Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I won. I won surrender. I'm saying I won. Bragging rights for me. Yes.

Alright.

Alright. We'll call the meeting to order at 05:30. Will the planning commission clerk please call the roll?

Commissioner Deborah Polly?

Here.

Commissioner Frechette?

Here.

Commissioner Hewn?

Here.

Chair Mauldin? Here. Commissioner Raymond? Here. Commissioner Stoss? Here. And vice chair Stevenson?

Here. Okay. Clerk, would you please announce the meeting video recording?

Tonight's meeting will be recorded via Zoom and can be viewed on the city's website within forty eight hours of adjournment of this meeting.

And director Huehn commissioner Huehn, I'm sorry, would you like to lead us in the pledge? Thank you, commissioner Yoon. Members of the public wishing to address the planning commission for any matter not on the agenda may do so at this time by competing and submitting a speaker card to the planning commission clerk. For items on the agenda, speakers will be called by the chair at the point on the agenda when the item will be heard. Speakers are encouraged to keep comments to three minutes or less and to state name and community of residents.

Under the provisions of the California government code, the planning commission is prohibited from discussing or taking immediate action on any item not in the agenda unless it can be demonstrated to be an emergency nature or the need to take immediate action arose after the posting of the agenda. Will the planning clerk please announce public comment?

I have no speaker cards for our general public comment period.

We'll close the public comment period then And, consent calendar. Consent calendar items consist of matters deemed routine and noncontroversial by staff Unless a member of the planning commission wishes to pull an item for individual consideration, all items will be approved by one motion. Are there any items the planning commission wishes to pull from the consent calendar? Clerk, is there any public comment related to the consent calendar?

I have no speaker cards for our consent calendar.

Okay. We'll go ahead and close the public comment, period. Now may I have a motion to approve the consent calendar? So moved.

Second.

It's been properly moved by commissioner Fichette and seconded by commissioner Raymond.

Planning commission clerk, would you please call the roll?

Yes. Commissioner Deborah Polly? Yes. Commissioner Forschette? Aye. Commissioner Hoon? Aye. Chair Malden? Yes. Commissioner Raymond? Aye. Commissioner Stoss? Yes. And chair Stevenson?

Aye.

Motion passes with a seven o vote.

Okay. Is there any excuse me. Is there any consent public hearing items?

There are no consent public hearing items tonight.

We'll move on to section six. Clerk, would you please announce 6.1?

Yes. Item 6.1, Stone Creek quick quack car wash, conditional use permit, and minor design review, project number PLNDDash0525Dash0129 located at 3384 Zinfandel Drive, exempt pursuant to section one five three three two infill development projects of the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA guidelines, consideration of adoption of findings of denial and denial, alternatively consideration of adoptions of findings of approval and approval.

Thank you, Kelly. Alright. So good evening, chair and commissioners. Chance Windley Ross with the city's planning division. I'm here to present the Stone Creek quick quack car wash, minor design review, and conditional use permit tonight. Moving right along. I just wanted to take a minute to briefly walk through the process for tonight's item. Staff will start with a short presentation to provide context and summarize why the item is back before you this evening. The applicant will then have an opportunity to provide an, any additional information. After that, the planning commission will open the public hearing to receive public comment followed by commissioner questions and discussion.

At that point, the commission would, consider a motion to adopt the findings for denial. If that motion does not pass, the commission does have the option to make an alternative motion, which could include approval of the project consistent with the previous staff recommendation from February 25.

Okay. Chance, I have a point of order, and we're probably gonna need our attorney to weigh in on this because I don't understand this process. We voted no on this. Tie vote under the law is a no vote. And it seems like somehow we're using a backdoor to reopen this discussion all over again and rehear and reevaluate things. I'm very confused about this. I'm very concerned that this doesn't meet legal mustard, and I'm not at all happy about the way this has been handled to this point.

Thank you, commissioner. Palmer, if you could please chime in.

Yes. I can address that. So at the first meeting that this was heard, it was agendized with a staff recommendation for approval. The motion to approve the item did not receive enough votes to pass, and commission directed staff to come back with findings of denial on the basis that it would be more legal defensible to opt findings rather than leave the item sort of hanging per se after an unsuccessful motion to approve. So at at this point in time, we've come back with findings of denial, and we've included the former findings for the information of of the commission as the full commission was not present at the first meeting.

It's also been agendized so that there is the ability to make the motion to deny or a motion to approve in order to have final resolution on this item during this meeting.

Okay. I again, I am very dubious about the way this has been handled. I just I haven't seen when city council has had these issues before than before and has denied. There's never been a a second meeting to adopt, you know, the findings or anything like that. That was a staff that recommended to us that actually advised us that we had to adopt findings.

And I've never seen that done before, and I've gone back and looked. And I have don't see a record of us doing that in the past. So I'm just I'm very frustrated with the process because I don't believe that there's been a lot of transparency with the commission in terms of how this has proceeded and been and, frankly, I there's been points where I felt somewhat manipulated on this issue, to be blunt and honest.

If if I can chime in again there. When adopting a conditional use permit, you do need findings one way or another. So findings of approval or findings of denial. And because there were no findings of denial on the first meeting, it would be procedurally correct to come back with to adopt those findings of denial. Otherwise, it may be susceptible to lethal challenge.

Well, I guess we're moving forward. I mean, there's I can sit sit here and ask questions all night, but I don't know that that's constructive unless you have, you know, any other light you wanna shed on the process.

Nothing further to add.

Okay. Thank you, Palmer.

I'll, yeah. I'll just I'll continue on with the presentation. So the, purpose of tonight is to follow-up to the February 25 plating commission meeting, which we discussed. We heard the full staffer, presentation at that meeting, took public comment, and discussed the project. A motion to approve the project was made but ultimately did not pass because it did not have enough votes.

At the conclusion of that discussion, the commission directed staff to come back with findings for denial. So the purpose of tonight's item is to present those findings for your consideration and allow the commission to take action on the project. And just to briefly recap the last meeting, the commission held a public hearing, received the staff report and presentation, and heard from both the applicant and members of the public. After discussion, there was a motion to approve the project, but it did not receive enough votes to pass. During deliberation, commissioners shared several concerns related to the project, which ultimately led to the direction for staff to return with denial findings.

During that discussion, a few key concerns came up that I just wanted to summarize at a high level here, including concerns about how this type of use fits, within the surrounding neighborhood, particularly given the proximity to residential uses. There are also concerns about increased vehicle activity within the shopping center and how that might interact with pedestrians. And overall, there was a discussion about whether an auto oriented use like a car wash is the right fit for this specific location within the shopping center. I do just want to, for the the benefit of this meeting and the public's benefit, just briefly reorient everyone to the project. The site is located on a 1.3 acre vacant commercial pad within the Stone Creek Village Shopping Center and consists of a 3,300 square foot, car wash building with a 108 foot wash tunnel and two vehicle queuing lanes.

The site also includes two vacuum canopy structures with 16 vacuum stations along with, three employee parking spaces, a trash enclosure, mechanical equipment areas, and landscaping. As discussed previously, the site was originally conceptualized as a gas station as part of the original Stone Creek Village commercial center. Because a car wash is classified as a conditionally permitted use within the applicable 2003 Sacramento County zoning code, the proposal requires the approval of a minor design review and a conditional use permit. Taking a look at the site plan very quickly, the slide here shows proposed layout of the project, and you can see the access is taken from the existing internal drive aisle. So, to reiterate, there are no new driveways proposed from the public right of way.

The car wash building is located toward the north side of the site with the queuing lanes wrapping around the, east and north edges. After going through the wash, vehicles move to the vacuum area and then exit back to the same internal drive aisle. Taking a look here at the, building elevations again, the design is, consistent with the overall look of the shopping center with similar materials to the other existing buildings. The applicant has also incorporated architectural features that help to break up the building's facade and give it a, I guess, more of a a retail look. So Steph worked with the applicant to tone down the corporate colors as well so that the color scheme fits better with the rest of the the development.

Here are just a few of the project renderings that were provided by the developer. In the left top left corner. You see view from Barry Hollow Drive, top right view from Zinfandel Drive, and then in the bottom view from the new Stone Creek Apartments. So tonight, the commission is being asked to consider the attached resolution that includes making a determination under CEQA, section fifteen three three two for infill development projects, and then taking action on the conditional use permit and minor design review applications. This action is based on the direction that was provided by the commission on February 25.

And with that, staff recommends that the planning commission consider making a motion to determine the project exempt per CEQA fifteen three three two, and adopt the resolution denying the conditional use permit and minor design review for the Stone Creek Quick Quack car wash. I will mention again that the applicant is here, and they would like to give a short presentation, fill in some additional information.

Alright. Thank you, Chance, if the applicant would like to speak.

Good evening, Planning Commission. I stand before you at this time asking for your support in our previous findings of approval for this project. We had questions that we heard from your staff and from, the council or the commission, and we went back, and we, asked for in in-depth reports for both traffic and how it will impact the development project and how it will impact the surrounding area. We've provided that document, those reports to the city for that for their review on that one. We've also asked our sound report engineer to go back and find additional information on there to look at it more in-depth on it, and they provided, again, reports to your staff to strengthen our position that we will not create harm to the, community, and to the surrounding development on it.

And so at this time, as you're making a decision on the two findings that you find as a commission to approve our project. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Can you remind me of how many, cars are expected to go through this, on a daily basis?

We hope that they'll they'll be about 400. So that's about in fifteen hours oh, whatever that is, 35 an hour.

Thank you.

I have a question. Maybe you can clarify. So the total trips through the car wash is gonna be approximately 400?

To the car wash. Yes.

And that's based off of the SANDAG model?

I I brought my engineer, my traffic engineer to be able to

That'd be great. Let's let's get them up here.

Good evening, commissioners. Does this work? My name is Armen Havenesen. I'm the project traffic engineer, and Quickpack hired us to look at the trip generation for the project. We do a lot of the Quickpack projects.

So there's two different data sources for this. At the time when we first looked at the trip generation, we used that we we used the SANDAG model. However, since then, ITE, which is Institute of Transportation Engineer, they came up with a new trip generation rate, which is actually not that different than the SANDAG rate. So for our recent report, we used the ITE trip generation rate, which is most commonly used when it's available. So based on that, based on the IT's, trip generation rate, the project will generate, net increase of 457 trips. That's the daily trips throughout the fifteen hours of operating time.

Okay. That's the net increase. But I think the question I'm trying to get at is what are the total trips?

Based on IT's trip generation rate, that would be oh, the total trips without the pass by discount is 913. Yeah. 913 trips. But this type of use does have a very high bypass trip rate, just like any gas station or anything you might have where people don't make a exclusive trip to go get their car washed and go back home. They just do it on the way to and from some other

Yeah. Trip. Yeah. I think the the the concern, at least the concern that I have, is not the additional trips generated on the the collectors, the the the Zinfandel and Bear Hollow. But the total trips generated coming through the parking lot, that's as a lot that is already heavily impacted.

It already has one automotive use in it. Even under the updated, SPA, it had only been approved for one automotive use, and now we're trying to throw a second automotive use into the mix with 913 additional trips through the parking lot each day. Is that correct?

Well, yeah, the the the trip generation is basically what I stated. That'll be there.

So the total trips through the car wash should be 913 a day.

This is based on the IT's trip generation.

Correct.

This is not based on the business model that they experience. So this is like an average that is used across all different states based on studies done by ITE.

I understand that, but we have to we have to rely on some standardized model with which to make our judgment on all of this. So in the past, it was SANDAG because ITE didn't have a a applicable model yet. But since this was brought to us, ITE now has a model Correct. Which actually shows a slight increase over the SANDAG numbers. So

Can I ask you a quick question? Is that Monday through Friday, Saturday through Sunday? Because I went over there a couple times too, and the weekends, obviously, that center gets more use. So what's the weekend number?

Go ahead. We're open seven days a week. So the the the answer, I

The the IT number is an average weekday trip generation because your Ambien trips are always lower during the weekend even though a specific use may have a higher trip generation rate, but your Ambien trip rates are lower.

Can I

ask a quick question? So we can look at models all we want. What's the throughput on, the quick quack quick quack at Zinfandel?

The throughput on how long it takes to

go through that? How how many, cars go through there on a regular base on a daily basis and particularly on a Saturday? Because that's a real metric.

Our projection at the car wash.

No. No. Actual numbers at the existing Zinfandel, Zinfandel and Sunrise location.

I don't have that answer.

That would be good to have.

Okay.

That was, contemplated as part of the original traffic analysis that was done for this site in addition to the apartments. Mhmm. We did look at what was originally contemplated for this location, this particular site, and we looked at a comparison of the previously analyzed numbers, which did not cause any significant impacts. And, previously, for this particular part, the original traffic study from 2021 looked at a gas station with a convenience store. And, the car wash in comparison to that gas station, actually generates fewer trips.

And the fewer trips are I'll tell you exactly. We made the comparison. In the AM peak hours, the, car wash will generate 22 fewer trips. In the PM peak hour, 59 fewer trips. And total daily trips would be, negative, I mean, in comparison to 1,294 trips. So it generates a lot less traffic than was originally contemplated and analyzed at the street system.

I understand that. And and I appreciate that information, but it doesn't answer my question. We we we don't know how many cars go through the Zinfandel Sunrise location.

I I can say it's not 900. It's gonna be closer to the 450 that we're projecting because that that's what we had to build our model off of. But to know the exact number, I I don't have that.

I was looking for exact, but just, you know, round

of applause.

I would I say that it's probably at 45 an hour. I mean, that that put it

Sounds that sounds reasonable. Thanks.

Okay. I'm I'm confused now because you've thrown several numbers at us. In the original staff report, we were told that approximately 400, 450 vehicles a day would be going through the car wash. But it turns out that that number was actually 900 and something going through the car wash. And now you, again, are starting to mention 450.

So it seems like that number of how many cars are gonna go through the car wash is a moving target that keeps changing depending on who's talking. And I don't mean to be combative here, but it's very difficult to try and make a earnest decision for the community when we keep getting conflicting information and things aren't clear in our report.

I understand that. We have approximately 350 car washes throughout The United States. I don't have one that does 950 a day.

Okay.

One of the things that I would like to mention here as a traffic engineer for forty years, the rates that you get from the ITE are basically a general depiction of what you're gonna have. For example, for a fast food restaurant, you have a rate that IT provides. But an In N Out burger is outside of that, or a Chick fil A is outside of that. So when we do studies for an In N Out burger or a Chick fil A, we actually use different set of numbers for that. So just because here, they're saying that a car wash will generate 900 and some metric, that's just an average.

But they have the actual business model, how many cars they're doing. So that is actually more reliable. However, going back to what you said, this is the standard, and that's why we put in our report. But what we do is we do a lot of their, surveys at their sites to, keep track of the the queuing at the queue lines and all that. And all of that all of that data is in line with what Don is presenting here, that they're basically going to do around 400 cars. And if I think I think you'll be really happy if you did 900 cards.

We were ecstatic. I mean but we know that there would be problems, and we would have designed it completely different on it.

If I sorry. Hi. Thanks for letting me participate virtually. Apologies. I'm not there in person, but, hopefully, you can hear me okay.

And if not, interrupt me. I recall from the first meeting, we talked about a number of the number that stuck out to me was 40 cars per hour. And, considering that this location is in in next to a Dutch Bros, I actually looked up how many, cars Dutch Bros draws an hour, and it's 60 on average. The average Dutch Bros draws 60 cars an hour. And I'd be willing to bet that, you know, if you're if we're looking at this the statistic of, like, how many are specific trips for Dutch Bros, I know it's significant that that that location, a Dutch Bros will draw a lot more traffic.

And then I wondered, you know, just for context in this conversation, I wondered how many public comments there were when that Dutch Bros went in about concerns about traffic and the safety and the number of cars that that was gonna draw to that area. And I couldn't find any, which I thought was really interesting. And if and if anyone wants to go back to you know, was that there's an administrative public hearing November 2023 rather than a full commission meeting, but there still is an opportunity for public comment. And it seems to me like if there was a real concern about safety over the traffic draw, that that Dutch Bros would have been a bigger concern than this would have been. And so I'm I'm just having a hard time really believing that this is about the safety.

And and since this has come up, this is my neighborhood too. I've since walked with my kids and sent my kids to Sprouts by themselves and walked myself personally to that handles twice to experience that that walking experience and have not experienced any safety concerns or potential concerns, especially with the speed of traffic going through something like that and have gone to two different quick quacks to kinda observe and sit and see what that experience is like. Twice walking from, Urban Grill and Salad over through, you know, through that area on Sunrise. So I appreciate the numbers. I know it it can be a little confusing, and it's it's they're all predictions.

Right? So I just think in context of what we're looking at at this corner, in context of what's already there, we need to remember that the draw for people is the Dutch bros. So, you know, what what's there is is there, and and, realistically, as we've said before, there are other, quick quacks that are gonna draw people. If they're gonna come by, it's because they're gonna see it, stop in, or be it Sprouts, and it's beneficial to the other businesses in the area. So just wanted to share that as we're having this conversation about the number of cars and the safety that, you know, Dutch Bros is definitely the draw, not this. So, anyway, thanks.

So a follow-up question. So and I guess this might be more well, I don't know who to direct it to. I'll just throw it out there. Chance, you may wanna answer it, or, Don, you may wanna answer it. So the traffic study has just addressed the traffic impacts on the collector streets and has not addressed the internal circulation. Correct?

No. We did actually look at the the queuing on-site queuing for this.

On-site for on-site for quick the QuickQuack property itself or the internal circulation of the whole complex of the entire shopping center?

For, the queuing was for QuickQuack. And as far as online circulation for safety, we did a nine hour survey of all pedestrians coming and going to the site. In nine hours, we recorded a total of 90 pedestrian trips, which is actually 45 people. And none of our surveyors observed anything that was remotely, would be considered as a safety concern to pedestrians in any shape or form.

The pedestrian I wanna make sure I understand this correctly. So the pedestrian trips are pedestrians that would, like in the example that commissioner Molden just gave us, have walked from their house to Right. And this that this doesn't then address people that are parking internally in the parking lot and walking over to handles. Correct?

As far as the pedestrian count is concerned, correct. These are for people coming and going. But that as far as the parking layout and the design, which I've actually reviewed it, I don't see any major issues other than I mean, similar to any other parking lot, including your own city hall parking lot. It's just basically pedestrian walking through a parking facility.

My Just thank you. Chance, I have a another question for you, and just do let me direct this to him for a second? So in the SPA, how many auto uses have been approved for this location? For this exact property? For this for this shopping center, this whole this whole development.

You may as an auto oriented uses, I would I would say that the Dutch Bros at this point is the only one that has been approved. The site that the QuickWack is located on, as I mentioned, was conceptualized as a gas station previously and approved that way.

Let me rephrase my question because I don't think I phrased it. What I'm trying to find out is how many auto oriented businesses did the does the SPA allow?

I I wouldn't say that there's a specific number of what it would allow. There are uses that are permitted, not permitted, conditionally permitted, or need a specific type of review, but we would need a it would depend on the on the use. It's not a specific type that

Chair, if

I could I could respond. I can just add a little bit. There's no cap or anything if that's what you're looking for, Konshore Frechette, in the SPA on auto oriented uses and specifically drive throughs. I'm assuming that's what you're referring to.

Yeah. Auto or yeah. I would because I was just trying to recall, your presentation when this matter first came to us, and you were pointed out that when the SPA was, modified, to allow the, housing component that is there now, that there was a one auto use envisioned, for the thing. And I wasn't so that didn't mean that that was the cap, but that was all that was envisioned when you guys were, when this SPA was modified. Correct?

I I do wanna clarify. There wasn't a modification to the s the special planning area. Okay. The the previous approval was just the approval for this commercial development. There wasn't a amendment or modification to the special planning area.

But, originally, it that entire, area there was intended to be a retail business shopping complex, and then we changed that to allow the, apartments that have come in since. Correct?

It's a little bit before my time, but I don't know the exact background. The developer and the property owner might have some background on this. So I have Pierre here. Oh, sorry, Bryce. Sorry about that. I did. If if you'd like, Bryce can shed some light on what Well,

I all all I'm really trying to make sure that I clearly understand is what when that change was made was what was the envision for what auto uses how many auto uses we thought was appropriate for the area if that determination was made.

I I don't know if there is a specific number at that time. I think that the site was was originally conceptualized most likely to allow for multiple, auto centric uses.

Bryce, maybe you can clear this up. Thank you.

I I think I can do that, commissioner Fuchette. I'll start with that. I mean, clearly, originally, this was was 25 acres. Commissioner for sure was right. It was 25 acres of commercial.

Think about that traffic. 25 acres of commercial. And for many years, nearly twenty years, we we attempted to get commercial development on that site. Ultimately, we couldn't do that and came up with an idea, actually working with one of the council members today and and staff to come up with what we call the horizontal mixed use project. We basically took the 25 acres and kinda sliced it into thirds and did a commercial on the corner, apartments in the middle, and actually alley loaded single family on the other end.

And when we came in for that, there was a lot of there was opposition. You're taking our commercial away. You're adding apartments. We don't want those people next to us. They're gonna ruin our neighborhood. So the fear of the unknown is always there. That property set 25 acres of vacant property for quite some time as the houses were completed. Yeah. And so we went through a lot of changes. Ultimately, it was approved, as I said, with the commercial and the apartments.

And the apartments, I think I think everybody's pretty happy with the apartments and happy with the single family. This site ended up with a we thought was going to be here's your directly to your question. The the TouchBros, we had thought was going to be a fast food drive through, and the gas station was gonna be on the corner. It is now proposed for the quick whack. Hopefully, that answers your questions. I I wanted to say a few other things too. Unfortunately, I wasn't here on February 25. I got stuck at a t ball game. I would have probably better much rather been here. I did jump online, as you recall, but I wish I had been here too.

To give a little more context to a few things, I heard I heard the issues that night, and I'd heard the issues before. Land use compatibility, traffic congestion, noise, you know, a lot of fear versus, I think, reality once things are built. And I think a really, really interesting question came up about, is is QuickQwack, frankly, a good community partner? And if there's issues that come up, if these fears of traffic, noise, dust, trash, loud music, if any of those do come to fruition, once they're built, how will QuickQack respond to that? And, you know, I've talked to to Don, talked to other QuickQuack.

You know, we have a QuickQuack in Folsom that we also were involved with, and we've had very, very in fact, to my knowledge, no issues. It's across a six lane road, Iron Point Road, with million dollar Elliot homes adjacent to it, not that far off from what's happening here. And we've had very in fact, no complaints there. If there are complaints, once it's built, one, you know quick quack. They're they're in this community, and they have a protocol set up to work with the city to address any of those concerns, work with code enforcement.

But I'm here tonight to tell you, specifically, you know us. You know Elliot Holmes. We are a good community partner. We've been a long term community partner. And if something comes up with these guys, you're gonna find me. You're gonna call me. We're gonna get it taken care of. I'm you're getting my promise that Quikwak's gonna be a good a good neighbor. We need them to be. Those are our homeowners. I wanted to hit on this at the beginning because mister Forschette and I have a long history too. There were no shenanigans between the twenty fifth and tonight. The twenty fifth vote was kind of unique in my view. I've been doing this a long time. You don't see very many three three votes.

They're usually three four or four three. The three three vote, I think, threw everybody off to be candid, and it it was not what anyone necessarily expected, and it wasn't necessarily a a a a it was a tie. It was a tie. And how do you address a tie? Staff and and legal came up with the procedure tonight that basically gives your body the alternative to deny it based on the findings that they've proposed or to approve it based on, quite honestly, the studies, the conditions, the previous findings.

And so I believe you have in front of you enough information to vote, positively tonight and approve it. Lastly, I wanna just say, we own two centers in Folsom. Most of you probably have been to Palladio. We also own the one across the street. And on a daily basis, we are struggling with retailers to get in there, to stay in there.

You name it. We've had them. It's a just an ongoing struggle today to keep viable retailers in shopping centers. I had to be over in Gold River on Saturday, and while I was I had to drop something off at a friend's house, I said, let's told my wife, let's drive through the center there, and we did. Starbucks is closed. I was quite surprised. Steakhouse is still closed. The Applebee's is still closed. Long's is still closed. That's a pretty viable center.

And so getting a tenant such as QuickQuack that, to my knowledge, has never closed a store once they've opened is is very important to a landlord. And so I think you need to think about that, getting them in there, getting them open, I believe, will will resolve a lot of these fears that people have about traffic, about cars. Whatever use goes there is gonna generate traffic. We hope so. Right?

That we want that. And so I think having a vacant field, if if you were to deny this, a vacant field is much more of a hazard than having a viable retailer such as QuickQuack operating. I'll take some questions.

I don't have any questions for you at the at the moment, but thank you.

And thank you for addressing my good neighbor comment.

You're welcome.

I appreciate that.

You're welcome. I'm still frustrated because I think what I'm understanding is that QuickQuack says their business model is basically 450 vehicles through. At least that's what you think you need to be have a successful location. Am I interpreting that correctly?

That that's what we build based upon the data that we collect from from the different reports that we receive on the traffic counts that are going up and down Siff And Dale. And so and the home or the rooftops, that's what we're we're basing this off of, just empirical To

simplify it, four fifty is basically your nut that you you need to make the business work.

Yeah.

Okay. Fair enough. Yeah. It's true that we need to have some kind of standardized met metric. And, Arman, that's where you come in and provide us with the traffic engineering and use a reputable model, either Sandbag or ITE, which are both very reputable and reliable models.

And I would expect them to be a little bit on the high side because they don't wanna underestimate traffic load. The question is, do we use that standardized model? Do we use what the what the applicant hopes or says is their business model? I'm a little bit frustrated that there was never any mention of that 900 number in the original staff report. It just kept referring to the additional traffic on Zinfandel.

No real talk has been given to the internal circulation in the shopping complex itself. And while I respect that you've done some queuing studies on the Kwikwak area itself. That is an especially since Dutch Bros has moved in. That is an incredibly busy shopping complex. It is amazing the lines of people standing in line to get ice cream and handles.

And I I don't view it as a as a center that is just making just getting by. It's heavily used. Every time I have driven by there and seen it or honestly, we kind of frequent handles on a regular basis. There's parking lots always pretty darn full, and there's always a line of people. A lot of people do walk from the neighborhood. I suspect most people actually drive there, get out of their car, and then walk over to handles. And so that does bring up questions about, you know, health, safety, and Do wish to kind

of just touch on that real quick? Because Yeah. You've mentioned the the pedestrian. The original layout, which, again, I said had a had a idea of a a a fast food drive through on where where coffee place is, and then the the gas station, the original layout was, in fact, reviewed by Public Works, by City Engineering, and I don't believe we've changed that layout at all. And so I don't think I think whatever goes on the corner is going to generate traffic.

We know that. Absolutely. And quite honestly, probably because people go to the car wash and go somewhere, they they're not going to I mean, if it was a sit down restaurant, for example, they might park and then walk to to to it might generate more more pedestrian traffic. And I guess I guess I just wanted to make the point that I don't think pedestrian traffic out there is an issue.

Okay. Well, I appreciate I appreciate, you know, your perspective. I have a slightly different perspective. And actually, some of

my I don't go to handles as much as you do,

for this year.

You know, unfortunately, well, the traffic and the safety is one of my main concerns. It's not my only concern in driving this. And, you know, I'm a single automotive based business works really well in there. I know I believe that our staff, when they evaluate traffic, is mostly looking at the the collector streets. I don't think unless there's some special circumstances or something, we actually do an evaluation of internal circulation.

I don't know. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong on that, but I believe that is the case. So that I'm still concerned about that. I'm, you know, concerned about the fact that as we were trying to make our evaluations here that, you know, there's some discrepancy in terms of what are the total trips through the, QuickQAK. I'm also, and the

last I think we've settled on $404,150.

4 we'll we'll take 450 for the for the moment. That's you know? But these are concerns I have in terms of the process that we got to in making our decision to deny on the twenty fifth. Some of some of the concerns right now are more process, not really the necessarily doing what to do with the business itself. The other thing that I'm a little confused on is that this is this has all, been approved under, the, old Sacramento County 2,003 code, title one chapter 10 article three section, one ten dash 30 blah blah blah blah blah.

I could read the whole thing off. But we're using that code, which is still in effect for the time being, in terms of determining what is an appropriate use, that SPA, in terms of what is an appropriate use. Yet at the same time, staff is saying, but we don't wanna use some of the definitions or terminology in that because we don't feel that those are valid anymore. But it kinda seems to me that we're in a situation where if you live by the sword, you have to die by the sword. And in that, SPA language such as health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare, are used talking about persons residing or working in the neighborhood.

And we've clearly heard from the neighborhood that they feel that there are some conflicts when it comes to safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare. And, again, just as a matter of process, trying to do my due diligence and try having to be answerable to the community, they're asking me, well, how come when we brought up those issues, you didn't consider those factors, which is clearly in the s p SPA? And so that's a problem I'm having right now, Chance, is that we seem to be picking and choosing, you know, what parts of the SPA we want to use and what parts we don't. And it seems to me we're kind of trapped in a live by the sword, die by the sword. Either we use the whole thing or we don't.

I mean, am I am I evaluating this incorrectly?

Jeric, if I may, I'd like to address some of that. So wait. I I do not think that staff has picked and chew picked and chosen. We we you you we utilize the SPAs because that's the authority for that particular location that we had to use for land use regulations. And we made a comment about some of the finding language, right?

And whenever we're looking for evidence for findings, we have to base it on factual information. And we utilize the standards that are in the SPA, in the zoning code, in the 'three code, that's what we utilize in order to make an assessment of a project. So if we're looking at the findings, what we utilize is whether it meets the setbacks, whether it meets the requirements for landscaping, maximum height, zoning. So that's what we're utilizing when we're evaluating a project and whether or not it's allowed by the zoning code. So staff's assessment is not based on from what we've done and what we've shown Planning Commission in the past, is that it's not based on things that are opinions or things that are not based on technical studies that are provided to us by the applicants or additional technical studies that they've given to us.

So

Okay. I I I appreciate that. And, you know, we while I'm being somewhat critical tonight, as a general rule, I believe we have an excellent staff, just to make that clear. But they're still reading right out of the, wording in the SPCA of the SPA, excuse me, quote, the establishment, comma, maintenance or operation of the use, comma, building or structure applied will not under the circumstances of the particular case be determined to be detrimental to the health, safety piece, morals, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhoods. So that is that is the very language in the in the SPA, and that would be a valid reason for, a valid finding that, you know, we clearly heard from the neighborhood that, you know, the neighborhood doesn't believe that this proposal meets those qualifications spelled out in the SPA.

And I'm just well, you know what? I've talked a lot, and I'm monopolizing the discussion. So I'm gonna leave it at that for the moment.

Thank you, commissioner Fashad. Does any other commissioner would like to speak?

So I I do have a couple comments. Sure. I think to clarify kinda what Lee was saying and where we're all going, there is some general plan inconsistency. We are right in the middle of a general plan update. We are taking over from the county. So I think there is a cumulative effect of Dutch bros with a car wash. Is it detrimental? I don't know. This is what we're up here to decide. There's other locations in the city. So I think, is this the wrong location for this use? It comes down to what we feel as a commission, how your what your gut level feeling is on this. So I I hear you guys, and I appreciate the comments. I think we've all taken this one really seriously. We've done our research.

I spent a lot of time in that shopping center. I drove to seven quick quacks. So I think I've educated myself on this. So I think this we're at this point now. I mean, Lee's passionate. This is his neighborhood. But I think we've all had our chance to that. So those are just the concerns I have. And I still we'll see how how I vote. I don't know yet. Like, we're gonna put it out there. So those are

the things I think we need

to figure out as a commission, how we feel about this project.

I I I would just like to just pause, chair. We we should probably open public comment period.

If you

guys are not aware, it's not open yet, so we would like to we probably should provide that opportunity.

So Yes.

Let's go ahead and open the public comment period, please.

I have one speaker card, mister Steven Davis. Hopefully, three minutes is gonna be long enough.

Good evening, commissioners, for the opportunity to speak. My name is Steven Davis. I live in Stone Creek neighborhood. I respectfully express my opposition to the proposed quick, quick car wash at this location. Stone Creek is already highly congested area. Primary access driveway is frequently backed up due to traffic existing businesses such as Handles, Dutch Brothers, Sprouts adding car wash to that. Average approximately, you said 500 the first time you guys ever met. I remember that. But you said four fifty today. Vehicles per day were significantly worse in congestion.

Increased wait times and additional safety concerns for the residents. When this area was first developed, residents were shown renderings of a modern, clean, neighborhood friendly design. A car wash facility at the front of this development would block visibility, change the character of the area, and detect from, overall aesthetic from the community. In addition, residents would likely face months, if not years, of construction noise, dust, and disruption. It's also important to note that there's already two quick car, quick crack car washes when the two to four mile radius is with this location given its existing, capacity.

It's reasonable to ask whether another car wash is truly necessary, especially placed so close to residential neighborhood, which includes Goddard School and Navigator Elementary down the street. Safety is a major concern. Stone Creek, homes to many families. Children walk and bike regularly in that area. Playing around the surrounding streets, influx of hundreds of additional vehicles on a daily to narrow streets increases the risk of accidents and creates an unsafe environment for our community. Noise is another another issue that cannot be overlooked. You guys said when you started here, was gonna be 58 decibels. That's the sound of refrigerator. Then why are your people at QuikQuik wearing headphones or wearing ear protection with a refrigerator sound?

So I have to have ear protection when I'm in my own home? 58 decibels. Remember that, mister Hoon?

So that that noise level is, definitely gonna be impacted by all of us. You also stated that you opened a quick quack over, off of, what, IronPoint? That's across six lanes of traffic. This is not across six lanes of traffic, so that's a moot point. I don't know why you even brought that up. That just made you sound not correct at all. Also, the findings of denial, I guess, so I'm asking, does that mean that the findings of denial, the commissioners did not do their homework, or what does that mean? And then, commissioner Molden, you, you said that the Dutch brothers had 60 cars. In QuickQuack, we're adding another 40. So a 100 cars per hour, if that's okay by you.

And the other thing too is you used a 2021 model at a gas station with the current businesses that you used you guys said 2021. Handle's opened on 12/01/2023. Sprouts opened 11/11/2022. So you guys use a model that has nothing to do with what's already there, and we're not even talking about Dutch Brothers. This is a model that you guys chose when it was an empty field when nothing was there. Remember that. So I hope you guys can can better explain that model, whatever you guys were talking about. Like I said, there's a ditch there's another quick crack. 3.1 miles on Sunrise, not next to a residential area, and one one point three miles over here by Costco, not a residential area. And I don't know what the Sandag is.

Is that San Diego traffic? Because that's what I found. Yeah. That doesn't make any sense to me. So, and second, what is it what is this gonna bring to the area? Jobs? How many people work at a QuickQuack? We've all gone through there. There's, like, three people in there all the time. And it's the same three people, and they do the best they can, but it's the same three people. So this isn't really bringing anything to the area but money for them. I hope you guys feel our presence here because we live here. We do not wanna see a quick wag go there. It just doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense for the area that we live.

Time has expired. Please wrap up your comment.

Thank you, guys. Appreciate your help.

Are there any more public comments?

I have no additional speaker cards on this item. We have received several, public comments via email. Those were distributed to the council, posted on our website, and in the back of the room available for the public. Those public comments were from DH, anonymous member of the public, Kim Schuster, Jordan Casselin, Lorianne Ball, Jennifer Knuckle, and that's all we have.

Okay. Well, the public hearing is now closed. So at this time, if any commissioners would like to make any comments or questions, we'll open the floor for them.

Yeah. I was I was absent on February 25, but I reviewed all the video and materials of February 25 meeting commissions and also the new staff report and everything. And I have a couple of questions for the applicant.

Yes, sir. So

how do you handle the runoff water? I mean, the drainage system. How do you handle it?

I handle the drainage system. I have my architectural team here that can answer that. The

architect and engineer of record For drainage, running off of the car wash Right. We design it, per to provide source control. The entrance and the exit of the car wash, 20 feet of the entrance at eight feet of the exit is designed to drain toward the car wash where there is an internal, drain, floor drain, that is directed to the sewer system, which is then taken to reclaim tanks. They're size 1,500 gallons. They're sand oil interceptors that are designed to settle water, separate sediments before ultimately draining to the city system.

So any soap water or anything else that doesn't go through the city water?

The design itself is designed to minimize that to the maximum extent feasible.

So how frequently you guys clean up the tanks?

That's more of an operations question.

Excuse me. What was that question again?

The seg segment, I mean, the tanks before going to the drainage. Right?

Yes.

So how frequently do you guys clean that?

Oh, it's probably on a because we have three tanks on it that's gonna filter it through, but they're on a quarterly basis with it.

Okay. And the current noise levels everything. Right? The re I saw the report. I mean, it's almost border with the standards of franchico diversity, noise levels. And do you think after a couple of years service of this machinery, this noise level increases?

No. We're using the same equipment, and, we will follow the the standard for that, emitter, of our blowers. It it would it doesn't increase over time, from that equipment.

Do you guys re submit a report every two years or something like that? Is there any way is there any standard?

We're happy to do that. We're not we're not concerned by that.

To add to Don's point there as well, QUIKQUAK uses this equipment across all of their sites. They enclose their equipment to minimize the noise impact as much as possible, and we are under the city's threshold for

Right.

The decibels.

That's all for me.

Well, I can appreciate, both the the comments from the the community and from the applicant and the team. And I I I use the Bel Air Shopping Center at Gold River regularly. And, yes, there are vacancies there, but there are a lot of reasons for that. Could be changed. But it is hard to keep tenants.

I understand it's kind of the state of where we're at today, and we wanna keep economics rolling. But per my comments on the twenty fifth, my concerns remain. The the cumulative effect of Dutch Brothers plus this, plus all the other things going on with the, increased density of of of housing compared to the original plan just gives me pause.

So I just wanna acknowledge. I do hear the thoughtful concerns and the passionate comments, from the residents around, you know, the apprehension or the opposition to having another drive thru oriented adjacent to to housing. I didn't share this at at the February 25 meeting, but I do want to highlight, at least from my understanding, is that it's our responsibility at that meeting and then, I guess, at this meeting as well, is to really evaluate whether this particular project meets our adopted land use policies and whether its impacts can be mitigated through enforceable conditions based on the traffic and noise analysis, site design changes and operational conditions, including limits on hours, equipment enclosure, on-site stacking and a requirement for additional traffic management if queuing exceeds approved capacity. I I did and still do feel satisfied with the project, but I do want to say that, you know, I I feel a little conflicted because I I as a human being, I feel you know, listening to all the residents and, voicing their concerns, I understand where you're coming from. But I I will also say I did my research.

I drove by the I went and sat at the, Quick Quack on Sunrise and also the one on Zinfandel, and I frequented as in the summertime mainly, not so much in the winter. But, and for somebody who lives in South Rancho where there's not many, I would say, businesses and retail, like, I personally would love a car wash closer to my home, and I live right on the corner. I live pretty close to Kiefer and Sunrise, and, you know, I think lately we've seen a lot of things pop up about what's gonna be what is planned for that area, and I personally would like to see a car wash despite despite the concerns and what and the passionate concerns people have had. I I personally feel like it would be good for our city, and I feel like the staff has done a really good job of providing us information, a lot of information because it was a lot to digest, but I don't want to take away from the concerns that were brought up, but I do feel like we've gotten some good information and answers, and I do appreciate you saying that you want to be a good partner and wanting to work if this does well, whatever happens after this, if this does get built, then, you know, being able to work with the community to to address concerns if they were to come come forth.

Alright. Well, I'd like to thank everybody for their presentations and hard work on this topic. Let's move on to what we're gonna do. I think right now what the discussion

should I think staff has to present us with the, the findings. That that's Well what we were supposed to be doing tonight. Am I

clarify, please, Arlene? Because right now, I think we're Mhmm.

Yes. So the the resolution that's in front of you is for the findings for denial of the QuickQAK project. That's what we're bringing forth. So so if you're going to make a motion, it would be a motion to approve the denial. That makes sense.

Can I make a clarification as well? We notated that there was a old date in one of the whereas clauses referencing the March 2026 meeting. So when you make your motion, if you could please just adjust it to include a modification to that whereas date to today's meeting date, the 04/08/2026 meeting.

So we're waiting for a motion to adopt the findings. Is this correct?

That's correct. You need a motion in a second.

Okay. I will make that motion with the modification of the dates that, Kelly noted.

I'll second.

Clerk, will you call the roll, please?

Commissioner Devrapali.

Based on the numbers provided, I compared everything I say. Yes.

Commissioner?

I'm sorry. Aye. Sorry. Sorry. Commissioner? So it's a we are to deny this is denying the application, you are saying?

Correct. This is the motion to deny the project.

Okay. Then I I say no.

Okay. Commissioner Frechette? Aye. Commissioner Huehn?

Aye.

Commissioner Raymond? No. Chair Malden?

No.

Commissioner Stas? Yes. Vice chair Stevenson? No. Motion fails with a three four vote.

So then is there a motion to pass then?

The next would someone would need to one of the commissioners would need to make a motion to, adopt the approval resolution from the previous hearing. You need a first and a second and a roll call.

I'll make a motion to adopt the previous sorry. I already forgot what you said.

A motion to adopt the findings of approval.

Motion to adopt the findings and approval from February 25 meeting.

Second.

Please call the roll, clerk. Commissioner Deborah Polly?

Yes.

Commissioner Fichette? No. Commissioner Hune?

Nay.

Chair Malden? Yes. Commissioner Raymond? Yes. Commissioner Stoss? No. Vice chair Stevenson? Yes. Motion passes with the four three vote.

Can I can I clarify for the record, vice chair Stevenson, was, your comment a second on the motion? Correct. Mhmm. Thank you.

Thank you. I know that was. Appreciate it.

Okay. Thanks, guys. Yeah. I'll be right back. K. So now we would move on to commission comments, ADA first.

We will do that. Move on to planning commission comments.

Nothing specific. I spend a lot of time to research on this one, so no specific comment. Nothing.

This one might have been our most researched dug in hard. I don't know. I I like to see the civic process at work. That's why we're here. So I appreciate the the dialogue. Thanks, everybody.

Yeah. And I I just, again, wanna say, like, I I think the time I know I spent a lot of time in the last month or in the last few meetings doing my research, and I can't imagine from, like, a staff perspective how much you guys also have to do, in order to not only prepare us, but also to get everything ready. So just appreciation there. And, well, that was that was rough.

Chair Malden?

No comments here. Appreciate Cindy's I just echo Cindy's sentiments. Rehanas as well.

Alright. Well, I'd like to thank everybody for their hard work this evening, and we will adjourn this meeting at 06:43.

We also have director's report.

That's okay. I don't have a lot, but we have April 22 meeting, general plan land use alternatives.

So Okay. Thank you.

Thanks, all.

Yes. We'll now adjourn the meeting, 06:43PM. Thank you.