Planning Commission - Special Meeting

Good evening. This is the Planning Commission meeting of 07/23/2025. Before we have the call to order, I have an announcement to make. And unfortunately, one of our commissioners has resigned her position. Tanya Morales let me know last week, and she submitted her formal letter, earlier this week that she would no longer be able to serve as a result for personal reasons.

So, and she is stepping down, we have a vacancy. So, the city has already begun the process of, getting the word out that we have a vacancy. And was an at large appointee, so that's a two year term. So basically, we have a half year this year and then all of next year left in that term for somebody to fill. That will be something that the City Council will take action to fill the position.

Just wanted to make that known before we call the roll because it might be odd when Stephanie says, you know, no longer on the commission or doesn't call her name. So anyway, thank you for that. And, Steph, please call the roll. Commissioner Herrera?

Here.

Commissioner West?

Here.

Commissioner Laney? Here. Commissioner Barcelona?

Here.

Commissioner Hurst?

Here.

Commissioner Reynolds? Here.

All right, thank you. Next up is a Pledge of Allegiance. If you all stand and join me. Thank you, everyone. Next up will be citizen communication.

This is the part of the agenda where anybody who wants to address the committee on any item that is not on our agenda tonight can address the commission. We have a five minute limit for anybody who wants to do that, but it's for anything not on the agenda. Is there anybody here who would like to, address the commission under citizen communication? Hearing and seeing none, we will close citizen communication. Members, the next step is the minutes, minutes of 06/18/2025. Are there any corrections or, suggestions for any changes to the minutes?

Do we need to fix the typo?

I asked, but there is a typo. And, I asked about that. And we can fix that administratively without need for an amendment. But thank you, Commissioner West. All right. So, is there a motion on the minutes? Or shall I just go ahead and deem them approved by virtue of unanimity?

So moved.

Thank you, Commissioner Barcelona. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner West. Stephanie, please call the roll. Commissioner

Herrera?

Yes.

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

Okay. Commissioners, that takes us to new business. And that is item number one, MSTR 20Five-ninety4, Russell Ranch Phase 2, Village 5, tentative parcel map waiver, residential condominiums, design review, and inclusionary housing plan, and determination that no further environmental review is required. And up today is Josh Kincaid. Hi, Josh.

Hello Chair Reynolds, Commissioners. Thank you for coming on an off week. Appreciate it. So yes, the, item before you tonight is the Russell Ranch Phase 2 Village 5 project. It is a request for a tentative parcel map waiver, for residential condominiums, design review, and an inclusionary housing plan.

This one doesn't work. Isn't that on? Oh, do it the old fashioned way. Okay. Alright.

The project is located within phase 2 of the Russell Ranch subdivision at of Empire Ranch Road and White Rock Road. For a little background, the tentative large lot and small lot maps for phase two were approved by counsel, with recommendation from the commission in 2018. There were, five villages approved for phase two and four have been, recorded as small lot final maps. There's a good laser pointer, I believe. There we go.

All right. Yes. So, four, the Villages 1 Through 4 surrounding Village 5 were, recorded as small lot maps and, have been under development or have, previously been developed. And just Village 5 here has, yet to be built. Here's a look at the small lot tentative parcel map that was approved for Village 5.

It included 118 fee simple, residential lots with an attached townhome product and a centrally located park amenity. As part of the map, sound walls were required along Empire Ranch Road and White Rock Road. Those walls are currently under construction. And here we have a look at the recorded, Village 5 large lot map. This large lot map was recorded, for as part of phase two, which included create the creation of the Village 5 large lot parcel, but no small lot final map was recorded for this village.

In the interim, grading, utility, roadway, and site improvement work were approved for, improvement plans on Village 5. You can see the image on the right that the retaining walls are are built. The lots are, padded, and the roads are under construction. However, when the applicant came in for their design review of the buildings, they also requested a change in the ownership type to condominium ownership, which means the parcel would remain as one large parcel as shown as on the large lot map, but would have 118 condominium units for sale. Staff found that the Folsom Municipal Code allows for a one lot condo project to be exempted from needing a tentative parcel map, upon approval of a map waiver from the Planning Commission and with a condominium plan.

As such, the applicant has now requested this entitlement along with the inclusionary housing plan and the the previously mentioned design review. So looking at the proposed site plan for MAP Waiver purposes. The applicant is not looking to modify the site plan that was previously approved under the tentative parcel map. They're keeping the same number of parking spaces, two thirty six as what was previously approved and the site work is, is not, proposed to change beyond what was, what was approved. Excuse me.

Based on the condominium plan provided, each unit would be individually owned with the areas below, surrounding, and above each unit owned by a common interest development entity of which each owner would be would have a would have an interest. Based on review of the condo plan and the draft covenants, conditions, and restrictions, CCNRs, Staff supports the proposed MAP waiver as proposed and conditioned. The applicant's also proposing to fill, to fulfill their inclusionary housing obligation, by providing an in lieu fee payment similar to what several other subdivisions have done. Staff does support this plan. So moving on to the design review.

Here we see the proposed landscaping plan. The applicant is proposing trees around the interior and, and throughout the projects. Excuse me. Around the project site as well as interior to the site, as you can see. Staff found that over 50% of the parking lot would be shaded in fifteen years, consistent with the code standard.

The applicant is also proposing the centrally located private park site with a play area, shade sails, garden, bench seating, shade structure, picnic tables, grills, sports tables, and an outdoor exercise area. So this should serve as a very nice amenity for future residents. So, the applicant is proposing three plex, four plex, and five plex units. The diagram here shows that the majority of the units in green would be five plexes, with the other units being three and four plexes. So looking at the, elevations, for the townhomes, these are the three plexes.

Each unit would have a garage in the bottom level and be two stories on top of that garage. Maximum building height is proposed to be 38 feet. I'll note that, the Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan allowed for two stories and 35 feet in height in this zone for fee simple townhomes, which is what was previously proposed on the site and up to four stories and 50 feet in height for townhomes with condominium ownership, which is what's being proposed now. So going with the, condominium ownership allows the additional story that they're proposing and the height that they're requesting. And those are allowed by Wright in the Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan in this MLD zone.

But as you can see, they're only going three feet higher than what was what would have otherwise been allowed for the fee simple lots are going from a maximum of 35 feet to now proposing 38. So here we see the four plexes. The applicants proposing to utilize elements of the California Prairie style for the buildings consistent with the Russell Ranch design guidelines. Some of the design elements from the style that the applicant has incorporated include a rectangular geometry, stucco exteriors with masonry accents, covered decks with ornamental railings and metal awnings. There are varying building forms that offer some good architectural relief on these buildings as well in staff's opinion.

And here we have the five plexes. The design of each of these buildings from the side elevations, including those facing the street, would be the same for each building architecturally. However, staff worked with the applicant to ensure that there was a good variety of color differentiation on the buildings themselves, including different colors on the upper levels of the buildings and bolder accents, colored doors, as well as a variety of color schemes for each of the buildings. While staff would ideally prefer to see more differences in building forms amongst, the buildings as well, we ultimately concluded that the differences in colors as well as the use of, the mirrored facades, provide an adequate level of variety while maintaining the cohesive community that the, the applicant is seeking. Here are the four color schemes proposed.

Staff found that there was a good variety of earth tone primary colors with bolder accents and different masonry accent materials, as seen on the bottom. And here's a view of the streetscape showing the different colors and some of the mirrored elevations that I had mentioned to give a good sense of variety. The applicant also provided a color scheme plotting map to show that they would not be repeating the same color scheme side by side or across the street, as they've been conditioned to do. Staff worked with the applicant to ensure that the accent trees, were placed to minimize the prevalence of these utility doors that we can see here, where feasible. You can see some of these trees are placed to somewhat, shield the view of those, those doors from the interior street.

And staff does support the design review as conditioned. Here we have the project rendering, three d rendering. Well, we, we did receive, some public comments early in the process, and we've addressed those comments in the staff report but, we have not received any additional comments since the public notice was actually mailed out, and put in the newspaper. We found that the previous environmental analysis for Russell Ranch Phase 2 covers the proposed project since actual project changes from what, from what were approved at that point and what were analyzed are very minimal. So, after publication of the staff report, we did hear some concern from the applicant regarding some of the conditions of approval.

Staff oh, thank you. So staff, determined that several of the conditions referencing the final MAP should be changed to reference a certificate of compliance since the applicant is going through the MAP waiver process. A lot of these measures currently state that upon recordation of a final map because we're getting a waiver, from the MAP process, the appropriate mechanism is not a final map but a certificate of compliance. We also found that a condition referencing the previously considered sound walls required pilasters every 50 feet and that this was not consistent with the Russell Ranch design guidelines, which requires greater spacing between pilasters, so we modified the condition to meet those guidelines. The modified conditions have been provided on the green sheet tonight.

I've just been handed a sheet of paper to, let me know that we should be adding condition 19, to this list that we have on the screen here. That one was missed in the writing of the modified finding. So, with that, staff does recommend approval of the proposed project as condition, including the modifications to the recommendation to the recommended actions shown here on the screen in bold with the addition of condition 19 being added. We can take any questions of staff at this time and, Lennar Holmes is also here to present and answer any questions of them. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Josh, just a quick question. Yeah. What is a conditions key?

Yes.

I'm not sure I've seen that term.

Yeah, so if you look at the end of the green sheet, you'll see the key at the bottom of the sheet that says

Oh, that's what we call a key?

Yes. Yeah, the key for and maybe there's a better word for it. But

the Responsibility table?

Sure. Yeah. Responsibility and when required table. I don't know. But you can see that table has the strike through of prior to approval of a final map for M and that has been changed to prior to recordation of a certificate of compliance. So that means anything that would have required a final map excuse me, anything that would have been required at recordation of the final map is now being required at recordation of the certificate of compliance.

Thank you. Are there any questions of our staff on this item? Commissioner Barcelona, you have something?

Sure. Yes. Okay. Thank you. I don't know if you can put up on the screen a diagram of the project plus the single family development that's adjacent to it on Hedge Grove Drive. Do you have one?

So are you looking for maybe the initial, this this map?

Yeah. That's good enough.

Okay.

So does the red line, that's just the boundary. Right? That doesn't depict the area that's gonna have a sound wall?

No. The sound wall is going to be along the the two major Yeah.

The outer edges. Yeah. So the single family homes on Hedge Grove Drive

Yes.

What is that? Just a wooden fence along the back of those properties dividing them from the condo project?

No. It's not wooden. It's actually the kind you can see through because they have a view. So it's wrought iron. Yeah.

It's wrought iron?

They're up they're up quite a bit higher than this slot. Yeah. It's on a oh, yeah. Oh, okay. Oh, yeah. It's up there. So they're they're up a ways. All

right. I'm done. Thanks.

I walked over there the other day just to be sure I understood it. And sound walls are actually already in, and a lot of the infrastructure is already prepared. Any other questions for staff? Okay, hearing and seeing none, now we can hear from the applicant. Is the applicant here? Come on up and introduce yourself.

Excuse me. Okay. Good

evening, Chair, members of the Planning Commission. Chad Roberts at Hefner Law. On behalf of Lennar Holmes of California LLC, thank you very much for the opportunity to address you this evening. Thank you for being here on an off week. Thank you very much to Josh and staff for a thorough presentation. I don't have anything to add at this time. We would respectfully request that you move the staff recommendation. If you have any questions, we are here and happy to answer them. As you can see here, we have the full applicant team. We have our architect team, landscape architect team, civil engineer for the project.

So if there are any questions, we will make sure we get the right person up here to the podium to answer them. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Chad. I didn't know if you guys were from the neighborhood or, okay, very good. Are there any questions of, Chad? I actually have one. And I asked this of our staff, and he said, you might as well just ask the applicant this. Because why the change to go from the townhomes to the Yeah.

I can't speak to why it was originally 118 lot tenanted a map for for townhomes. What I can say is this Rowtown product is almost always created with a condo map. We think it's what the market wants. The attached nature already, you know, dictates that you're going to have an HOA maintaining the exteriors, maintaining all the common spaces. So we think it makes the most sense here. And there are also some other benefits from a construction perspective of having a condominium project rather than townhomes. For example, grouping of electrical meters and things like that.

Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. And I suppose if you don't have to do certain maps and you can just go through the condo process, it probably saves time as well. Would that be accurate?

I don't know how much time is saved here, but obviously the Subdivision Map Act provides for this parcel waiver process where you've got a condominium project on a single parcel. Folsom City Code does as well and is laid out really well in the staff report. We think all the requisite findings can be made. Given that it's the type of product we want to do here, it's the right path forward for us.

Got it. Thank you. Nobody else has any other questions? Right. Well, you can step down.

Thank you so much.

All right. And now it's time for citizen communication. Is there anybody here, who would like to address the commission? I mean, not citizen communication, time to hear from the audience. Anybody here who would like to address the commission on this item? Seeing and hearing none, we will close the public comment. Commissioners, that leaves it to us. And Josh, you might want to put that recommended motion up on the screen again. I am informed that that does incorporate the items from the green sheet, so that makes it a little easier for us to formulate the motion and then that would be with the addition of that numeral 19 in the motion.

Look at that, 19 is up there now.

Woah. Magic. Amazing. And would anybody like or commissioners, anything under discussion? Okay. Anybody want to make a motion? Go ahead. Commissioner Hurst.

I move to confirm staff's determination that no further environmental review of the Russell Ranch phase 2 Village 5 project is required and to approve a tentative parcel map waiver residential condominiums design review and inclusionary housing plan for the Russell Ranch Phase 2 Village 5 project, MSTR25Dash00094 based on the findings included in this report, findings a through o, and subjects to the attached conditions of approval, conditions one through 59, with conditions nineteen, twenty, 21, 22, 35, and 38, and the conditions key modified to reflect recording of a certificate of compliance and modified sound wall design.

Thank you. Commissioner Hurst, is there a second?

I'll second.

Thank you, Commissioner Herrera. Any discussion on the motion? I'm actually very encouraged that we're seeing a condo product because it seems like it's pretty rare these days. It's really hopefully that means they'll be a little bit more affordable than some of the other options, in our city. Okay. Seeing and hearing none, Stephanie, we have a motion and a second. You can call the roll.

Commissioner Herrera?

Yes.

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

Yes. Okay. The motion passes. Congratulations, team. Thank you for all coming tonight. I honestly thought that there was I didn't know what I thought. Anyway, thank you very much for having everybody. Thanks to Lennar for doing business in Folsom. And also, yeah, thanks to everybody for being on deck just in case we needed you. Appreciate that. Okay. And with that, we're gonna go to the planning managers principal planners report. Okay.

Good evening. Jessica Brandt with Community Development. I will be quick. So, they report our next planning commission meeting is scheduled for August 20. We do have multiple items scheduled for that, hearing.

So, not nothing that appears particularly controversial, but we do have two, tattoo parlor conditional use permit, a vet clinic conditional use permit modification, a subdivision map, actually very similar to the one you just heard, although it's single lot small single lot, down in the Folsom Plan area. And then, likely, a review of the Broadstone Crossing to DA, related to the pedestrian over crossing. That needs to come back to the Planning Commission before it can go to the City Council so it should be a pretty full agenda. Anyone expect to be absent that evening that you know of right now? Okay super.

All right. And then, as usual, report on design reviews, staff approved. We approved two custom homes in the last month and five residential additions and modifications. Modifications. And that's the principal planner report. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you very much, Jessica. Commissioners, is there anything else anybody'd like to bring up tonight? Okay. Seeing and hearing none. I know we had, because our, principal engineer is out of town, we had our, step in engineer. Thank you for being here tonight just in case we needed you. But, yeah, thank you, everybody, and, the meeting is adjourned before 07:00, 06:54PM. Thank you.