you.

Yeah. So on a four lane, if you're making a left turn into Alder Creek Parkway, would you be making it from the number one lane, or would there be some type of mitigation for that? Because traffic is going to move very fast on that road.

I don't know if we have the detail on that quite yet. It would probably come back with Toll Brothers or with one of the other project

Toll or metal shop.

Yeah, and so I think they but obviously we have standards for when signals would need to be installed and that definitely seems like one that would be under consideration. So right now it's sort of high level negotiations on deal points, as I understand it, between the city and the county and the developers closely watching where that goes. So we don't have the final answers There's at this

lot of cooks in the kitchen on that project. Yes.

All right. Is there anything else? You may have all noticed we have an officer here today, and that's Officer McAuliffe. Thank you very much for joining us tonight. Appreciate you. Thank you. Appreciate you. Thank you for your service. And, I think with that, commissioners, we're adjourned at 07:43. Thank you.