Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, well, seeing that it's six o'clock on the dot, I'll call the meeting to order.

I call the August 19th, 2026 City of Lincoln Planning Commission meeting to order. Secretary, may we have roll call, please?

Commission to Gilbert.

Here.

Commissioner Hutchinson. Here. Commissioner Jackson.

Here.

Commissioner Jerry Johnson.

Here.

And Chairman Eric Johnson.

Here.

It appears that Tony Manning is not here yet.

Thank you. And just administrative matters, I want to make note, Commissioner Gilbert will be leaving us at approximately 645 in case he's, we see him exit. Let's see. We'll move on to the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Jerry Johnson, please, if you'll lead us.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, the republic for which it stands, one God, indivisible, with justice for all.

Thank you, Commissioner Johnson. Next item is agenda modifications. Do we have any agenda modifications this evening? I believe we might have one.

We do have an agenda modification, sir. There is an item that indicates that there would be a presentation on the open space from city manager, Sean Scully. And we are going to push that to next month's meeting.

Okay.

Sorry, excuse me. Would we like to make the announcement with regards to that there was a public notice that was sent out on Prairie View?

Well, since it's not on the agenda, I think we'll handle it during public comment. Sorry, Jamie, that's my fault. Okay, that's okay.

Perfect. Okay, so noted removing general item, general business item 9B to a later date. Item number five, informational items and disclosures. Do any of my fellow commissioners have any information items to share? I'll start at my right. No, none for me either. Okay, item number six. This will be 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, and please limit your comments to three minutes. And I'll just make a note about the... There was a notice that went out about the cell tower that was potentially going to be on the agenda tonight, but it is not, it will be at a future date. So this would be the time to make any comments related to that, since it's a non agenda item for tonight. Do we have any,

Chair Johnson, I do have two comment cards. I would like to call Reno, is it Pandera? Thank you. And then after Reno, it will be Janet Correa.

Yes, please. Oh.

Oh, actually, if you have anything to add to the commission, if you could please hand that to the secretary. And then if you would return to this podium, if you would like to make a comment.

Oh, no, you're fine.

I think it was on. Thank you. I'm just I was here as a concerned homeowner who will probably be the closest to the cell tower and full disclosure and have this here as well for you guys to formally oppose the proposed construction of the cell tower. for lots of different reasons. I'll kind of go fast because you guys can read it. But when we originally bought the house, which I was an original owner when it first came in, we bought with the understanding that these areas would never be developed. We played a lot premium fee from $20,000 to $40,000 on top of the regular house to have an open space yard. And a cell tower would negatively impact that in many different ways. Including in this, the neighborhood and the kids sell towers and kids, if you look at the research, is not a good, especially for little kids. So adding a massive towers, not a good idea. I also work for the school district. The school district has sent the city a letter in opposition of having it next to one of our elementary schools. So I'm restating that. I don't know how much the city's looked into it, but that area is a migratory bird habitat with raptors and other birds that migrate through the seasons. I'm not sure if that's fully been looked into. So I hope that could be addressed as we move forward. There's native oaks up there and they're protected under California law and it'll definitely impact them as you're digging a whole new road up there. I get, and I speak better here, but I get that having cellular connectivity is an important thing. But in that area, we have mass amounts of open space that could be put that doesn't impact any residential areas. You guys own, and I'm gonna mess this up a little bit, but there on the corner, um in between or past wilson park you have a city structure there that could could have a tower that would impact nobody negatively most cities put their towers on top of the lights at the parks wilson park would be a possible place then too that could have a cell tower that wouldn't impact really anybody closer to school so i would consider that um so it's way more in depth than what i wrote here so i'd appreciate you reading it and there's quite a few questions for the council dollars and how it's going to impact us so i hope you guys would consider that before we move on with this project one way or the other thank you thanks reno thanks for the information we'll look at it secretary do we have another comment we do i call janet

Yeah, you can speak together for three minutes. And yeah, just please state both of your names.

My name is Janet Korea.

Just so people online can hear too. Yeah.

My name is Janet Korea.

My name is Chris Cronin. Thank you.

We are homeowners in the neighborhood that you wish to put a cell tower. In fact, if you walk out my front door, I look directly at the hill where you want to put the cell tower. I find that that is totally objectionable. I don't want to walk out my door and see a cell tower on top of an open space hill. It will negatively affect our property value. We have lived in that neighborhood for over seven and a half years. Yes, the cell service is not that great, but we've managed to live with it and have no problem. And I do strongly object to where you wish to put that cell tower in that open space. And I am positive you can find a more appropriate place to put that.

I second what Janet said. There are plenty of other spaces around that we can use.

There are plenty of other spaces around that would adequately take care of that.

Cell tower. It's been said that they can fix them up to look like trees, and I have yet to see in my lifetime a cell tower that looks like a doggone tree. They'd stick out like a sore thumb, and honest to gosh, when we walk out our front door, we're looking right up their heel. We're in the cul-de-sac up against the park and the school. So I just think there's way too many other spots in the neighborhood, open spots, that the cell tower can go. And I strongly would object to them building one and doing that. And we've been there for seven years, like she said. And we've dealt with the not-so-good cell service. And we get by. So I can live with that.

that's all i got to say thank you for your comment secretary do we have any other anyone else wishing to speak chair johnson i did not receive any more cards would anyone in the room like to speak please step up to the podium and state your name i'm jeff dieter i'm another homeowner i live actually right around the corner from reno penders um

The real question here is, is this done? Is this a done deal? Because we're in a position where I don't want to waste my time. I don't want to waste everybody's time. But what I'm hearing from city managers and things like that, this is done. And if it's done, then we need to figure out how we're going to move legally from this point forward. And I just want to know where we are. Are we able to have any response to that?

At the end of all the public comments, I'll turn it over to the city for any responses.

Okay. That's pretty much what I want to know because I need to know the right steps to move forward. My lawyer is a land mitigation lawyer, and he's the one that's telling me there are steps here because there are migratory birds that fly through the area. There are things we can do, and I just want to know where we are so I can get the ball rolling if we need to.

All right. Thank you. Thanks, Jeff. Secretary, do we have any additional comments?

Would anyone else in the room like to speak? All right, I'll move it to our, oh.

Oh, yep. Yeah, real quick. Yeah, if you come up to the mic.

Just when I give you the piece of paper, is that formally then addressed to you? Is that how that works? I'm doing it legally, right?

Yes.

Yes.

So now that's part of the record and all that.

Yes.

Okay.

Yeah. Everything done conducted in public hearing becomes official. I just want to make sure I did it right. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, since I have seen no other hands raised in the room, I will move to online. Would anyone online like to make a comment here doing our public comment agenda item, anything that is not on the agenda? I do not see any hands raised.

Okay. Thank you. So that looks like all the comments I'll turn the, I guess I'll, I'll inquire of Nita with the city. If you'd like to address any, anything that was brought up.

Yeah, we're going to start with the project manager, associate planner, Michaela Noble. She's going to start it off with just kind of where we are in the process. And then I can add some color into some of the other things as such. Is this a done deal? Okay.

Thank you.

hi everyone um you received the public notice from me mckayla noble i'm for the prairie point tower so just a little background it's a potential cell tower project application that the city received. next to the 12 Bridges Elementary School site. There's an open space parcel there. FCC has strict regulations on processing these applications. For new cell towers, it's 150 days. So we actually received this application back in, I want to say it was October of last year, and the city actually entered a tolling agreement with the applicant, which essentially extended the application review deadline to August 31st of this year. So we provided comments to the applicant, had some significant things that we wanted to get addressed before we could conclude the environmental review, as well as feel comfortable recommending to you all for an approval on the project. However, with that looming deadline of August 31st, we reached out to the applicant in the middle of June to extend that tolling agreement to give us ample time to finish our review, as well as conduct the environmental review as well. The applicant wasn't responsive. They didn't provide any of the updated comments. So we kind of were pigeonholed a bit to make a decision on the project. in order for that timeline to not run out because pursuant to federal regulations, we needed to make a decision before the 31st. So we were going to come forward with a recommendation of denial because we didn't have sufficient evidence to provide a recommendation of approval. The public notices were sent out, but since that time, the applicant has extended the tolling agreement. So we have executed that formally to give us more time to conduct the review. Therefore, the project was not scheduled for hearing tonight. So that's kind of the summary we're still waiting on the applicant to resubmit plans to address our comments and finish off the environmental review so that's still up in the air, still seeing if this is the best site for the project. I will say the 12 Bridges area is a difficult area. It's very hilly and terrain and there's residential all around. So trying to find these places are challenging to where we're trying to have the most minimal impact on the residents in the existing facilities there. So that's just where we're at. We're hoping to come back at a later date with another hearing to which everyone who received a notice today will get a notice again as well if they're still living at that residence.

Thank you. And then with that new tolling agreement, does that extend their deadline?

Yes, so the deadline, we have extended is until February 28 of 2027 the hopes for that is to. we've requested the applicant to conduct public outreach with the Community to get their feedback on the structure as well. As well as finish our environmental review and we do know that the holidays are coming up, so we want to make sure that we have ample time and opportunities for the Community outreach to be done without running into a holiday.

And that you know I would add that. it's not a done deal lease agreement has been signed for this particular parcel of land that's kind of how sell companies operate is they reach out to an agency or even a private owner and they sign the lease agreement for the patch of land first. And then they come forward with a project to actually erect the cell tower. And then either concurrently with that or shortly thereafter, they will communicate with providers that are then going to provide the service. And some of it is timing, some of it is finances, some of it is just their processes. But the FCC is on the side of the cell towers because connectivity is a goal throughout this country from Washington, D.C. to every state administration. having that connectivity of this country is important to those agencies. And so if this applicant continues to provide us responses to our comments, And the planning staff ensure that they are meeting all of the regulations, the zoning. We also have an opportunity to talk a little bit about aesthetics and we have discussed with them the non-tree, tree looking application for this particular site. As long as they meet those needs, then we will recommend to you that you approve the project because it it puts us in a place that if they do everything we asked them to do. That it makes it very challenging for us to say anything else, then. Could you please approve this and that it also makes it challenging for a Commission or subsequently City Council to say anything other than. it is approved, but it's still not a done deal because as Michaela said, we have to finish the environmental, we have to finish the review of the project, we need to make sure that we're meeting all the codes and requirements. Unfortunately, cell towers are not allowed to be denied by a governing body as a result of health perceived health issues that there is not enough we're not medical doctors right we can't make that determination that it's causing a health hazard there is not sufficient evidence that is that we're able to say that it has to be this distance from a home or this distance from a school or this distance from anything else based on that argument. So that's not even an argument that this body can consider.

Mr. Chairman, point of order, please. Chair, recognize me for a point of order?

Yes, please.

Not an agenda item this evening. Not discuss something that's not an agenda item, public meeting. And although the comments are coming from our staff, I feel uncomfortable that we're getting a little too deep in the discussion here when, in point of fact, we're glad to listen to the public, but we cannot, as a governing decision-making body, we cannot take any action tonight. And I'd feel much more comfortable if we take all of the information we've been given with all of the comments from the staff and the staff take care of it by themselves without us being exposed to it because we need to protect the city's interest as well as the interest of the public. So that's my position as a commissioner.

And it is well taken. I was actually just about to wrap up and then to say that staff will continue to communicate with the applicant and with any constituents that reach out to us wanting to stay in the loop on this.

Yes. Yeah. Thank you. My purpose wasn't to cut you off.

Oh, no, no, no. Peter, Commissioner, pardon me, Commissioner Gilbert, you and I, we are on the same page on this.

Yeah, no, thanks for pointing that out. There's definitely an order to, to how we can regulate these types of things. So appreciate the input. It's been noted and, you know, city is gonna act on it. And then, well, it's appropriate time, it'll come back to us to and get notices again. So thank you for your comments. So with that, we'll move on from public comment 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. Do I have any of my colleagues who wish to remove an item from the consent agenda?

Mr. Chairman, I do. Item 7B.

Item 7B. Okay. Let's see. Okay, sorry. We'll remove item 7B. Any other?

I'll move approval of the agenda. I hear about the public, if they want anything pulled.

Actually, with respect, Commissioner, we moved away from that members of the public would need to reach out to the commission if they wish to have something pulled prior to the meeting, that we don't do this in meetings. So unless someone has notified the secretary, which she will make this comment now, that there have been no requests to pull items from the agenda.

Well, I think generally speaking, Our clerk lets us know whether there's anybody online that wants to approach us on any agenda item.

But that's for public comment on the consent agenda. So once the...

They can ask for it to be pulled.

Again, that occurs outside of the meeting, not during the comment section. So anyone may make a comment, a public comment on the consent agenda, but in order to have an item pulled, they would need to reach out to a commissioner prior to the meeting. That change has been in effect for a bit now.

That's news to me, but that's fine.

So if I understand right, So we're at the point where we've had item seven be pulled and then Since we have that polled, I need to have a motion and a second on the remaining items.

Hold on one second. Before you take the motion, we will ask if there was public comment before accepting the motion. Yeah, just a comment. Not that they can pull. Public cannot pull an item. However, before a chair takes the motion, he will ask, is there any public comment?

All right, well, before we take a motion, is there any public comment on the consent agenda items?

I don't see any hands raised in the room. Is there anyone in line who would like to make a public comment on the remaining items in the consent agenda? There are no hands raised online.

Thank you. Thank you. Excellent. All right. So now I believe we're at the point where we can have a motion.

I move the agenda. move the approval of the remaining items. And I'll second it. Okay, perfect.

A motion and a second of the remaining items. So we'll do a voice call. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Abstentions? We have one absent. So let's see. We got, there's five of us. Zero nos, zero, and then one absent. Perfect.

Thank you. Yep.

Okay, so now we'll move on to discussion of item 7B that has been pulled.

I'm not sure a full staff report is needed, but if desired, that's fine. Yeah, it is not needed. I just wanted to raise a question on the map. There is a trail within the map Um, that is, uh, kind of amorphous because it hasn't been defined, uh, well yet. And it, it's, um, it's a concern to me that, uh, the trail is mostly in phase a, but some shown in, in phase B, but regardless of what phase it's in and where it ultimately is located, I would like very much that trail to be connected to the trail to the west. and the east for that matter. And just to leave it to the engineering folks to decide where that goes is, I think, a mistake. And I think we as the commission or staff or somebody has to give some direction that that's not going to work if it's mid-block.

Tom, did you want to show anything on that or?

Yeah, let me just pull up the maps here.

This is just a friendly reminder that the maps are not up for approval today. The tentative maps have been approved for both the Hidden Hills and Heartland at Hidden Hills projects. We are just looking at the design review for the production homes of these 14 lots.

Thank you for that clarification.

I do have the map up here on the screen now. So this is the trail here? Is this what you're asking about, Commissioner Johnson?

I'm not seeing your pointer.

Oh, sorry.

I forgot it does that.

Let me. Right through here. Right. Is that the one?

Yeah. And then if you pass over the road, the.

Back this way.

Yeah. And then drop your pointer down a little bit. Okay. I think it must be further south. If you look at OS3, that's approximately where the trail is shown on the other side of the road. And that probably isn't there either. But I'm just saying that the trail should be designed in such a way that it is continuous and is at a street intersection, not mid-block where someone gets killed when they're leisurely crossing the trail.

We will note that for that's all. Yeah, you know, as we're as we're able to. But like Michaela said, the maps of maps are well, the location of the trail is not the location is not. So that's something that we can have a discussion with them about because there is a bit of open space there in the center that we can talk to them about the topography and such.

Yeah, that's probably not going to work. That's a pretty steep drop off. It's very rocky in that area. So we are kind of fitting the trail in already.

Well, there are bridges.

Not in the current plan for this particular project.

Just saying.

Understood.

All right. It's noted. With those comments, if there isn't any other comments from other commissioners, I'll move approval.

We have a motion. No, we don't have any more comments. Oh, um, there's any public comments related to this one.

Does anybody in the room have any public comment on the consent agenda seven B?

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

I'll move online with anyone online like to speak. I see no hands raised.

All right, thank you. So I guess I'll bring it back. Make a motion that we approve it. I'll second it. Okay, we have a motion and a second. We'll do a voice call. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Okay, any opposed? Abstentions? And we have one absent. So 5-0-0-1. All right, thank you for... bringing that up and we'll move on to item number eight, public hearings. The first one is eight, a circle K Ferrari pavilion, 81 Lincoln Boulevard. I believe we have to be presenting on that.

Good evening commissioners, Thomas Kirkchank associate planner with the CDD department. This project is for a conditional use permit for off-site alcohol sales under a Type 20 beer and wine license, along with a public convenience or necessity determination. This will be a new construction, 3,060 square foot Circle K convenience store and gas station at 81 Lincoln Boulevard. So the project site is located at lot three of the Ferrari Pavilion Commercial Center and highlighted here in red. The development is currently in the process of securing site construction plan and building permit approvals. Applicant is Seven Solutions and the property owner is ARM Properties, LLC. The site is designated community commercial and zoned commercial within the Sun City Lincoln Hills General Development Plan. And this convenience store is set to be open 24 hours, seven days a week. However, the alcohol license regulates what hours of sales. Here's the plan from the staff report attachment two. This shows the approved entitlements site plan here. And the gas station here fronts Lincoln Boulevard. So the Friary Pavilion Commercial Center received entitlement approval in 2023, including a conditional use permit authorizing alcohol sales on the subject parcel. This approval established land use authorization for alcohol sales. However, a separate license from the California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control is required before alcohol may be sold. Circle K applied to the ABC Board for a Type 20 license allowing off-sale beer and wine. Due to the concentration and proximity of existing licensed establishments, the ABC Board initiated a public convenience or necessity or PCN determination process. Pursuant to Lincoln Municipal Code section 18.60.020, a PCN determination also requires approval of a conditional use permit. On June 8th, 2026, the city received applications for this conditional use permit and PCN determination. Approval of the requested conditional use permit and a PCN determination would complete the city's portion of the process required for the alcohol beverage control to consider issuance of this type 20 license. sale of alcohol beverages beyond a bona fide restaurant type 41 license requires this conditional use permit. Similarly, a PCN or a public convenience necessity analysis is required and does, and excuse me, the ABC licensing to ensure it does not significantly contribute to an oversaturation of such licenses. Staff researched the project site history and obtained ABC licensing information for the surrounding area. There are a total of 42 active alcohol licenses within a one mile radius. 25 of those are located within downtown Lincoln and the others are located at the Lincoln Crossing and the Sterling Point shopping centers. The Circle K project site is located approximately 0.31 miles from the nearest place of worship, Foothill Bible Church, 0.29 miles from the nearest park, Sheffield Park, and 0.38 miles from the nearest school, Horizon Charter School. Chief of Police Matt Alves reviewed records from the past five years at or around the project site. The chief stated that there have not been chronic police concerns at this location. Therefore, he has no heightened concerns about the facility's proposed alcohol sales. The project satisfies the required findings for the PCN application. Staff analysis of each finding is provided in the accompanying staff report. The proposed alcohol license is consistent with the site's approved land use entitlements, the Sun City Lincoln Hills General Development Plan, and the revised 12 Bridges Specific Plan, SEIR. Pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15183, no new or more significant environmental impacts are anticipated. Therefore, the project is exempt from further CEQA review. Staff recommends the planning commission conduct a public hearing, consider the information contained in the staff report as testimony of the public and take the following action. Number one, determine the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under section 15183. And two, adopt a resolution approving the conditional use permit for alcohol sales and a determination of public convenience or necessity with project specific and typical conditions of approval included in attachment one of the staff report. This concludes my presentation. Staff and members of the applicant team are available to answer questions you may have.

Thank you, Tom, for that presentation. Do any of my colleagues have any questions or comments at this time? We'll have another opportunity again. Okay. Seeing none, I'll now open to public hearing. As 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. Secretary, do we have any hands raised online or anyone in the chambers that wishes to speak?

I did not receive any cards. Would anyone in line, I mean, in person here in the room would like to speak? I don't see any hands raised. And anyone online would like to speak? There are no handswakes. Okay.

Thank you. So with that, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to my colleagues. Does anyone have any additional comments or questions this time?

If none, I would. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion that we approve this item.

I'll second. All right.

We have a motion and a second. I can do voice call, right? Okay. All right. Roll call. Let's do a voice call. Oh, a roll call. Okay. All right. We have a preference for a roll call. So we'll do a roll call, please.

Commissioner Gilbert.

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson. Yes. Commissioner Jackson. Yes. Commissioner Jerry Johnson. And Pierre Johnson. Yes.

Yes. So let's see. Passes four yes, one no, zero abstentions, and one absent. Perfect. Thank you. All right. We'll move on to item number 8B, Liberty at Lincoln, Phase 1, Village 8. And it looks like we have Michaela who will give us our presentation, please.

Good evening, Commissioners. Michaela Noble, Associate Planner with the Community Development Department. The project we have before you tonight is the Liberty at Lincoln Phase 1 Village 8 project, which I'll be shortening that name throughout the presentation. This presentation is just a summary of the project. More detailed information was provided in your staff report. The applicant, Lewis Plan Communities, is requesting approval for a small lot vesting tentative subdivision map. The proposed project consists of approximately 12 acres within the phase one of the Liberty at Lincoln community, which is located within the village seven specific plan. The areas South of the projects are already under construction and homes are currently being built there to date. The project site is located at the South East corner of the Ferrari ranch road and Chalice Boulevard intersection. And here is the proposed small lot tentative subdivision map, which was included with their staff report as attachment five exhibit C. The map features 110 village medium density residential lots across roughly 11 acres in three linear parkway and major Paseo lots. residential lot sizes range from approximately 2600 square feet to 7200 square feet, the project will be accessible via chalice boulevard right here, as well as anthem drive which comes off of liberty parkway. The project satisfies the city's minimum lot sizes and requirements for the village medium density residential designation. Staff analyzed the proposed entitlement request and determined that it is consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the city's general plan, the Village 7 specific plan, and general development plan, and the city's subdivision ordinance. The project site was analyzed at a project level in the village seven specific plan environmental impact report. And today's development plans are consistent with what was previously analyzed. Therefore, no additional environmental review is required under the California environmental quality act guidelines. The Liberty village eight projects will need to implement all applicable mitigation measures from the village seven EIR, which those were included in the mitigation monitoring plan with the staff report. City staff has prepared draft conditions of approval for the project to ensure orderly and timely implementation of the project. Standard and project specific conditions have been applied. The conditions of approval also include those mitigation measures that I previously referenced and all conditions will be subject to verification of city compliance. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA and adopt a resolution recommending City Council approve the small lot vesting tentative subdivision map for the Liberty at Lincoln Phase 1 Village 8 project. At this point in time, we didn't receive any public comments on the project, and we have the applicant team here tonight to answer any questions as well as myself. Thank you.

All right, thank you, Michaela, for the presentation. So I'll bring it back to the commission. Does anyone have any questions or comments?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have a question with regards to the map, if we can bring it back up, please. One thing I'm concerned about is number one, how close is the nearest park here?

Or let me bring up actually. So we actually have a couple. So we have the park right here, which is in the, can't remember off the top of my head if it's the Village 3 or Village 4 part of the Phase 1 project. So that's just right down the street. You also have the clubhouse here, which has park facilities there that all residents will be able to access, as well as the park right across the street here as well, which that has not been built yet, but plans are in the door for that with the city.

Okay. That was my biggest concern, and I appreciate it. Thank you.

Of course.

Anyone else have any comments, questions? Please, Commissioner Johnson.

I've kind of grown up or grown old with this project, I guess, but I'm impressed with the planning that's gone into it and with the quality of development that's occurring there. One of the things that our general plan requires is that there are be a diversity of housing stock, both size type and income qualifications. So far, I haven't seen those come before the Planning Commission on this project. Is there something in the future that will address that concern?

I'll defer to the developer on that one. We're only speaking at phase one again, village seven has allocated 3,700 units and the phase one map that was previously approved a few years back only considered 535 units. So that's, you got 3,200 units that are left over that have still yet to be developed and yet to be allocated of what those units might be. But Phil Rodriguez can provide some more color to that as well. I'm sure.

Please, yeah, Phil, if you have comments about that.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Phil Rodriguez with the Lewis Group of Companies. I can answer that question directly, Chairman, not Chairman, Commissioner Johnson. We are dipping our toes in the water with greater density, smaller lot product. In the phase one area, we have a pretty good diversity of It was called low density residential, medium density residential. This particular product type, the 50 by 50 lot size is creeping into higher density areas, which will lower the price point for the homes to create more diversity. We're fully expecting that as time goes on in the development that we both, you know, be presenting and developing smaller lots, smaller square footage homes, even further creep into that price point disparity that goes on right now.

Your company has developed large apartment complexes elsewhere. Are you thinking of any of that here?

Oh, yeah. So maybe if someone could help me put the land use plan up and I can see if I can point with either my finger or the mouse,

Oh, that's fantastic.

So directly across the street from the clubhouse, not directly, but just off to the northwest, northeast, that's a future Lewis rental community with a quite different product type that we're proposing than our typical stacked flats or row town homes. We're currently projecting that those would be parent homes creeping into a different density area, higher density. But that would be a privately owned, Lewis would own that, have its own clubhouse, its own traditional amenities that you might see in a typical rental community. So there's a lot that's projected, a lot that I think you know our company well. We appreciate density and we're trying to be as diverse as we can throughout the master plan.

Thanks. And just to add on to that, sorry to switch mics. Um, we previously processed recently the specific plan and general development plan amendments, which did have zoning designation changes where that village medium, high density residential designation was added north of Moore road. Um, and that is intended to provide flexibility to potentially produce medium density products or high density projects. which presumably that top density could be an apartment complex in the future.

All right. Do we have any additional comments or questions? All right. Seeing none, I'll now open to 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. Secretary, do we have any hands raised online or anyone in the chambers that wishes to speak?

I did not receive any cards. Would anyone in the room like to speak? There are no hands raised in the room. Moving to online, would anyone online like to speak? There are no hands raised. No speakers.

Okay. Okay. I'll now close the public hearing and bring it back to my colleagues. Does anyone have any additional comments? All right. So seeing none, if anyone would like to make a motion.

I'll make a motion as stated here in the agenda.

I'll second the motion.

All right, we have a motion and a second. Staying consistent, we'll do a roll call on this one also. Secretary, please, roll call.

Commissioner Jackson.

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson. Yes. Commissioner Jerry Johnson and Chair Eric Johnson.

Yes.

Notating that there are two absence.

yes so uh motion passes four yes zero no zero abstentions and two absence thank you congratulations on that one all right we'll move on to item number nine general business and uh so we have one item a 9a will receive a report of the city of lincoln truck route study by nita please

Thank you, Chairperson Johnson. Give me just a moment and I'll pull this up. Okay, so I do wanna preface this by saying that this is the exact presentation that we gave to council in January of 2026. We haven't updated it because we did this presentation in collaboration with a consultant, Farron Pierce. They are one of the leading consultants in this geographical area regarding transportation, travel, traffic, et cetera. We also have city engineer Vin Kay here to back me up. And with that, I'll go ahead and get started. So some of the information is dated, and Vin and I were talking about it, that we will probably refresh it at some point, but we don't think we're quite ready yet. So when we asked Farron Pierce to take a look at truck travel and truck transportation and just the volume of trucks in town, we wanted them to take a full look at the entire city. And we learned some really interesting and helpful information regarding truck routes and the conditions. And we also talked about the opportunities and options for rerouting the trucks within the city of Lincoln. And even after this presentation, we ended up learning even more information. So we'll provide a little bit of those updates. Kind of to start off with that we have these, you'll see these blue signs, not currently within the city limits, but you'll see them on interstates, the STAA route signs, S-T-A-A. And that usually indicates the truck routes. It helps the truck drivers know what roads they're supposed to be on. There are different colors of the signs. There are different letters and designations of the signs that gives the truck travelers and truck drivers, those that help in opportunity. We needed to differentiate because the thing that everybody says is there's a lot of logging trucks on Lincoln Boulevard. And when are we going to do something about the logging trucks on Lincoln Boulevard? And how come there's so many logging trucks on Lincoln Boulevard? And can't we find another place for the logging trucks to go on Lincoln Boulevard? But we didn't ask them to look at logging trucks. We asked them to look at truck traffic. And so they did take a look at all of the types of double, triple, and quadruple axle vehicles on our roads, including the heavy-duty trucks, such as logging trucks, the local delivery trucks. So perhaps you've seen the Cisco truck delivering to the local restaurants downtown. and then the big tractor trailer trucks. And you don't see those often on Lincoln Boulevard, but they do come through sometimes. Surprisingly, one of the things that we learned is that the city of Lincoln has a lot of designated truck routes designated through the Caltrans. It's an official process. The city doesn't just say you're a truck route, you're not a truck route. That's a process that you have to go through with Caltrans. And we have a lot of those. And We have truck routes that were determined in areas that, besides Lincoln Boulevard, that aren't great, you know, so for example on Joyner Way through Nicholas, that's all residential for the most part, residential area and what would be called surrounded by sensitive receptors such as homes, but a long standing previous route. One of the things that they also determined is just wanted to identify where all the truck route signs are in town. You know, the blue, again, those blue star route signs. One thing that we found out, you'll see a little bit later in the presentation, is that a lot of the traffic was through traffic coming from one end of Lincoln Boulevard to the other. And we were trying to determine why Would somebody get off Highway 65 and come through town and then proceed on through maybe the north side of Rockland or Roseville? And we learned that we had these some blue star routes through town that And we learned that we had a blue star route up above north of town off Wise Boulevard. And while, yes, there's lots of great GPS and mapping, that those things get looped into things like Waze and Google. And so that it was routing trucks through town. We asked them to take a look at total truck traffic by doing some surveys, placing cameras and counters. They did that over a couple days last May. So maybe this, or I'm sorry, May of 25. So maybe May of 27, two years later, is a good opportunity to do a little update because we've made some minor adjustments just to see where we're at. We identified, I think the the perception was that Sierra Pacific would be the majority of the truck traffic with the logging trucks because they're so visible and the gladiator being would be a huge contributor to truck traffic. But what we found, and you can see these numbers are a bit, I have no idea how to do, oh, look at that. You see these numbers are a bit small, but Sierra Pacific is, on these days that we're surveyed, approximately 44% of the truck traffic. That is not as large a number as we thought it was going to be. Gladding, 3% of the truck traffic. Not upset about them.

Can you turn your microphone on too, please? I'm trying to find, I'm trying to see 193 and I guess that is a 193 shield there.

There's 193.

But that's not a truck route?

It is. Oh. 193.

So this doesn't have a green line.

No, this is a truck routes. This is where they place the cameras. So these little, these little things right here. So they put a camera right here at the entrance to McBean. And then they had a camera here where McBean comes into Lincoln Boulevard. That's where they put the counters. If I go back a couple, these are all your truck routes in the heavier green.

And is East Avenue a truck route?

No, well, yeah, this little tiny portion of it, the Virginia Town Road. We asked them to look at truck travel going all directions, you know, both directions. To count the trips that were in the downtown area to we really wanted to see who's going where were people coming in and just again the perception with that SPI was the major contributor. We thought that we would see them all coming in off 193 or coming. south down Lincoln Boulevard and turning into SBI. But this is where we actually learned that a large percentage of the truck travel was through traffic, which just still boggles our minds. So we started to talk about what are the options. And we have learned, since we did this study, and since Ben has done some research, is this particular road, now I'm going to use the pointer all the time, I'm sorry, I'm obsessed. This particular road, McBean Park Drive, it is currently a truck route. And when we started talking with Caltrans about stall signs and removing some stall signs that didn't seem like they were actually really should be there. We learned, been learned, is that when the city took over 193 from Caltrans, we agreed that it would be a truck route in perpetuity, even though it is now surrounded by what would be considered sensitive receptors, such as a park and homes, that there is not a way, we asked them, that there's not a way for us to make it not a truck route. But there are things that you can do to help restrict travel down certain roads. Nothing cheap, but there are things that you can do to kind of help discourage trucks. But the one thing you would have to do is have a place for them to go elsewhere. So we've talked about rerouting, and one of the popular reroutings is through 65 and Wise Road. That's not currently within city limits. That's in the Village 2 slash 3 area. Also, that particular intersection of Wise Road is not currently designed, engineered, or constructed to handle the heavy truck traffic. Because of where it is in relation that the trucks can't actually, big, long trucks can't actually stop there and be out of the, is it the train tracks that are the issue then? They can't be off the train tracks and stop at the stop sign where it is on Wise Roads now. So that would have to be completely reconfigured and redone after it was annexed into the city as part of Village 2 slash 3. And it would have to be rebuilt, because again, it's not built for seven ton trucks. We also talked about possibly shifting the truck traffic. Again, it would have to be a combined project where you do things to Lincoln Boulevard to discourage truck travel, but you could shift them through Nicholas Road. That's a challenge because there's not a way for them to get easily on and off 65. And also, again, we're pushing them from one area of sensitive receptors to another area of sensitive receptors. And then there's the Nelson and 65 interchange that will occur at some point, but not currently soon. And trucks are currently prohibited on Nicholas Road, east of Joyner Parkway. That part is not a truck rep.

I know.

It goes so far and then it stops. I know you're giving me the look. I know. Then there's the most expensive option, and then again, this would be part of the Village 2-3 development, the East Lincoln Bypass, which would be part of building the bridge over by East Avenue and replacing a part of the bridge off of 193. That's your most expensive option. Then we also discussed an interchange down in Moore Road, pushing everybody south a bit. But then, you know, again, people have to, trucks have to get into town. We have delivery trucks that are coming into our businesses downtown, to our grocery stores. We have SPIs deliveries that are coming through. They would still have to come up somehow to get to the places they need to get.

You mentioned pass-through traffic. What percentage is that?

I want to say it was over 30%. Help me out, Ben. Do you remember?

Yeah, I believe it was a little less than 50%. If Sierra Pacific accounts for a little bit or around 50%, most of the other truck traffic just cut through traffic.

yeah we had a very small percentage that was actually people coming and making deliveries and leaving it was mostly through traffic so. Again, we were scratching our heads, why is this happening and what been determined is that there are these there are star route signs on either end of looking boulevard. And also a little bit north of Lincoln that is a star outside kind of almost encouraging trucks to come this way. And so he has been communicating with Caltrans and the county because the road, the signs that we have we found are in county right away, not the city. to possibly have those changed from a blue sign to a white sign and the white sign says yes this is still a truck route but it's not the come this way truck route sign the minor designations so and i'll let ben talk about that but we wanted to try to accomplish that and then give some time for that change to kind of set in before we re-evaluated it so the um

pass through traffic that's primarily going i guess north towards sheridan not necessarily it was going both ways north and south i kind of threw that route yeah that's okay kind of interesting that's kind of bypassing almost like a shortcut yes they're bypassing the shortcut and taking the long way

Yeah, so that is what we found. That was the information that came out of doing that study. Like I said, a lot of it was just a bit of scratch your head of why is this occurring. And there is no cheap solution of any sort other than trying to adjust some signage. And if you wanted to chime in about that.

Yes. Let me give a little update, latest as far as swapping out all these StarRoute blue interstate, which StarRoute is really intended for interstate trucks. You know, the federal government regulates interstate commerce and that's really the intent of a lot of the star signs. And when Fear and Pierce brought to our attention that, hey, there's quite a few of these signs that, you know, that's installed, are we sure that these should be designated star routes? And I did some research and they really shouldn't be. So I gave direction to our senior engineer and he's been working with Public Works and the county. Unfortunately, you know, materials and procurement of signs, believe it or not, has taken several months. Um, and I believe we're going to get the science next week and our public works crews will gradually swap out all the signs. We've already gotten in touch with Lasser County and they agreed to remove and replace the signs that are outside city limits. And we'll reassess next year and see if there's any impact. I think a lot of the cut through trucks coming off 85 are actually coming South Brown. Um, it's, it is a challenge, um, you know, managing truck routes. I would like to look further into, you know, as we, as the city grows to see how we can possibly redesignate some of these truck routes. Um, one of the main challenges with truck routes is that trucks are heavy. If If you look at all the roadways that's been constructed within and beyond the city, as a former county engineer, much of the damage to roadways are actually done by the trucks. And you cannot designate truck routes know wherever you want to even when it makes the most logical sense oftentimes you can only designate truck routes on roads that are structurally capable of supporting trucks like typically uh with trucks it requires a traffic index which is a measure of the strength of the road of at least eight or 10 to support tricks. And most of our residential subdivision roads, you know, only required to be constructed to the traffic index of six or seven parking lots, even lower traffic index of sometimes five or less. That's the challenge we have Lincoln Boulevard, former state highway structurally, it can handle trucks. Likewise with McBean and state route 193. when it was relinquished to the city, the portion that's within our jurisdiction, I reached out to Caltrans. I said, can we eliminate this as a truck route so we don't have trucks coming into the city? And initially they looked into it and they dug into some of the older agreements and they're like, maybe that's a possibility, but you would still have to provide a turnaround at Sierra College Boulevard, right? If you end it there and say you can't, go into Lincoln because it's no longer a truck route. Now you've got to provide a U-turn or some type of truck turnaround or force them to head down Sierra College to Highway 80. So that was not an option. The good news is I think that with a couple of signals coming online, With oak tree lane that signalized intersection, we expect that signal to come online this fall. I think there's still about three months worth of work of construction, as you can see what's happening along McBean Park Drive. The structural section of the roadway that needs to be constructed is fairly significant in terms of depth. Right. So I think within a week or two, the contractor is going to flip traffic to the north side and they'll start work on the south side. And hopefully by this fall in October, we can turn that signal on. And then after that, we actually have another signal that's been approved that will need to be constructed near Stardust Lane, the other portion of Oak Tree Lane. And we hope to have that online by next spring. So McBean Park Drive within city limits will now have two signalized intersections. And hopefully that will slow down traffic. My goal is to reduce speeds along that corridor to 45 and not post 55. So we can allow any V and golf cart access to cross some of these intersections.

Right.

I think that's, that's what we really envision village one and what we want for the general plan. By all means, we have to allow for adequate circulation, but we don't need to have a freeway, you know, that's naming being parked right. And then I think we also working with Placer County, they are, in fact, I'm coordinating with the Deputy Public Works Director to fund the signal, to signalize the intersection of Sierra College Boulevard at McBean and Sierra College Boulevard at 12 Bridges. If they are successful with their board approval in September, they can begin design and hopefully get construction started next summer on Sierra college Boulevard, adding two more signals over there. So I see the quarter sort of changing to accommodate a lot of the traffic. The challenge we have with old Lincoln Boulevard, it used to be a state highway before we construct a bypass, right? The intent of the bypass is to get all the commuter traffic and all the truck traffic off of old Lincoln Boulevard. But we do have Sierra Pacific located right there. There's no easy way to get to, you know, Sierra Pacific Industries. And until Wise Road is improved and they're able to build an interchange off of State Route 65, that would be the ideal longer term solution. I think we just, I'm gonna try to do my best to manage traffic along Lincoln Boulevard. It is a challenge because you have a high school there. You're trying to allow for throughput and synchronize and coordinate the signals, allow traffic to flow through. Yet you have to try to allow pedestrians to cross Lincoln Boulevard safely, right? But if you make it too free-flowing, that's not good for the businesses. But if you have, you know, everything grinds up, grinding a hole to allow for, you know, to prioritize pedestrians, then certain, you may reduce people wanting to come to downtown. So it's an ongoing balancing act. where we try to allow for movement and, you know, accommodate not just our residents, but patrons to our businesses in downtown Lincoln, right? And then still support, you know, one of our long-term businesses like Ladding McBean or Sierra Pacific Industries. You know, we can't just cut off truck access to those businesses, right? So it's an ongoing challenge, and we're working on it.

Yeah, thanks, Ben and Nina, for the information. I find it kind of fascinating and interesting, you know, just how things are flowing. I did have a question, kind of just a thought. With all the trucks flowing through, kind of going through, you know, a higher number than we thought, this day and age with, you know, Google Maps and all those other devices that kind of route people different ways. Um, you know, I know we have the stall signs and all that. Um, I'm curious how many of the truck drivers are still navigating that way, like just by looking at signs or is it kind of driven more by these, I guess, apps or routes, you know, that kind of find, Hey, here's the fastest way to go through load in truck routes and all that stuff.

Well, we don't know. I can tell you how Nita navigates everywhere. And me. You know, I use various apps, right, whether it's Google or Waze. But what I find on those apps is that other drivers participate in them as well, right? So, for example, I had to go to Roseville this afternoon. I took industrial because I heard that through Facebook that Roseville was closed for an accident. And so I took industrial and as i'm driving along industrial the APP that I was using said about the object on the road 250 feet ahead that someone on the road for me to. Taking the time while they were driving obviously or not, because you know that would be unsafe to indicate on APP that there was an object on the road, so some of these signs that occur. or that are posted by the sign get noticed on the apps by users, as well as just the AI of the apps themselves. And that gets recorded into the apps and just becomes a thing.

Okay. Yeah, I was just curious if that played into it somehow.

I can add to that a little bit on my personal experience. When I used to work in West Sacramento, where I was for over 20 years, we have quite a few truck routes with the port and much of the industrial areas. It did become an enforcement issue. We even reach out to Google and Waze and try to get them to update their information. And unfortunately, some of the truck drivers do utilize the apps and illegally leave truck routes and cut through residential parkways. And it became an enforcement issue. Now, the thing to keep in mind is many of the truck route signs are intended to for enforcement, for law enforcement to use. So if a commercial truck driver wanders off the truck route, they can be cited. And then there are certain roads where trucks are prohibited. I'm not a big fan of over signage. Sometimes you have too many signs It's overkill and no one pays attention. And sometimes having fewer signs actually are more effective, right? To prohibit truck routes, you typically need a sign near the beginning of the segment, another sign at the end of the segment. That way, if a truck driver wanders off, see there's no truck prohibited sign. And then as they leave that segment, there's a second one. So they can't say, oh, I missed that one. He did miss the second one, right? So next time you go through that corridor, there's two signs on that segment. But typically with the residential roads, they're not gonna wander into some of the smaller streets because the trucks also need a big curvy turn in order to make especially right turns. So they typically do not wander into residential areas. And then you know around railroad tracks there you know that's why you get warning, even with ways and Google maps when you near tracks they don't want to be stranded near railroad tracks where. There could be a conflict with oncoming trains but yeah that could be a challenge in the future, and you know with technology. You know, truck drivers are humans too. One of the things that I am aware of with the trucking industry is there isn't enough rest stops on the interstate. Sometimes they're wandering into cities. And I think sometimes, you know, like what we have, especially when Big Boy came along, the giant locomotive, I think sometimes trucks will park adjacent to railroad tracks where there's long stretches where they may not be some side frictions or intersections. That's why sometimes you don't want your roads too wide and truck drivers can find a spot where they can park and sleep for the night.

Okay.

Yeah.

Well, thanks for that report. Very informative.

Um, anyone else have any other questions, comments on this item?

Okay. All right. Well, thank you again for that. Um, and I'll just note item nine B receiver report on the city of Lincoln open space policy updates has been pulled from this agenda and postponed. So that takes us to item number 10 informational items from staff, uh, director's reports. The staff have any item informational items for us.

Don't believe staff over there has any other additional items, the only thing I would say. You have their project tracker that we're happy to respond to any questions that you may have on that I did just want to give you also a heads up that we have been working on the village one ifp the infrastructure financing plan. Honestly, I think, for a decade in the city and just no joke and but. We're getting there. And my goal that I'm currently driving everyone into the ground with is that we will have a draft to the governing bodies before the end of the calendar year for your consideration and approval. In fact, we hope to have a draft for internal review from the consultant before the end of this month. So it's coming. I'll be very glad when it's done.

excellent all right thanks for those updates uh we'll move on to item number 11 commissioner comments do any of my fellow commissioners have any comments all right well seeing none we're now adjourned