Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. I'll call the 04/15/2026 City of Lincoln Planning Commission meeting to order. Secretary, may we have roll call, please?

Commissioner Gilbert?

Here.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Here. Commissioner Jackson?

Here.

Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Vice Chair Manning,

Here.

And Chairman Eric Johnson.

Here. All right. We'll move on to item number three, Pledge of Allegiance. I've asked Commissioner Jackson to please lead us on that tonight.

With liberty and justice for all.

Thank you for that. Item number four, agenda modifications. Do we have any agenda modifications this evening? Okay. Looks like no. Item number five will be a public comment on non agenda items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. Citizens may address the planning commission on any item on the agenda when the item is considered. Citizens wishing to speak may request to speak by raising your hand when requested to do so. This is an opportunity to speak on non agenda items. Please limit your comments to three minutes.

Secretary, do we have any hands raised online, or do we have anyone in the chambers that wishes to speak?

I have not received any comment cards before the meeting.

I do not see any hands raised online.

And in the room, would anybody like to speak? There are no hands raised in the room.

Thank you. Number six, disclosure of ex parte communication. Do any of my fellow commissioners have any communications to disclose? And we'll start at my right, please.

None.

None. Nothing

to disclose.

And I don't have anything to disclose either. Alright. So we'll move on to item number seven, consent. All matters on the consent agenda are considered routine business and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a request to remove a specific item for separate action is received. Any items removed will be considered after the remainder of the consent agenda. We only have one item tonight, but do any of my colleagues wish to remove an item from the consent agenda?

Move approval, Mr. Chairman.

Second. Before we do that, I was instructed, a new little, procedural thing before we do the motion. I appreciate it. Is there any public comment on the consent agenda item?

And so we can we can recognize the motions. We just take public comment before we actually take the vote.

Okay. Perfect. Alright. So we have

I I have a comment. Okay. Under comments here, says that I commented that I thought, he thought, that staff reports and presentations for this meeting were good. My recollection was it said very good, but no need to change.

Okay. Thanks for pointing that out. All right. So we did have a motion and a second.

May I get to a second, please?

Who motion?

Peter.

Thank you.

All right. So we have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Abstentions? Alright. Motion passes. Let's see. Six zero zero zero.

Now we'll move on to, section, item number eight, public hearings. First one is eight a, Chevron at Joyner Parkway adopted resolution approving a conditional use permit for type 21 full liquor application and determination of public convenience or necessity. And we have, Efrain Sanchez, senior planner, who will give our staff report. Please.

We would we would ask the commission that when they make the motion to approve the item that they also include this is determining the project is exempt from CEQA.

Good evening, planning commissioners. Alfred Sanchez, senior planner with community development department. The project is a conditional use permit, CUP, for on-site alcohol sales under a type 21 off sale general license along with a public convenience and necessity, PCN determination for an existing 2,700 square foot Chevron convenience store and gas station at 151 Joyner Parkway. The project site is located on the Northeast corner of Joyner Parkway and 1st Street located here highlighted. The convenience store currently operates with a type 20 ABC license for off sale beer and wine.

The request is to upgrade to a type 21 ABC license allowing for off sale beer and wine and distilled spirits. Applicant Lincoln Station Inc, on behalf of Gill Property Development, the site is designated neighborhood commercial and its own neighborhood commercial business professional within the Joyner Ranch general development plan. No billing changes are proposed. The 2,700 square foot convenience store will keep existing hours of operation, and this is just an image of the actual gas station. The sale of alcoholic beverages beyond a bonafide restaurant requires a conditional use permit.

Similar, a PCN analysis is required for subsequent ABC licensing for hard liquor to ensure it does not significantly contribute to any existing oversaturation of such licenses. Staff researched the project site history and obtained ABC licensing information for the surrounding area. There are a total of six active alcohol licenses within a one mile radius. The Chevron project site is located approximately half a mile from the nearest place to worship, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints, a quarter mile from the nearest park, Creekside Park, and 0.14 miles from the nearest school, which is Creekside Oaks Elementary School. Furthermore, the chief of police, Matt Alves, conducted a review of the records from the past five years at or around the project site.

This chief stated that there have been no chronic police concerns at this location. Therefore, the chief has no heightened concerns about the the, facility's proposed use. This slide illustrates the location of the six active licenses within a one mile radius. The only other type 21 license in in, is the other Chevron off of Nicholas Road, which you can see up the top over here with along with two other alcohol licenses. And then here's a project site highlighted in red.

And then in that shopping center, there's, three other al alcohol licenses as well. But, of course, the only, other type 21 is over here at the other Chevron station. Staff reviewed the surrounding land uses and found that the request is compatible with the commercial character of the area. The project is consistent with the general plan, including economic development policy ED 2.3, which supports business expansion. Off sale alcohol sales are common in commercial districts, and the use is similar to other nearby licensed establishments.

The site is eligible for the use in the neighborhood commercial business park zone with approval of a conditional use permit. The nearest type 21 license is the Chevron at 2330 Nicholas Road, about 0.92 miles away. With conditions of approval, staff found that the project would not create health, safety, or welfare impacts. The police chief reported no chronic concerns and raised no objection. Flood hazards findings are not applicable because the site is not located in a flood zone.

The project is exempt because the 2,700 square foot convenience store is existing. Thus, the project as condition will not have a significant effect on the environment. The project is exempt because it meets the criteria that characterize it as existing development. That leads us to our recommendation. Staff recommends that the planning commission conduct a public hearing, insert the information contained in the staff report and testimony of the public, and take the following actions.

One, determine that the project is exempt from CEQA under section 15,301 existing facilities, and two, adopt a resolution approving the conditional use permit for alcohol sales type 21 off sale general and determination of public convenience and necessity within the existing building located at 151 Joyner Parkway in Lincoln with project specific and typical conditions of approval. So we have the applicant team here in here if you have any questions for them or if you have any questions for me. That concludes my presentations.

Alright. Thank you, Efrain. I'll bring it to my colleagues. Do any of my colleagues have any questions or comments at this point before we open up the public hearing? Please, Commissioner Johnson.

I assume the school district was notified, and did they have any comments on the application?

Part of our process, for this type of application, the school district was not notified. It's not one of the findings that we have to do. Yeah. And it just it's not part of our well, actually, take that back. Yeah. I take that back. As part of our routing, I there is someone from the school district that gets notification. No comment for that. Sorry.

Second slide, the very top of your second slide, says on and off. Is that on-site and off? Is that just you were telling us what licenses are around that confuse me, or is this both on and off-site consumption? It's Go back the other slide. Sorry. Maybe it's that one. Top line. On-site and off-site sale of alcohol. That meaning you're just showing us what on-site and off-site are in the area, or is this gonna be both?

Yeah. I could see why that's confusion. I I should've just struck struck out out the on-site because it's technically just off-site sale of alcohol.

That's all

that that 21 is right. Off-site.

Correct. I think originally, I think I was trying to indicate that both on-site and off-site require CUP in commercial zone.

Any additional questions or comments at this point? I'll now open the public hearing. Citizens wishing to speak on this item may request to speak by raising their hand when requested to do so. Please limit your comments to three minutes. And, before I ask what hands are raised, I'd like to give the applicant, an opportunity if they have any comments or would like to make a presentation at this point. Oh, please please step up to the podium and yeah.

Hi. My name is Nick. I'm the owner at the Chevron. I just wanna add that, I know he pointed out there's six active licenses within the one mile, but they're all mostly on-site. Like, pizza place, they're not off the off sale one. The only off sale is the other Chevron. So within the mile, there's no other places where our customers can buy liquor. So it's mainly for public convenience. A lot of there's more than thousand houses within one mile, but no other place for them to buy liquor. So we get it all the time that they get the gas.

We already have beer and wine. So we always we get a lot of request if we can add liquor. And if we do add liquor, the school concern across the street, we plan on having all the liquor behind the counter. So nobody can run away with a bottle or no runoffs because even though when it's on the shelves, no matter how hard you try, kids will just run away. So we plan on keeping it all behind the counter.

And also want to add that in our previous years, we had no violations from ABC. We always follow all the laws and no, loitering, none of that. We have no, like the police chief said, it you know I mean? We follow all the, every all the rules and regulations. So that's all I wanted to add.

Excellent. Thank you. Alright. Secretary, do we have any hands raised online or anyone in the chambers that wishes to speak?

I did not receive any cards before the meeting.

I do not see any hands raised online. And is there anyone in the room who would like to speak?

Please come to the podium and, please, state your name.

My name is Kevin Sittle. I live at 1st And 0 Street. I think this is a really bad idea because within a few miles, as you stated, there's plenty of opportunity to buy the liquor. Being that it's literally a 100 yards away from a school, I think that's a bad idea.

Okay. Thank you.

Do we have any, additional hands raised or anyone else would like to make a comment?

I don't see any other hands raised in the room.

Okay. Seeing that, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to my colleagues. Does anyone have any additional comments?

Just a question. What what is our direction at this point? Do we offer seven or eight motions here, or does one motion including both the CEQA and

and This is this is item eight a, commissioner Johnson. Right. It has two item two components, thank you very much. One is to determine that the project is exempt from CEQA under section 15,301 and to adopt a resolution approving the conditional use permit for alcohol sales type 21 off-site off sale general and determine the public convenience or necessity within the existing bill building at 151 Joyner Parkway.

Okay. I got it. I was slipping down a okay.

And you can just do it by saying as stated in the agenda, with the CEQUA exemption.

Correct. Yeah. So we're voting on, yeah, eight a, the one resolution with CEQUA. Good question. Do we have any other questions or comments? Yeah. If not

I'll move approval of, item eight a.

I'll second it.

All right. And just to clarify, it includes the CEQA exemption?

It does.

And as stated in the agenda. Yeah.

Yeah. Thank you for clarifying that. All right. So we have a motion and a second. Can we have roll call, please?

Commissioner Jerry Johnson?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Manning?

Yes.

And Chair Eric Johnson?

Yes. Alright. Motion passes six zero zero zero. Item eight b. So this one has a lot of resolutions in it. So so I'm gonna I'm gonna read those as kinda like an introduction so that we have them as stated in the agenda. So I believe at the end we can do a motion together with all of it as stated in the agenda. So eight b, Starbucks and Circle k at 1st Street and Joiner Parkway. It's a so we have a list of seven. Adopt a resolution determining the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQUA.

Let's see. Yeah. Do I need to read all the okay. Just that first part. K.

Second one is adopt a resolution recommending city council approve the Joyner Parkway and 1st Street commercial tenant of parcel map. The tenant parcel map would subdivide the two acre parcel into a total of two commercial parcels. The third one, adopt a resolution approving the specific development plan, development permit, master plan for the proposed Starbucks and Circle K commercial project in conformance with the design and development standards of the Joyner Ranch general development plan. Number four, adopt a resolution making a determination of findings of consistency with the general plan for summary vacation of public landscape easement along the frontage of Joyner Parkway and 1st Street. Five, adopt a resolution approving a conditional use permit for alcohol sales and or consumption consistent with municipal code, section eighteen twenty two zero three zero for Parcel 1.

Number six, adopt a resolution approving a conditional use permit for autumn automobile drive through consistent, with the local municipal code as stated in there. And number seven, adopt a resolution approving a conditional use permit to allow development on a commercial property with a nonconforming parcel size consistent with the Joyner Ranch general development plan for Parcel 2. I believe I said all that right. So like I said, by reading all that now, it's gonna be a motion as, you know, presented in the agenda unless we do something different. So I will now turn the time over to, Thomas Krushenk, a senior planner, who will give us a staff report.

Good evening, Planning Commissioners. Thomas Cruikshank, Associate Planner with the Community Development Department. The project for you is the Starbucks Circle K commercial development project. Tonight, I will discuss the project location, requested entitlements, findings and environmental determination and staff recommendations. This presentation is a summary of the, project.

More detailed project information is included and outlined in the staff report provided. Lastly, as of this meeting, we have not received any public comments on this project. So the project site is located just west of downtown portion of the city of Lincoln within the Joyner Ranch general development plan area and just south of the previous project here across the street. This application seeks to develop two acres of commercially zoned property at the corner of 1st And Joyner. The proposal includes a Circle K gas station and a Starbucks with a drive thru.

Request entitlements for this project are a tentative parcel map, specific development plan, development permit, findings of consistency with the general plan for summary vacation of existing public landscape easements and conditional use permits for alcohol sales at the Circle K, a drive thru at Starbucks and a non conforming parcel size of less than one acre. The entitlement request for a tenant parcel map proposes to divide the existing approximately two acre parcel into two separate commercial parcels. Parcel 1 is proposed to be 1.04 acres, that's the northern parcel. Parcel 2 is proposed to be 0.94 acres, that's the southern parcel. For the second entitlement requests for a specific development plan development permit on 11/20/2025, the design review board conducted its review of the project.

The Board expressed overall support for the architectural design and identified two modifications for consideration. First, the Board requested that the brick veneer used on the Circle K Building also be applied to the fuel canopy columns. Second, the Board asked whether the red bollards on the Circle K could be revised to black. The applicant team agreed to change the bollards to black, and these requests have been added as conditions of approval. Following its review and discussion, the Board issued a recommendation of approval for the project to the Planning Commission.

The 3,974 square foot Circle K gas station located on the northern parcel and the 2,338 square foot Starbucks will be positioned on the southern parcel. Also included is a landscape design that incorporates select tree species, shrubs and ground covers to create a visually appealing aesthetic while providing effective screening along the site perimeter. Sign program has also been included with the entitlement submittal, which proposes two internally lit 14 foot six inch tall monument signs here and here. These signs will be located near the corner of 1st And Joiner and, along the entrance on 1st Street. There are also building mounted and fuel canopy signs and non illuminated branding signs at the Circle K.

The next entitlement involves the abandonment of existing public landscape easements along 1st Street and Joyner Parkway. These easements were dedicated many years ago and they are no longer required. The vacations of easements does not remove the requirement of providing landscaping within the site. It merely eliminates the conflicts with the private maintenance and management of landscape within the new project. The final entitlement request for conditional use permits.

Conditional use permits are required for alcohol sales at Circle K on Parcel 1, a drive thru at the Starbucks on Parcel 2 and for the development of a non conforming parcel less than one acre as required by the Joyner Ranch general development plan. Parcel 2 is proposed to be 0.94 acres. Starbucks and Circle K commercial project has been found to be consistent with the City Of Lincoln General Plan, the Jonah Ranch General Development Plan, Lincoln Municipal Code Title 17 subdivisions and Title 18 zoning. Analysis has determined that the project is exempt from California Environment Quality Act pursuant to Section 15,332 infill development. The project is consistent with, the development intensity and land use assumptions evaluated in the Joyner Ranch general development plan and will not result in new or more severe environmental impacts than those previously considered.

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, consider the information contained in the staff report and testimony of the public, and take the following actions outlined here. Adopt resolutions determining the project qualifies for exemption under CEQA, recommend City Council approve the tentative parcel map, approve the specific development plan development permit, make a determination of findings of consistency with the general plan for vacation of public landscape easements and approve conditional use permits for alcohol sales at Parcel 1 an automobile drive thru at Parcel 2, and development on a nonconforming parcel less than one acre in size. This concludes my presentation. Members of the applicant team and staff are here to answer any questions you guys might have. Excellent.

Thank you for the presentation. Do any of my colleagues have any questions or comments at this time before the public hearing?

I serve on the design review board, and so I just want to publicly say that, the applicant was was very positive about our recommendations. We appreciated, working with them, especially with the baldered colors and, the landscaping side of it, thought was very, very nice. So I just I just wanted to put that on record that, I appreciated, their their working with us as well as they did.

Thank you. Do you have a comment?

I I have a question. Can you go back to the slide that shows the overview of the design you

see in

drive through?

Was there any concern from city staff, any type of reassurance or study done? I mean, by far am I an expert at this, but I see that drive through and the entrance is right there near the entrance of Joyner Parkway, which is a pretty busy street. If that were to back up and that drive through flows out into the street, that's pretty concerning. Right?

Yeah.

So That design looks I mean, is that gonna happen?

We did ask for, DKS as a as a consultant. They did a traffic study. Stay city code does require a minimum of 25 feet, off the the main drag. This provides more than 50, and they're providing in excess of the required stacking since it is a high use kind of business. And this this particular parcel was was assessed to be able to handle the capacity. Our big concern was backing up in the joiner. That is a very busy street.

Yeah. That I mean, I I would rather back up on the other on first than on joiner. Yeah. So you say that it they've they've got a higher capacity on stacking. What what is the minimum capacity and where they at?

I forget what the minimum was. Minimum 10. This one provides 21 in the current configuration.

I just that that's a bit of a concern to me. I laugh at traffic studies because we have them all over the city, and every project comes up here and, hey. We had a traffic study done that says it's gonna work, and we can show you areas all over that had traffic studies that said they're gonna work and they're not working. You know what I mean? It's almost like it's just something we do to check a box sometimes. Right? Find a consultant to say it's gonna work. Okay.

I would add that the city now has a traffic engineer that we haven't had in years past. City engineer Vin Kay is also a traffic engineer, and so that he reviews all of the traffic study. I'll I'll say that traffic flow, traffic patterns, the to ensure that there are no backups, that is one of his major pet peeves. And so when these traffic studies are conducted, we're not just taking the consultants, the developers consultants' word for it. He does a separate review and evaluation of those traffic studies to determine that they are in fact true, and that the what they're recommending or proposing meets with when what we think needs to happen in order to avoid a backup.

That study has been reviewed by

Yes. The study has been reviewed by not just the planning staff, but also by the city engineer who's our traffic engineer. Okay.

I mean, that's somewhat reassuring. I would love to see an overflow in a plan. I think we all know that certain retailers that create some pretty big traffic and drive through Starbucks being one of them, Chick fil A, you know, in and out. Right? And they seem to all overflow really long, and I just have that concern on Joyner Parkway right there that that could be that could be dangerous. I'd love to see a backup flow into the gas station if possible, but, it's just me. Thank you.

Yeah. Thanks for that question.

Well, that's Johnson. Well, while the project site site landscape plan is up there, I'm just kinda curious. And maybe there's an that applicants' architect is isn't present tonight. But, I think if I was doing that, project, at at least as car's Starbucks goes, I'd want to have the building close to the street so it was obvious that there was a Starbucks there and not hidden behind rows of traffic and relatively small signage. And I was wondering why that wasn't considered at the time.

We have the applicant, Callie, here. She can write.

And commissioners, thank you for having me. I just wanted to also thank both Mel and Thomas and SP over the past few years. It's been a very collaborative working relationship. The reason why we positioned the Starbucks how it was what considered further east is because we wanted to make sure that we had a longer queue. This has a 21 queue stack, and so we just wanted to make sure that there was enough stack in a drive through lane to not have an overflow issue. So that's why it's further to the east rather than being on the frontage.

Well, you'd still have the same room for the backup, wouldn't you, if you just moved it from

one so because the pickup would have to always be on your left hand side. And if it was further to the front, then the drive through would be at the the passenger window.

Could you point that out on the site plan?

Yeah.

Yep.

Yes.

The pickup is kinda right at the center of the the light there.

And then if we were to shift the entire building to the joiner, then the pickup or the driver would be in the passenger.

Opposite side? Depends on what side you put it on.

Yeah. I mean, if you did a wave around and you your last turn, it would also have the driver on the on the left side. Anyway, it I'm not I'm not asking you to redesign it tonight. I just was Yeah.

I'd like to make a comment on that. Yes. You could put it on the left side, but think about someone coming in. Can we have them that back? Think about somebody coming in there on the left and having to make a very sharp left turn.

That's an accident looking for a place to happen as opposed to having a longer run before you had to start to make a turn and work through the shopping center. The other comment I'm gonna make is we have found, particularly with In N Out, that what we approved for them didn't work in terms of the access, etcetera, didn't work. And the reason it didn't work is they were so successful. And so there's a conditional use permit on this project. There was one on that one.

And so the staff worked with the people who owned m in and out, and they started they got approval to use the overflow into the parking lot. And they have hired people who take the orders in the parking lot, which allows them to maximize their business and eliminated the concerns that have been expressed tonight. So that use permit is gonna allow us, if if there is a problem, to come back and address the issues that our vice chairman had, which are very relevant. But we can't we can't plan or ask people to come to our city to put parking in for the worst possible scenario, having financed, shopping centers and developers, the cost would become so prohibited we wouldn't be building. So we gotta do the best we can using our professional staff to plan it the best we can.

But because we have a it's conditional use permit, we have the the obligation to review it and change it if necessary.

Thank you. Yeah. Thanks for all those comments. Do we have any additional comments or questions at this point?

Okay.

Thanks for that presentation. Let's see. So with that, I'll now open public hearing. Citizens wishing to speak on this item may request to speak by raising their hand when requested to do so. Please limit your comments to three minutes. And before I ask, for for the public comments, I wanna give the applicant an opportunity if they have any comments or would like to make a presentation at this time.

Have any further comments or presentation,

but

thank you.

Yep. Thank you.

Thanks for being here available.

All of

if there's any further technical questions, our design team is here that can answer any questions.

Okay. Thanks.

Thank you. Alright. Secretary, do we have any raised hands online or anyone in the chambers that wishes to speak?

Chair Eric Johnson, I did not receive any comment cards before the meeting. I do not see any hands raised online. However, we do have one, two hands raised. Gentleman in the gray shirt, please come to the podium.

And please state your name again.

Thanks. My name is Kevin Sittle. I literally leave live five blocks away from this development thing. Last thing we need is another Starbucks. Just granted these people over here a liquor license. The last thing we need is another gas station, which will be direct competition to them. I don't understand why you would consider this. We don't need gas stations literally across the street. I mean, look at Lincoln Boulevard. We have three gas stations going down Lincoln Boulevard between 7th And 1st.

There's three gas stations. Why would you put another gas station right next to one that already exists? I'm opposed to the liquor license. Don't need another convenience store literally down the street from my house because we already have one. And if I go the other way, there's another one right there within five blocks. So I'm opposed to this whole thing.

Thank you for your comment. Do we have a we have another one.

Please state your name.

Nick, on the Chevron across the street. So I just want to add, there's absolutely no need for another gas station across the street. With all these electric cars coming, our gas sales are down 5% to 10% every year. Have six pumps at our station, and you'll never see more than two full at the at the same time when you drive by. We used to do a 120,000 gallons a month.

We're down to 50,000 to 60,000 gallons a month. I can provide you guys the numbers. So if we're doing 50,000 gallons, when someone comes in and build a new gas station, their expectations are at least 150,000 to 300,000 gallons. So I don't know how they did their their IMST studies or whatever, what what number they're predicting, but we're doing 50,000 gallons a month. With six pumps, we should be doing 200,000 gallons.

Also, when we built our gas station here, we had to go through a lot of tough ruling, lot of hearings, lot of protests. And with our beer and wine license, which we have currently, we can't sell singles. We can't sell beer and wine after 11PM. Normalize 2AM. So another license for them for CUP to sell alcohol beer license, it's there's no need for another beer and wine across the street.

You're right. Someone said Starbucks should be on the, corner. The goal should be to beautify the city, not congested with more gas stations. I talked to a seven Eleven rep. They said they were looking at two more corners, for seven Eleven gas stations. There's Arco coming by the airport. There's another Costco. So it's already really hard to compete with Costco and all that. So there's absolutely no need. So and then also, like you said, with the drive through, if there's a line coming out of the drive through for Starbucks, when gas gets delivered by big tanker, how is that gonna affect?

How is the big 18 wheeler trucks gonna deliver the gas? There's always a problem with the drive throughs where only required is 10 feet or 25 feet, but you go to a store any Starbucks or Dutch Bros or In N Out, they literally take up the whole parking. We do not need another gas station across the street. We need a Starbucks and then maybe another healthy food option next to a Starbucks. There's a fire station across the street. There's a school. There's a church. One gas station for those houses is enough. There's like, you know mean? I can't emphasize enough that there's no need for another gas station.

If you guys I would if they wanna brand our Chevron to a Circle K or if they wanna buy ours and you wanna turn it into Circle K, I'll be happy to do that. I'm open to that option, but there's absolutely no need. So please consider that very carefully, another gas station across the street.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Secretary, do we have any additional?

I don't see any additional hands raised either way.

Okay. So with that, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to my colleagues. Does anyone have any additional comments after remaining?

I have a couple of questions maybe for staff here. There's nothing in here where we're making any type of zoning change to allow a a gas station to be at this. Right? This already fits the zoning. Correct?

That's correct.

Yeah. Okay. And same for a coffee shop and a convenience store and all that. It already fits the zoning.

That's correct.

Yeah.

You you need me on it more?

Alright. Here we go. How's that?

I'm gonna take care of you on this. Okay. Yes. It is. I'm loud and proud. Okay. So so now I'm gonna move that to a comment. And for the public that came up and spoke, really appreciate the comments. I really do. And we all have opinions and trust me, you see things that happen out there and you go, why do we need another one of these?

Really though, that's for the market to decide and not really for our panel. If zoning fits and somebody wants to open another gas station or another grocery store across the street from a grocery store and try to make it happen, the public and they have the right to do that. Our job is to make sure that things fit the zoning and that they're going to work and that the plan is safe and not an obstruction to the public. But as far as do we need another one or not, the that's what the free markets figure out. And I respect it, but sitting in this position, and I have the same opinion at times, and I have my favorite coffee places and not my favorite coffee places, and my favorite hamburger joints that I'd rather see here and there, but that's not our job to determine what gets put where and what gets put.

We have what we would like to see there, but it doesn't always happen that way. So I just want to make that comment. I think that most of the committee up here would agree with me on that. And but I do appreciate the comments from the public. So thank you.

Do we have any additional comments or questions at this time? Seeing none, I'd just like to echo what, commissioner Manning. I appreciate the the comments. That's You the free market dictates. Looks like this fits within the zoning and our scope of what we're here for. So just wanted to I agree with that. Thanks for that comment. So seeing no more questions or comments, before I entertain a motion, since we had seven, I just wanna, put out there I'm looking for a motion that contains everything unless anyone plans to vote otherwise on one of those.

I would

I do have a question. Just to reassure us to our legal counsel, one one motion for all of it would be adequate? Yep. So you could

take one motion as referenced in the as referenced in the agenda so long as any, no commissioner wants to take a separate action

on an individual line item.

Thank you. If I could have a second to review them before anyone makes a motion, and I'll give you an idea of where my vote might go. I wanna look for one. Are any of these motions regarding a drive through?

Number I thought I saw it. Number two.

Go to the next page. Yeah. I'm finding trouble to to support that based on the plan. So if a motion is given to approve them all, my vote would be no on all of them, even though I I do, agree with most of them just because of that one on six.

So we do have the ability, commissioner, to pull out the one that you would like to have voted on separately. So if you just stated, which I think it's number six, but

Well, yeah. But I I appreciate that. And if if anybody making a motion would would would do that for me, that would be amazing. You have the right to make the motion how you want, but that's probably how I'll be voting. Thank you.

Here we go, Tony. Like to make a motion approve the application in total minus item number six.

I'll second.

Thank you. All right. Just a point of order.

With regards to that, are we going to then be voting for item six on its own?

Yes. Thank you.

Yes.

Yeah. Good question. So we have a motion and a second to consider all, resolutions excluding number six at this point.

Roll call. I will second that motion.

Okay. Perfect. We got a motion and second.

I believe Commissioner Hutchinson second I'm sorry.

Two seconds. You can do

the next one. Okay, thanks.

Roll call vote. Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Vice Chair Manning?

Yes.

And Chair Eric Johnson?

Yes. So that motion passes six zero zero zero.

Mr. Chair.

Please. I'd like to make

a motion that we approve item number six.

I'll second.

Okay. So we have a motion and a second to approve resolution number six as listed in the agenda. Roll call, please.

Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Yes. Vice Chair Manning? No. And Chair Eric Johnson?

Yes. So that motion passes 5,100. Thank you. K. Now we'll move on to item number nine, general business. And it looks like we have none. Is that still true? No general business? K. Then we'll move on to item number 10, informational items from the staff. Director reports, do we have any informational items?

Yes, I just, in addition to the, planning entitlement tracker, which is, in your packet for your consideration, we'll be happy to answer any questions on that that you have. We did also want to, kind of bring forward to this commission that each time we have a change in personnel, for example, when we had a new city clerk, made some modifications to the agenda. Now that we have a new city attorney, we're also considering, changes in some modifications to the procedural, way that we run these meetings so that they are, I'll say, in align with the way the council meetings are run. And so we'll be bringing a couple of items, at least one, forward next meeting as an informational or perhaps even a general business for discussion item about changes to the agenda.

Excellent. Thank you for that.

Mr. Chair? Yes. I have a question. Will we be getting that possible changes prior to the meeting?

Yes.

Thank you.

Yeah, you'll see them when the agenda is published, and we'll be reaching out beforehand.

Thank you.

Thank you. That takes us to item number 11, commissioner comments. Do any of my colleagues have any comments? I'll start. Am I right?

Yes. I appreciated the comments of, some of my fellow commissioners who, understand that, you know, property rights are something that is paramount in the planning process. And and, you know, everybody would like to keep out competition.

However,

is my considered opinion based on the research and my business career that competition is much more valuable to the marketplace. And with that, I'll end my comments. Thank you.

I would just say that I concur with Commissioner Gilbert, and I really appreciated Vice Chair Manning's comments regarding the marketplace. Because, yes, as a former marketer, he is correct. Thank you.

I will also agree. But I but I also wanna thank staff for two wonderful presentations. It was very easy to follow, and, everything was laid out perfect. Thank you.

You're good. Appreciate all the help from staff tonight, getting through some of those questions. Thank you. Excellent.

Yeah. I too like to echo, appreciation for staff. Thank you for that. And looking at some of the little modifications, you know, changes that might come forward, and the comments, you know, about the competition and free market. I also failed to welcome, you know, the the new businesses to to Lincoln there. So I just wanna welcome them, to that. Glad that they're, investing in Lincoln in our city. And with that, we are adjourned.