Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Calling to order the regular meeting of the city of Manteca Planning Commission, Thursday, 01/15/2026 at 6PM.

Commissioners Mendoza, Jimenez, Paslak, vice chair Coleman, and chair Fiore.

We're all here.

We're all here. We're good? Alright. Let's move on to flag salute. Mister Mendoza, would you lead us?

Great. That leads us to agenda review and supplemental reports. Madam secretary, there any changes to the agenda or the supplemental reports?

Chair Fiori, there are no changes to the agenda, and there were no supplemental items received for items on tonight's meeting.

Okay. I will now then open, public comment. This portion of the agenda is reserved for persons desiring to address the commission on any matter, not on the agenda but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. Speakers are limited to three minutes, consistent with city policy regarding public comment and Brown Act meetings. Prior to public comment, the commission by motion and vote may extend or shorten the length of public comment consistent with city policy regarding public comment and Brown Act meetings.

The law does not permit commission action or extended discussion on any item not on the agenda. If commission action is requested, the matter can be placed on a subsequent agenda subject to commission consensus. Madam secretary, are there any public comments via Zoom or in the audience for items not on the agenda?

We receive no early submission for public comment. Chair, at this time, you may call for public comment via Zoom webinar or in person for items not on the agenda. Public comments can be made on zoom webinar by using the raise your hand feature or by pressing 9 on the line.

Thank you. Is there anyone in the room who would like to address the commission on an item not on the agenda? Seeing none, will close public comment.

At this time, we ask the members of the Planning Commission to disclose any communications they have had with project applicants or members of the public regarding items on this evening's agenda?

None. None for the chair?

None. None. Great.

And that leads us to the consent agenda.

Matters listed under consent are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion and one vote. There will be no separate discussion of these matters. If discussion is desired, a member of the audience or commission member may request an item be removed from consent and will be considered separately.

Thank you. Are there any public requests to pull the items? Item. Do any of the commissioners wish to push or pull either one of the items No. On the minutes? Okay. I ask counsel, can we take both these items as a whole under consent? Okay. Alright. I would like to take, may may I have a motion and a second on both the items in consent?

For approval.

Thank you.

Second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Aye. Madam

chair, one more time. Motion and a second by who?

Motion by commissioner Coleman. No. Commissioner Jimenez. And second by, commissioner Coleman.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you. Okay. Motion passes.

A public hearing to consider a resolution approving a one year extension for site plan and design review s PCDash21Dash99 and minor use permit UPNDash21Dash100 for the Airport Plaza project located at 2060 West Lathrop Road, a p N20202014 assistant planner Allison Diaz will be presenting this item

good evening madam chair and members of the commission my name is Allison Diaz assistant planner and tonight I'm presenting an extension request for the approved Airport Plaza site plan and design review and minor use permit project the project is located at 2060 West Lathrop Road at the southeast corner of the North Airport Way and West Lathrop Road and is just over three acres. This project is requesting a one year extension for approved entitlements SPC 2199 and UPN 2100 for commercial development that includes restaurants and retail storefronts. The project site is bound by Lathrop Road an existing low density County residential to the North single family residential to the East and South and by Airport Way an existing low density County residential to the West. The zoning designation is neighborhood commercial and the general plan designation is commercial which is consistent with the previous general plan designation of neighborhood commercial. The approved uses have been deemed compatible with the site allowing for convenience stores restaurants and retail uses which are allowed by right and gas stations car washes and drive through uses allow with a minor use permit.

This is the approved site plan for the project the site development includes a total of four buildings and one fuel canopy these are the approved facades for the extra mile convenience store and the attached car wash The facade styles are contemporary with industrial inspired details. These are the facades for the drive thru quick serve restaurant. These are the facades for the retail and restaurant building. These are the facades for the additional restaurant building and this is the architectural design for the Chevron fuel canopy. A courtyard with a relaxing water feature will be located between the two restaurant uses and this space will act as an outdoor room with tables and seating.

Additionally a landscape plan with a robust tree canopy will be installed on-site. Project entitlements were originally approved 12/06/2023. They are consistent with the general plan and zoning, meet the required site plan and design review, minor use permit, drive through findings and outdoor seating findings, is consistent with the climate action plan and the CEQA initial study and mitigated negative declaration were filed with the state clearinghouse. At this time, there are no proposed changes to the scope of the project or the plans. Staff recommends the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and approve a one year extension for site plan and design review SPC 2199 in minor use permit UPN 21100 for the Airport Plaza project located at 2060 West Lathrop Road that concludes this presentation staff and the applicant are available to answer any questions you may have thank you

thank you at this time do any of the commissioners have any clarifying questions for staff? Questions for the applicant?

Just have one question for the applicant. This is an extension for another additional year. Is there a kind of projected development timeline in place at this point for this project?

Good evening, commissioners. I am Kurt Wagonich. I'm the architect on the project. To answer your question, we wanna be under construction as soon as we can. We've had little setback in terms of, working with, Public Works on the amount of street improvements that are possible at this intersection.

It's a sort of a very tricky intersection where we've got some areas, in the county, and some in Manteca and some that are Three of the areas are not developed yet. And so it's been a mixture of ideas going back and forth on how to, handle the street widening and and stuff like that, so on striping. So that's what's held up the project. So we fully intend to, move forward at this point. We have all the drawings done, and, we're in the billing department.

So we wanna move forward as soon as possible.

Thank you. Can can you refresh my memory? What are the operating hours for this?

The top of my head, I'm thinking it's twenty four seven.

Yeah. Yeah.

The gas station will be twenty four seven, and the stand alone QSR building will be up to that tenant. But so that that may close earlier.

Okay. Thank you very much. Any other questions?

I have a question. Is the entire building structure gonna be built at one time, or is it gonna be phased?

It's gonna have two phases for it. We're gonna build the front half, the the gas station and the QSR. And then, after that gets built, then we'll proceed with the other one as soon as we have, the tenants lined up for that.

Thank you.

Further questions? Alright. Thank you. Appreciate it. At this point, I'm gonna open the public hearing. Are there any public comments on the Zoom, comment cards, or persons present, madam secretary?

Chair, there is no hands raised in Zoom, and I have received no comment cards.

Thank you. Anyone in the audience? Seeing none. Okay. Let's close public hearing. Alright. May I have a motion and a second,

please?

Just Just a couple more questions before we make a motion for Ms. Diaz. In the presentation, there were no proposed changes to the project scope or plans. Are there any changes to the original conditions of approval from the project?

The only changes for the conditions of approval were the phasing which the development of phase two shall occur no later than one year from the final of phase one.

Okay. Very good. Thank you.

You're welcome.

I have a question.

You

know when I think this was on the agenda like ten months ago How long ago did it come to to the planning commission?

This one came two years ago in '23. It was approved. And

then it went to the city council. Correct?

Commissioner Mendoza, I believe you may be referring to a different project.

Well, no, because I remember this project because I voted against it. And the reason I voted against it because of the way they were treating the medians. And in the presentation at the Planning Commission, instead of a raised median, they were going to paint it. And my feeling was that paint's not going to do it. And from what I understand, I think the board at the board meet at the city council meeting, that got changed so then there was a raised median on Airport Way.

So I think we can certainly take a look at that. But to your point, whatever was approved by city council is what we would be proposing for extension this evening. So if that was included as part of the, approval of city council, that would be part of this extension.

Okay. Thank you.

Any other questions? Alright. Requesting a motion and a second.

I motion to approve. I need to read something here motion to approve a resolution for a one year extension for site plan and design review SPC 20 199 and minor use permit UPN21Dash100 for the airport plaza project located on 2060 West Leithrop Road, A P N 200202 Dash 020 Dash 14.

I'll second.

We have a motion and a second. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Motion passes. Thank you.

Discussion items e one, a Planning Commission resolution making a general plan conformance determination regarding a proposed right of way vacation consistent with California streets and highways code section eight thousand three and thirteen and California government code section 5,402 a for portions of Vino Street and Hewen Street between Spumante Lane and Frisante Lane and finding this action exempt from further environmental review pursuant to section one five zero six one b three of the CEQA guideline. Deputy director Jesus Orozco will be presenting this item.

Good evening commissioners to the chair. Before you is an administrative report requesting general plan conformity for the disposition of city owned property. This is not an entitlement. Therefore, it's not subject to a public hearing. Before you really is a a segment of of land that will be dedicated back to for a private owner.

And I'd like to note just for the record that there's a discrepancy with one of the easements. It should not be 30 feet. It should be 50 feet for the entire width of the site. What the commission will be doing tonight is, in essence, making a finding and termination that the use of this property will be in conformance with allowed or consistent with the general plan. And so you're not essentially approving any easements or anything of that nature.

Now hand it over to Mr. Selling for any additional comments.

Thank you. Excuse me, commissioners. Good evening through the chair. So basically some background on this. These maps for Units 4 And 8 Of Villa Cicino were presented to the city at different times and essentially through staff oversight just missed it on the plans that they were proposing to dedicate it as right of way rather than an easement.

And so once the project was under construction this was caught and that's the reason we're here tonight. So in going through the process we understand that the Planning Commission must make a finding for conformance with the general plan before we could bring this to the council for their consideration to abandon or vacate the right of way and retain the respective easements. So and we're here to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. Any of the commissioners have any clarifying questions for staff at this time?

Can you explain what's so it was going to be a right of way like a path or was it going to be an actual road going through there?

So when it was on the maps, I believe it was it was shown as a right of way but it was always intended for a pedestrian path and and a landscaping area.

That's what it's gonna be now? Correct. Just the it's gonna be a right away instead of a

So yeah. What would what would happen, know, if pending obviously your your action tonight as well as council's would be that the underlying ownership would revert to the respective lots. There are technically four lots that would be affected by this vacation. The three that would actually have access off of this easement. And then there's a little tiny corner on the west end that would be relinquished back to that lot as well.

So what would happen essentially is the bottom 20 feet or so would be retained as both an access for the respective parcels and an emergency vehicle access. There would be bollards placed at the west boundary I should say of Lot 536 to prevent through vehicular access from you know general public or anyone and then that northern 30 feet would be retained as an easement for the landscaping and pedestrian access. The entire 50 foot width meaning the 30 feet for the landscaping pedestrian access and then the southern 20 feet for the emergency vehicle access would be retained as an easement for public utilities. So there are water and sewer lines within this area. So we want to retain that easement for those for future maintenance.

Commissioner? Mike. So the actual driveway to the properties will be the responsibility for maintenance by the people that own those homes.

Correct. Correct. And I would point out that this 20 feet emergency vehicle access would essentially be like a fire Lane. They would not be able to park their cars in there. Their their actual driveway as you know commissioner Mendoza touched on would be outside that 20 foot emergency vehicle access easement.

So how does how does that get noted on somebody's deed when they go in there and buy this property so that twenty years from now, they're not coming back to the city and say, this concrete's busted up, and I need you to come and fix it. How does that get prevented?

Yeah. I would would have to get confirmation of this. My speculation would be that when they're you know, that that property owner is essentially signing all their paperwork to purchase the property that it's going to be disclosed there that their property actually extends the full width of this 50 feet however that these easements are retained there and it is their maintenance responsibility for the essentially not the 30 feet northern 30 feet but that southern 20 feet.

Okay is this are the bulbs built now or not? They're not at that point yet?

They are if if you went out there. When you when you say bulbs, I I think you're talking about the bollards or

the No. No. No. The the streets, the bulbs. You know how they

Yes. They are. In. They are. It's constructed. So

and I like the bollards. Otherwise, it will be a street if you don't put them in there.

Correct.

But I think that the the egress in there because there's gonna be an egress on each end because from what I understand, the person on the east has access all by himself. Correct. So the entrance to there has got to be such that someone doesn't think it's an extension of a street.

Correct. And if you were to go out there, I don't I did print out kind of an aerial of what it looks like and I can pass it down the dais for the commissioners to take a look at but it is concrete so it's there is a differentiation in the material It's not asphalt like a typical public street. So it's concrete, it's narrower. So there is some physical attributes to it that would not present itself. I think at least from the east because the bollards are essentially just for that one parcel that you know a driver would essentially see those as you know a physical barrier that it's not a through roadway.

From the West because it does extend deeper because of the two lots there may be a little bit more challenge in that regard. If we have to we may need to consider you know maybe some type of signage or something like that, you know, private access only or something to that effect.

On this picture, Lots 306 And 307 have a fence. I'm assuming a property fence between this 50 foot easement. And you might wanna give this back to him.

I'm gonna well, yeah, I've got two different exhibits by lot numbers, and I think they're a little bit different.

552 and 537.

552.

It's 306 and 307 on that picture.

And then the picture you're looking at. Yeah.

552. I'm not seeing 552 on my exhibit.

So Well, I speak to your staff report? You have Let's

go back to that. I

guess the question is the two properties to the north of this easement, there's gonna be a fence line.

On the north. I'm sorry. Yes. Okay.

Gonna be a fence line separating that from the 50 foot easement.

Correct. Correct.

Will there be a fence between the 20 foot easement and the meandering path and the landscaping?

No. My understanding is no. Okay.

That, you know I don't know. I mean, thinking I mean, you would think everybody's good people and everything else, but, you know, that could become a problem if, you know, there's stuff happening back there and those three people that front that don't like it.

Mhmm. Mhmm.

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah, think and it may be something that we have to observe over time, but my expectation would be that as those homes are occupied, they're going to have clear view of anybody you know out in that area and so I would think that that would be a deterrent. If you put a fence now it kind of becomes a little more secluded.

All right. Thank you, Mike.

So what's currently there? That's going be torn out? No. This

will stay,

what you

see. So three properties to the south, that's going to be their frontage? Correct.

Their driveways will essentially butt into the concrete that you see. Yeah, that emergency vehicle access lane.

Question or comment?

The 20 foot EVA easement for the fire department, does that meet fire department standards for Manteca Fire?

That's my understanding, yes.

Because it looks like the primary entrance point, at least from airport, is Huynh Street. And if you're going north in airport, you actually have to make a U-turn. There's no left turn, it looks like, from airport onto Huynh's, to my knowledge. You have to go up to the next intersection to make a U-turn.

That's my understanding, too. Yes, correct.

And you drive straight down Huens, you run into this path, this kind of corner, and it forces you to the right. And I imagine that's going to be the primary emergency entrance point for this area as well. Because from the West Correct. There's not really access to this area. Okay. Yeah. So it's a one entrance.

From Swanson, there would be to the south. But yeah.

And is this Fire District three, four,

or two? I'm not sure what Fire District it is.

Okay. And then I noticed there's an adjacent SSGID easement. Correct. Has that been vetted through them and any concerns expressed?

Correct. No, it has been vetted through them.

Yeah. And then just to confirm two more questions, sorry. For confirm for the record, we're only approving the general plan conformance tonight. We're not approving any design upgrades, features, changes. All that will be submitted separately if there are any developments.

Correct. Just the general plan conformance.

Okay. And then was there or is there any outreach for the obviously, new neighborhood, new development, but there are residents already living in this neighborhood. Was there any outreach related to this to them? Are there any concerns expressed?

Not to the it would likely only be the couple of houses to the north. We did not do any outreach to them. We've simply been working with the developer.

Okay. And then sorry. One more. That entire south side of this, all the lots are undeveloped still.

Correct. That was part of our arrangement with the developer.

Okay. I think that's all I have right now. Thank you. Yeah. Additional

questions for the staff? Well, kudos to whoever found the mistake or the oversight. Alright. At this point, I'll open up for public hearing. Madam secretary, are there any public comments on Zoom, comment cards, in person?

We received no early or sorry. We received no, nobody on Zoom and no hands.

Anyone in the audience wanna make a comment on this agenda item? Alright. Seeing none, I'll close public hearing. Oh. Madam.

Yeah. So we can hear what you had to say.

Hi. My name is Wayne Ledkos. First time I've ever been to one of these. Kind of cool.

Welcome.

I looked it up on Google. It's an interesting lot. It's an old picture, but, glad you guys are doing stuff like this. It's

Thank the city.

I'm so I find this very interesting.

Oh, excellent. It could be problematic in the future, if we didn't kinda clean this up.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments? Alright. Let's close public hearing then. Okay. We have no other applicant, no comment here. So I would like to request a motion and a second. Don't be shy. Alright.

Okay. I'll make a motion to approve make a general plan conformance determination regarding a proposed right of way vacation from consistent with California streets and highways code section 8,313 and California government code section 65,402 A for portions of Vino Street and Hewitt Street between Spumonte Lane and Verzante Lane and finding this action exempt from further environmental review pursuant to section one five zero six one b three of the CEQA guideline.

I'll second.

All right. All in favor say aye.

Aye. No

opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. That leads us to our last item for the day, e two.

E two, appointment of Planning Commission chair, vice chair, and secretary for the 2026 calendar year. Deputy director Jesus Orozco is available for any questions.

Okay.

Well, I think the time has come. I am going to call for a separate nomination and a vote for the chair and the vice chair. And at this point, I would like to take the privilege of nominating, Commissioner Coleman for the chair of 2026. So may I have a motion and a second? I made the motion, didn't I? Sorry.

I'll second.

Thank you. All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Motion passes. Congratulations.

Thank you, madam chair. And on the topic of vice chair, I would like to nominate commissioner Tanisha Jimenez for vice chair for 2026.

And I will second. So all in favor, aye.

Aye.

Aye. All opposed? Congratulations.

Madam chair, if you do the honors of, considering our development services director as the secretary for this commission, duties will eventually be delegated. I can get a motion in a second.

Cool. And this would mean Jessica at the moment? Do we have a

It'll essentially thinking, madam chair, it'll essentially mean me, and then I will delegate to Jessica, yes, but Okay. Formality of it.

I got it. Well, I call for a motion and a second to appoint the development director as the secretary. All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

I'm sorry. I need a second, don't I? I keep doing that. Thank you.

Kusho was looking for the mic.

Wrapped my head around it. Alright. All right. May I let's see. We have a motion and a second. So all in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Motion passes.

Second.

Beslak. Commissioner Beslak. I'm trying to keep my thirty minutes, guys.

You were so close.

I know. I was so close. Thank you. All right. Leaves us in staff comments.

Congratulations, Chair Coleman. It's gonna take a little bit of time getting used to it. And vice chair Jimenez. Commissioners Fiora, thank you for your wonderful and and great chairing this past year. For staff updates, I just wanna remind everyone this Monday upcoming Monday is a holiday.

So enjoy your three day, your four day weekend. As of now, it looks like there will be a meeting the second Monday or I'm sorry, the second meeting of February tentatively. And then I'd like to also acknowledge that our clerk or secretary this evening is today is her birthday.

Congratulations. Happy birthday.

Madam chair, I just also wanna piggyback on Jesus' comments and just thank you for your leadership over the past year, all of the time that you've poured in in leading the commission. We truly do appreciate that. We do look forward also to incoming commissioner Coleman and vice chair Jimenez over the next year. So, again, thank all of the commission for for the time and the energy that you put in to to the community. But tonight, yeah, I do wanna specifically recognize commissioner Coleman and Jimenez for for the their election in their position. So thank you.

Please just do commissioner comments. Anyone wanna go?

I'd just like to say thank you to Chair Fiore for setting a good example for all of us. I mean, for myself and, you know, a couple of us, we're totally new to this. And, your leadership in showing us what it could look like really meant a lot over the last year.

We didn't scare you away. So Yeah. We now have vice chair. Excellent. Any other comments from

the I have a I have a comment. You know, I've been doing this for, I don't know, four years. Time flies when you're having fun. And you know, one of the main things that I look at when I look at a project along with everything we have to do, I look at the safety features of it and I bring them up. So this over the holidays, read an article that really disturbed me. I don't know if some of you probably seen it because it was published in the Manteca Bulletin. It was actually put out by Cal Matters. That's who actually wrote the article. Headline is forty thousand people died on California roads. State leaders looked away.

And if you read the article, basically what happened was the California State Senate Committee met and the director of Caltrans, Tony Tavares, went up and made a presentation identifying that deaths on roadways have gone up sixty percent since 2010. Nobody asked him a question. Nobody asked him what he was doing, how they were gonna try to fix this. They were more worried about planning for the two twenty twenty eight Olympics in in Los Angeles. You know, to me, that bothers me because these people are elected officials, and if you ask them what their number one priority is, it would be safety.

So how do you how do you not bring up questions on what we're doing? And the 60%, it's just not Tony Tavares is the Caltrans director, but he was referencing the whole state, county roads, city streets, and state high ways. So that really you know, it made me think about, you know, is safety our number one priority? But then I think about Manteca. What has Manteca done, you know, to keep us safe here in our city limits?

And I know that they've established a committee of police people, fire people, planners, engineers, and normal people, just normal citizens that are in our safety committee that look at problems throughout the city, and they try to resolve them. See, that's looking forward. That's trying to solve the problem before it happens. So why in our why isn't our state people doing this? So that again, it bothers me. You know, and then there's a lot of you know, I travel around all over this county, I look at different cities. And if I see something, I give them a call. And I tell them, hey. You got a problem here. You gotta go do this and that.

And most of them do it. There's one agency that didn't do it. And that bothered me too. So I'm dealing with that in terms of you know, because, again, it's about safety, not just mine, everybody's. And it bothers me, and, hopefully, you know, the state looks at looks at things a little differently, and we elect the right people. So thank you.

You make excellent points. And I know that Dina Eltawansi is the new director of Caltrans, and I'm sure she's gonna, be taking something of that. I certainly hope that you're on our safety committee. Well, if no one else has comments, I would like to say thank you for the honor and privilege of sitting as chair for this last year. It was, it was a little stressful in the beginning, but, with the staff's help, it was a breeze later on. And we didn't meet a lot of times, but we got the work done at the city. And I appreciate all the commissioners and, as always, the staff for being so professional. So thank you with that, and I'll close this meeting.

Cool. Good point.

If you're