Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

1926 to order, and I will ask the Kirk to call the roll.

Chair Wilkerson?

Here.

Vice Chair Banta? Commissioner Vargas? Here. Commissioner Bermondt? Here. Commissioner Dingmann?

Here.

Commissioner Hampton? Here. Commissioner Leroy? Here. Chair, we have a quorum.

Everyone, please stand for the pledge of allegiance and I'll ask commissioner Vargas to please lead us in the pledge. I

pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

We'll now move on to our regular business starting with communications. At this time, I will ask Assistant Director Garcia if there are any communications or announcements for tonight's evening meeting.

We don't have any communications or announcements tonight.

Thank you. We'll move on to the approval of this evening's agenda. Do I have a motion and then a second to approve the agenda?

I'll move. I'll second.

We have a motion by Commissioner Beaumont and a second by Commissioner Vargas. All in favor, please say aye. Motion passes. That'll be end of business. Next item is business from the floor. This portion of the agenda is available for the public to address the Planning Commission on any issue that is not on the agenda. There will be a limit of the of three minutes per speaker. I welcome anyone who wishes to speak to address the commission regarding a topic or issue that is not on tonight's agenda this evening to please approach the podium.

Mr. Brabbi Steve Vail. I didn't see it on the agenda, so I hope I'm not out of order here. But I just wanted to do a short thing about the proposed mosque in downtown. So the only thing I wanna say about it is, number one, there's concerns of a group that I represent which is Act for America, which has about 9,000,000 members.

There's a concern that it wasn't done properly according to Hoyle in terms of the way the Planning Commission did this, taking a property that was undervalued for housing purposes and then turned it into a religious thing. That's number one. Number two, the way that it ended up being announced was of concern because that didn't seem right in terms of, you know, what the community wants. Obviously the government, you know, isn't involved one way or another, pro or negative in terms of religion, but it just felt like this was kind of an endorsement. And the last thing I

wanna say is I love my brothers and sisters in human world, both Christian, Jewish, Muslim, all

the above. I think that this would be a mistake, for the Muslim community as well as for everyone else. I don't represent the Jewish community. I do represent myself as a resident in the act for America. I think this would send a bad message to the citizens of Vacaville as to what was expressed at our that last planning meeting that, you know, they're not about jihad, it's not about sharia. I'm not talking about violent jihad, I'm just talking about pushing an agenda. If that's true, then this building won't be built because that will send a message the opposite. And that's all I have to say. Thank you for letting me talk.

Thank you for your time. Do we have any other speakers? This is from the floor. Please, sir, can you step to the

Hear and listen to the Lewis Holmes proposal. May I respond to that after or is that I'm not sure of the proper procedure.

You're here for one of the items that is on the agenda for tonight?

I'm sorry, I'm not hearing this.

No problem.

Are you here for one of the items that the Commission is discussing tonight? Is that what you'd like to speak on? Then there will be an opportunity for you to speak at that item.

Thank you.

Anybody else? I will now close public comment. Now it's time for the consent calendar. We have one item on consent, which the minutes from the 04/21/2026 meeting. Does anyone from the commission or the public wish to pull the consent item for discussion?

Do I have a motion and a second to approve the consent calendar? Motion. Second.

Second.

The motion from Commissioner Vargas. I have a second from Commissioner Dingmann. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Great. Motion passes. We'll move on now to our first public hearing for the evening, which is to receive a presentation on Orange Apartments and Retail Development Project. We will first hear a presentation from staff, followed by commissioner questions, and then we will open it up for public comment. Before we proceed, I would like to ask if any commissioners have received ex parte communication on this matter? No. No. Great. May we please have the presentation?

Good evening, chair and members of the Planning Commission. Item before you tonight is called the Orange Apartments and Retail Development Project. And this is a request to construct a 73 unit apartment complex and a 9,600 square foot retail building on a vacant 3.76 acre site that's gonna be located South Of Orange Drive and East Of the Town Road. There are three entitlements for consideration tonight, an environmental assessment, a major design review, and a tentative parcel map. The aerial image on the left hand side of the screen shows the approximate project site located in the Northeast corner of the city, and the image on the right shows the project boundary.

In blue, you can see Orange Drive to the North and Leisure Town Road to the West. This project site was originally annexed into Vacaville in 1969. Another relevant date specific to this project occurred in June 2023 when the city adopted the twenty twenty three-two thousand and thirty one housing element, which changed the project site, at least a portion of it, to residential high density. In April '4, the applicant submitted an application to the city for this project, which the city hosted a neighborhood meeting in May year. Unfortunately, the applicant requested the pause of the project resulting from a condition of approval to annex into a community facility district and wanted to just wait until that could be resolved, which was later resolved in December, which the city was able to adopt new policies and regulations related to what types of projects need to annex into community facility districts.

Well, with that action from City Council, the project was resumed in February, and here we are before the planning commission with the project. This image was provided to us from our MITCHE team that shows an aerial image shot with a drone, the project boundary outlined in blue. This project includes the reaffirmation of the previous environmental assessments that have already been conducted for this project site, a major design review, and a tentative parcel map. As previously mentioned, the site is 3.76 acres, 73 multifamily residential units with a clubhouse and swimming pool would be located on 2.76 acres with a density of 26.1 units per acre. The 9,600 square foot retail building would be located on a one acre parcel, yielding a floor area ratio of point two two.

Vehicle access would be provided on Leisure Town Road and Orange Drive. The architecture, which we'll show in a couple slides, reflects a modern design. The general plan designation is identified as residential high density, which allows 20.1 to 30 units per acre, and then a portion of the site is also identified as highway commercial, which allows a point three floor area ratio. The zoning matches that with a portion being within the residential high density zoning district and then the commercial Highway zoning district. This is a landscape plan that was provided.

It's the best exhibit that I was able to throw on to their image. This shows the apartment complex on the right hand side of the image surrounded by perimeter landscaping and parking, and then you'll see the retail building on the left hand side of the project tucked back away within the middle property line with parking fronting along Leisure Town Road as well as some additional landscaping. This was a rendering that was provided by the applicant that shows the clubhouse and the apartment buildings for the project. This next exhibit shows the architectural design that would be proposed with the retail building. So staff's main job is to evaluate consistency and compliance with a variety of different regulatory documents.

The first was the, for the major design review, we looked at the city's objective design standards within the Vacaville Municipal Code and found that it complies with those standards. We also found a couple of other notable things is that the apartments would provide sufficient parking as well as common open space for those future residents. It meets the required findings for approval. The tentative parcel map complies with the Evacueville Municipal Code as well as the Subdivision Map Act and meets the required findings that are included with the Planning Commission staff report. In regards to environmental analysis, our job is to confirm compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.

Section fifteen thousand one sixty two allows cities to reaffirm previous environmental assessments that may have been conducted for projects when the activity is within the scope covered by the previous EIR or when there's no new significant effects or no new medications, when there's a previous statement of overriding considerations that's still applicable to the project and then previous mitigation measures are applicable to the project. So for this project, we looked at the 2015 general plan EIR, the 2021 supplemental EIR, and then the addendum that was prepared for the 2023 housing element and felt that all three of those previous environmental assessments covered potential impacts produced by this project and that mitigation measures already existed for which could be adopted for the project. The project meets those findings under section fifteen thousand one sixty two and that no new document is required for circulation. We did some public outreach for the project with a new project notice in 2024 and that neighborhood meeting that I mentioned earlier in the presentation. We also held a public, sent out a public notice for this hearing tonight on May 6.

We haven't received any public comments related to this project. In conclusion, staff supports the proposed project and meets the required findings as condition complies with the general plan and zoning as well as the city's objective design standards and development standards provides more housing and the project's well designed. With that, our presentation is short and sweet with a recommendation for the commission tonight to approve the project subject conditions of approval. The applicant is also here tonight to answer any questions for the commission.

Yes. Thank you for the presentation. I'll now open it up for commissioner questions. Commissioner Beaumont.

Thanks, Albert. Appreciate that. It says there's 73 units. I count 72. I assume there's one manager's unit that's not listed?

Correct. Yes.

Okay. What's the minimum number of parking spaces for a 73 unit apartment? Because I'm looking at 1.6 cars per apartment, And I'm wondering where the excess cars are going to park if there's not any spaces.

The project would provide 121 parking spaces for 73 units. There are provisions for reduced parking for three bedroom units also with the project. When we looked at it, I apologize, usually we provide one of those tables that shows the comparison of the one to one ratio. You got one bedroom units, two bedroom units, three bedroom.

I guess my question is, is there parking on Orange Drive for extra cars or could they use the retail parking if they had to? I mean, since it's there?

I don't know if there's any parking on Orange Drive, and the retail parking would be for just that retail building. When we looked at the parking that would be provided for the project, there

would

be parking sufficient for serving those residents. Commonly, what we find with apartment projects is that you might have some on-site management that occurs. None of that has been developed at this early on stage. So if the Commission is interested in hearing from the applicant about what something like that would look like, that's commonly what we are able to offer to the Commission.

I'm just wondering if it would be assigned parking since there's 72 units and, you know, that would make sense if there were assigned and

they Yeah.

I would say for the Commission, there's 121 parking spaces, so there will be at least one parking space for each of those units that would be there. Whether the applicant decides to assign designated parking, up to them. We don't have anything within our municipality Are that would obligate

any of the units low income or are they all market rate?

All of them would be market rate.

Okay. And for the retail space, for the exit on Leisure Town, is there a gate that provides that prevents them from going into the exit only? Would that have to be a gate that would be an they would have a pass that would go from the apartment complex out to Leisure Town?

That is that is a separate entrance or exit that could be utilized by those residents for access so they can use Orange Drive, but I believe that one's an exit only.

But is there something that would prevent them from coming in that way? That's my question. Exit only is a real easy to go both ways if there's not something there like a spike strip or a gate that only opens one way.

For the commission, there wouldn't be anything within our municipal code that would prevent the property owner from being able to use that as an exit or an entrance. It's really what we look for is, is there sufficient emergency access for the project site? Can we get a fire truck in and out of that area? However, the applicant decides to provide access for those residents is up to them.

Okay. Don't get me wrong, I like the project. I just had all these questions. Thank you.

It really brought the heat tonight.

There you go, buddy. Thank you, Commissioner Beaumont. Commissioner Digman. Yeah.

Staff, thanks, Albert. Appreciate the presentation. And this, you know, Doug, I think, stole a lot of thunder up here. But we all had questions about parking. I think this looks like a very good project, but understanding Leisure Town and Orange Drive and how that's situated there, 1.6 spots per unit seems low, especially with the community clubhouse and a pool and those kind of things. And just understanding, I think, what the overflow is going to look like there and then the retail building itself, like what kind of businesses could you speak maybe to is there any thoughts on what type of business might fit in there conveniently with all the stuff that's around there? Has there been any discussion there?

No, there hasn't been. We can't regulate the types of uses and what's allowed and permitted. So the tough part about retail is being able to find those individuals that would occupy those units. And so instead of speculating on what kind of uses there, I would, at the appropriate time, the Commission can call up the applicant during the public comment period to maybe foreshadow exactly what their goals are for occupying those tenant spaces.

Yeah, great. I think I definitely would like to hear from the applicant on that. And then maybe the overflow parking piece, I think there's a lot of questions up here on that. It would be great to hear from the applicant on what overflow might look like, especially with Orange Drive right there and a busy, you know, four way there of Leisure Town. So that's all

I have. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Vargas?

Yeah, to piggyback off of the retail, is the city proactive in attracting folks into that retail space? And the reason I ask is because, you know, I drive through Leisure Town on my way to work. I work in Sacramento. And I pass through Chevron, which is on the corner of Elmira and Leisure Town. Those retail spaces have been vacant for quite a bit of time. So wondering if that circumstance will be for all this property here. Granted, maybe not because it's closer to the freeway, you already have the gas station there, but I do worry about some of these retail spaces just remaining vacant.

I can tell the commission that we do have a wonderful new economic development manager that has just started for our department. And so we're certainly, as a former economic development director, I mentioned, we're all in the business of economic development. We're all in the business of providing good customer service to people that are looking at adding to these businesses. And so we do have people on staff that are available to provide easy pathways for being able to get these things occupied. Again, I would defer to the applicant as to what their goal is.

When we look at these types of development projects, we look to make sure that the appropriate buildings and uses are being proposed within the appropriate general plan designation in the zoning district. And so what would be appropriate for this location is a retail building is what you see as part of the project. What would probably be inappropriate would be a residential development within the highway commercial, and that's part of the reason why this project's been bifurcated right along those zoning districts. But again, at the appropriate time, the applicant can shed some light on what their goals are for the building occupancy.

I appreciate that, and thank you for the presentation.

You

go? No, David. You got

it. Sorry.

Technical difficulty here. I just had two questions, I think. Is there a requirement to build the apartments and the retail at the same time? Or can they be bifurcated, build one and then the other?

We don't have anything that would regulate that would allow us to regulate. They have to be built at the same time.

Did I see that 2020 has to be started by 2028 in the plan? Was that a date I saw?

The approval for entitlements is granted usually by two years and then allows the applicant to be able to submit applications for extending that time period, which at that point would be subject to the Director of Community and Economic Development. Yes, it's intended to light a little bit of fire, but it doesn't prevent them from being able to submit an extension request.

Sure. And could you remind me, like, what's the trigger for whether we need more fire department, police, schools when you put in apartment complexes or other housing developments? Is that I know it's part of the general plan, but is it based on an occupancy or?

Yeah, it is for residential developments is based off of for the fire department, it's based off of standards of coverage, so proximity to access to existing fire stations. For the police department, it's based off of the number of residents per sworn officers. I think it's 1.4 sworn officers per 1,000 residents. And so when we look at that, for larger developments that have a greater impact, these infill developments are not necessarily producing that larger of an impact and so the concept between that is that since the fire and police services are provided or funded through the general fund, that the provisions that are provided by that are through property taxes. So when they pay for those property taxes, those get collected by the assessor and then they disseminate over to the city for our general fund.

It's being paid by the general fund.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Banta.

Thank you for the presentation. My question I have a couple of questions. One question is about the community outreach. The radius, is the radius that we send the mailers out the same whether, like, it's near neighborhoods or whether it's near open space? Because, obviously, if there's a bunch of open lots there, like, we're probably not gonna hit as many community members.

Yeah. A lot of the notification occurred. If I can change the map real quick. So a lot of your notification included all the commercial properties that were surrounding the project. We are required to make sure that they're providing notification mailing for anything that's within 600 foot radius.

For your higher profile projects that might be in the downtown, we might ask the applicant to provide us labels that are well beyond that boundary. In this particular case, when we received the project, we saw it was infill development, we saw it was limited uses, there wasn't anything that warranted extending that notification beyond the what's required within the municipal code, which is 600 feet around the project boundary.

Okay. So this is considered infill even though it's butting up to, like, the sitting limits?

Correct. Yes.

Okay. And then my next question was there was two letters about from the water and immigration in the staff report or irrigation, sorry, not immigration. There's a letter from Solano Irrigation and Water in the staff report, correct?

Correct, yes.

And about fencing that's being built? Correct. Easily built with because it's bedding along Horse Creek?

Correct.

Is all of that gonna be included in I forgot what my question is. All of that's being accepted by the the developer. Right?

Yes. It's part of the conditions of approval. Okay. They have to comply with the requirements for the Celano Irrigation District for which we have agreements with them on, and they are part of our development review process. Okay. The Celano County Water Agency does have a resource on the southern end of the project, And so their letter informing what type of improvements have to be done up against their facilities was also included as a condition of approval.

Okay. So that's all accepted? Yes. Okay. And then my third question is about the sidewalk that abides on Orange Drive. If there is a sidewalk by the gas station there, is that sidewalk is there going to be a sidewalk there along where the apartments are or is it going to just be landscaping up to the street?

No, they have to extend those public improvements along there to Africa.

So that'll be extended all the way?

Correct, yes.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation. Just two, I think, easy ones for you. Can you explain the long term traffic and circulation plan for Orange Drive as we continue to put more housing projects out there? Just because I think traffic isn't gonna become an issue as we continue to go. So is there a plan in place?

Yes. That would be our general plan. So whatever improvements are identified in that general plan based off of the horizon year of 2035 is prerogative and the purview of the city's traffic engineer to make sure that those improvements are implemented at the appropriate time. So the individuals like this project will provide payments through development impact fees, traffic impact fees, and those fees will be used for those city projects.

Okay.

And then for the question on parking, I've had a chance to go back and look at the project table. The parking that's required by the Municipal Code is for every single bedroom unit or studio unit, they're obligated to provide one parking space, and then for every two two bedroom units are provided two parking spaces and that's the calculation that they've identified for their project, they got one bedroom and two bedroom units. So that's where the 121 comes from.

Any other questions? And so far, okay. I'd now open it up for public comment.

Thank you. My name is Tom Markle. I've been a resident around here and worked here for since 1969. And I know things change. We all know that everything in our area, I live in Leisure Town is going to change.

We had committees who met with us from Sire and we negotiated out a pretty good handshake. Nothing's, you know, in writing and as it is. About a week ago, I received from Green Lewis Holmes a vision for Green Tree property continued. And I understand that things are going to change and quite frankly, maybe when we see everything, we may disagree with it and say great. But we don't know that because we haven't seen anything.

No one has really spoken to us. I say me, but many of the Leisure Town residents are a bit surprised as to Lewis Holmes' project, knowing go ahead.

I don't go ahead.

We were just going to I think there was a bit of a miscommunication in the beginning. We assumed that the item he wished to speak on was on the agenda. So I think it's okay if we take his comment, if the Commission is okay with that.

Yes, sure.

We can follow-up.

I'll be

brief as I can. What what is concerning, we were we were told, know, the handshake agreement with SAIR that off of Orange Drive, there would be residential and there would be a retail center. Center being something like a grocery store, you know, something like Walgreens and etcetera. Sit down restaurant perhaps, you know, who knows? All be nice, but we're seeing something different.

One of the things that I see, and not just a personal observation of mine, is two and three story buildings obscuring views of the mountains that we have. And I'm concerned about that. It may be something I can't control, but I want you to know many people in Leisure Town are concerned about that. We, as I drive drove here, saw the park buildings on Main Street. This is my own personal opinion.

They are horrible. They stark white military style buildings that have no aesthetic beauty to them whatsoever, painted white. It's it's an abomination. We don't wanna see that in leisure time, quite frankly. Alright. I'll speak for myself. I speak for no one else but me.

Sir, your your time is up. Thank you for your time.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else?

Hi, my name is Jasperi Sidhu, and I'm the applicant. Basically, in regards to kind of the retail, kind of depend on market factors, of whatever comes through, right? But the goal is some type of commercial, something with something to sit down, something that can kind of provide something for the homes. So that's kind of the goal. And in regards to parking, the plan is to kind of preserve parking and then we did meet the threshold for the parking requirement. So just any other questions, if you guys have any?

How do you plan on doing the exit only on the leisure town?

Currently, it is just with the sign. That is the current plan. There is a potential for a gate. We just have to coordinate with fire just because of their requirements. So it kind of depends on fire.

And is the entrance to the retail right next to the exit only the way it shows on that plan there? I don't see an entrance to the retail off the

So the entrance off of Leisure Town Road is right off the right right there, and the exit only is at the very end of the road. So right there is where the exit only part is

for the There'll

be parallel for Correct.

Any other questions?

All right. Thank you, guys.

Thank you. Any other comments?

Good evening, Chair, Commissioners. My name is Ruben Galvan. I'm a field representative for the Carpenters Union, Local one hundred eighty, which covers Alana County. And I'm here today to speak about the Orange Apartments and Retail Development Project. As we discuss the development and growth in Vacaville, we know housing is much needed.

It's also important that new projects just don't just add units, we must also set standards for the people who will build them. That's why I'm asking a very important question, is there going to be labor standards on this project? When I say strong labor standards, I mean contractors who pay fair wages to support working families, access to quality health benefits so that workers don't have to choose between going to the doctor or paying the rent. Given real opportunity for apprentices from state accredited programs who want to learn the trade and build a career and meaningful labor compliance as well. Real enforcement to make sure contractors follow labor laws, pay workers properly and provide safe working conditions.

These protections don't just help workers, they help the community as a whole. When workers earn fair wages and get health care, they can better support their families and contribute to our local economy. Apprenticeship trainings trains the next generation of skilled workers who will keep our city growing strong for years to come. On the other hand, when labor standards are ignored, we open the door for bad actors, responsible contractors. These are the ones who pay low wages, often no health insurance, misclassified workers to avoid paying benefits and even wage theft.

These bad actors don't just hurt workers, they hurt the community by lowering the quality of work and putting safety at risk. Vacaville deserves projects built by responsible developers and contractors who will treat our working families with respect and dignity. I urge the commission to encourage strong labor standards on this project to make sure the development benefits everyone, not just the developer. Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing normal public comment, I'll close public comment. I think there was a little confusion by one of the speakers. I was wondering if you guys could maybe clarify from the first speaker.

Yeah. The first speaker was alluding to the GreenTree development. And certainly, gentlemen, I can give you my business card and we can have a separate discussion. That kind of gives you some information. We don't have any new projects about related to that right now.

Thank you. Any of the commissioners' feedback? I'm excited for the project. I hope it continues to beautify the area. I know the area has, you know, seen better days and so I'm excited for a project that's more aesthetically pleasing as we come into Vacaville. So look forward to the project. Seeing no other comments, do we have a motion from the Commission? I'll make a motion. Motion by Commissioner Vargas? Second. Second by Commissioner Leroy? Yeah, you do need to read it. Okay.

A simple motion to approve the project subject to conditions of approval.

Okay. And we have a second. Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Commissioner Vargas?

Yes.

Commissioner Bermondt?

Yes.

Commissioner Dingmann?

Yes.

Commissioner Hampton? Yes. Commissioner Leroy?

Yes.

Vice Chair Benter?

Yes. Chair Wilkerson?

Yes.

Motion passes.

Thank you. We'll now move on to our second public hearing this evening, which is to receive a presentation on the Vandongate development agreement amendment. We will first hear presentation by staff, followed by commissioner questions, and then we'll open up for public comment. Before we proceed, I'd like to ask if any commissioners have received any ex parte communications? No.

Staff, may we please have the presentation?

Good evening, Chair, members of the Planning Commission. The second item before you tonight is the Vandengate development agreement amendment. And this is a request to amend the Vandengate development agreement to remove a requirement to pay a community benefit contribution fee. The scope of this includes an environmental assessment and that amendment I was speaking about before. The aerial image on the left hand side shows the project site location in the Southeast corner of the city, and on the right hand side shows the boundary of the project site, identified in blue, fronting along Vannan Road.

Pertinent background history related to this project and the site. In 2004, LAVCO approved the annexation of this site into the city of Act Aville. In September 2018, City Council adopted and approved the Vannogate development project. In January 2020, the city approved some house plans for this subdivision. However, in April 2022, there was a modification submitted for the tentative map to reduce the lotting from 43 to 42 lots and change the configuration of the streets, and that was approved.

In June 2022, City Council decided to suspend collection of all community benefit contribution fees with the exception of Lower Lagoon Valley. And then in November 2025, another pertinent action related to this project from the city council approved the final amount for Vanning Gate, which paved the way for future development on the site. This project includes the reaffirmation of the previous environmental assessment for the project as well as this amendment. Some history some information about the project site. It's 9.36 acres.

There's 42 lots. It's mainly for single family residential detached homes. Vehicle access would be provided on Joyce Drive and Vannan Road. The original DEA has a term of ten years that would put it ending on October 2028. The DEA does require the payment of a community benefit contribution fee that at the time in 2018 was 8,300.

I don't have the escalator for the commission. The amendment is really necessary to comply with city council's direction from June 2022. All the terms in the development agreement would remain unchanged as part of this amendment. The project sites identified in the general plan as residential low density, which allows development at 3.1 to five units per acre and the zoning, again, low density, which allows a minimum lot size of 6,000 square foot in size. This map shows the revised tentative map that was approved by the Director of Community Development that shows that lotting reduced from 43 to 42 units, with access on Joyce Drive, Maverick Drive, there being extended A Street, ending in a cul de sac.

But as we mentioned, there was a modification to the tentative map mainly because there was an adjoining development called Vannan Cove that is shown on the southern portion in the blue outline, and you'll see that secondary street that's provided on the southern portion of the red boundary. And so that's really that secondary access that's going to be provided to the project site from Bed And Road. Our job is to determine consistency and compliance with a variety of different requirements, including the back of our municipal code. This amendment complies with City Council's direction as well as the required findings that are outlined in our municipal code. The environmental assessment is, again, determined for compliance and consistency with the California Environmental Quality Act.

Similar to the previous projects, section fifteen thousand one sixty two allows us to reaffirm the previous environmental assessment. In this case, the Vending Gate project, the city had prepared a mitigated negative declaration that aligned the impacts from this infill development. Nothing really has changed as a result of this amendment, and so project meets those findings. No new environmental document is required for circulation. We did some public outreach associated with this project by sending out a public hearing notice on May 6, 600 foot radius around the project, and then we're also hosting this public hearing with the Planning Commission.

We haven't received any public staff hasn't received any public comments associated with this amendment. With that, staff supports the proposed amendment, meets the required findings, complies with the general plan and zoning, objective development standards, as well as city council's direction. Most notably, all other terms and obligations outlined in that development agreement would remain effective. By simple motion, we're recommending that the Planning Commission would give a recommendation to the City Council to introduce the subject ordinance and adopt the amendment. That concludes our presentation and a representative from the applicant who owns the property is also here to answer any questions.

Okay. Thank you so much for the presentation. I'll now open it up for commissioner questions and comments. Commissioner Beaumont.

Thanks, Albert. I do have a question. Maybe you go back to the City Council in 2022 as to why they did away with the CBC fees. But I'm reading this and it says that it was for the Southtown Fire Station No. Seventy five and equipment for that station which was paid for, but it includes other capital improvements and acquisition of lands that the City Council considered to be of community wide benefit. So I'm wondering why do we give money back when the city's hurting when the applicant, the developer, has agreed to pay those fees, I guess is my question.

It's a very good question. I would start by saying we're not giving any money back because we haven't collected any fees since City Council's direction in '22. And the main idea is that the creation of a community benefit contribution, it's specific to whatever the project is. And so in this particular case, when City Council had looked at, the main reason for why the CBC was required was intended to collect money that was necessary to fund the city built fire station that's out there in Southtown. And once that improvement had been done and a lot of other improvements, City Council realized that, there weren't any other improvements to be done because all the infrastructure, all the street improvements, all the park improvements for Magnolia Park, all those were being allocated for by other separate developments, and those developments were obligated to put in the improvements associated with the roadways.

So it was a combination of determining that all the other loans and payments that were necessary to take out for the fire station had already been paid back, plus there were no other uses for that money. City council, in this particular case, I wouldn't be able to speak to the other development agreements that are out there that have the CBC, but for this particular one, that's part of the background associated with discontinuing the collection of that vein.

Good information. Thanks, Albert.

You good? Okay. Seeing no other questions at this time, I'd like to open up for public comment.

I'm here just to briefly comment on this particular project. I'll probably do the same for the previous project later on with the City Council, depending on what you decided. But my concern is very basic. I don't understand why the city is really going out of its way not to charge for any fees when it comes to community benefiting from it. I don't care if there are community development fees, developers fees, I don't understand that.

For what I've heard in other cities when that is implemented, the city overall benefits for our services, for our staff, for all the things that we need. And we are a growing city. I think you'll admit that. I've seen the city grow extremely from, I think it was 70,000 to about, now we're about 110,000 people in there, maybe more. We're not slowing down.

Growth is important. But I just questioned how you're administering that as a city, you know, with the city council, the staff, and everything. We need all the money we can get right now from those developers. They they're making money. We need to get the benefit for the community and not let it go through, not to be accountable for it, give them a free red carpet.

Sure, they'll come to back about I think the philosophy among you is that I've heard many times is that you build it, they'll come. So that's not the issue. The issue is what are you doing with those funds that you're that you need to collect to benefit the community and not let it be eliminated at the benefit of the developer. They have to give back to the community. Thank you. That's

it. Thank you for your comments. Any other public comment? Seeing none, close public comment. Commissioner Vargas. Yeah, Albert, I

know I think you mentioned for the CBC, you didn't have kind of a progressive fee. So example, 83.7 in 2018, my assumption is it's increased as the years have gone along. Is it possible, and I think it would be helpful for the community to see from the time in 2018 when that vote came in by City Council, what was the loss in that community benefit to the city, to the citizens? And I say that just because it would seem to be and as this gentleman here had posed, maybe a loss to the city. In particular, when you look at some of the cuts that are being proposed or some of the ads from Safety and Fire, our CR or police officer in the back, which I 100% support Safety and Fire.

But wondering if there's a different approach for the city. I get that we want to attract developers, I get that 100%. But I think it would be good for the citizens to understand what that loss is, if that's not too

much.

That's certainly something that we could put in the City Council staff report.

That would be great. That would be great. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Hampton.

Just to

follow-up on that, the fees that you collect, can you pool those or are those restricted to the projects that you're working on? So I know, for example, categorical funding is restricted towards the categoricals that are identified in school services, But the protocols that you have, can you pool those or are those simply restricted to the projects identified?

That's a great question. I do not know the answer to that.

I can help if you'd like, Robert. So the short answer and the generally applicable answer is because the CBCs are part of the negotiated development agreements, which are just contracts between the city and the developer, What we are limited by in terms of spending that CBC is whatever it says in the development agreement.

So if we'd written it in

a way where it said, so they can use it for beautification, for general purposes, for parks, anywhere in the city, that would be great. We could use it for any of those things. Typically, think the way the CBC portion of the DAs are written is to go towards specific projects. And so we collect it through the DA as an additional kind of fee beyond what the developer would otherwise pay, and then that's the restraint on it is however it's written into the agreement, if that makes sense.

So I guess the challenge is reviewing policy on a project like that. I would think that, you know, pooling those resources to redirect into beautification or other things would be something that, you know, the city would be open you know, and be able to utilize additional revenues that are generated through developers. So a consideration.

I appreciate the feedback. Every development agreement is negotiated specifically with that developer and so we're always in the market to see what we can get when we are negotiating each one. You. Thank you.

Any other questions or comments from the Commission? If not, I'd ask for a motion.

I have one more question.

Okay, Commissioner Gupta.

Sure, I

just have one more question. So in the CBC it does state like for other capital improvements and as we're our next item is going to look at capital improvements. And the last time I sat on the planning commission to look at capital improvements, we asked how is there funding for this and the answer is we don't know. Is that capital improvements further defined in the actual DA agreement that would preclude us using it from any other capital improvements?

So I haven't looked at the DA in a while. That may be the case. What I will say is because of the Council's direction in 2022, at this point, we're essentially just carrying out an order that should have been carried out in 2022. So it was globally apply any active DA at the time that had a CBC, whatever it could have paid for or could not have paid for was directed to be terminated. So that's not here.

Any other questions or comments or look for a motion?

I'll just if I can just say thank you for the comments. We're writing all of these down and we'll provide your feedback to the City Council when it goes for first reading. So if anything else you want to share, we're happy to share those with them.

You. Commissioner Vargas. I'd like to make a motion. Second. Motion from Commissioner Vargas, second from Commissioner Beaumont. The motion is? A simple motion recommend that the

City Council introduce and adopt the amendment.

Great. Roll call vote, please.

UNIDENTIFIED REPRESENTATIVE:] Commissioner Vermont? COMPANY Commissioner Dingmann? COMPANY Yes. Commission passes.

We'll move on to our third public hearing this evening, which is the receiver presentation on entertainment zone ordinance. We will first hear presentation by staff, followed by commissioner questions and then we will open up for public comment. Before we proceed, I would again like to ask if there's any commissioners that have received ex parte communication on this matter. Ready for the presentation.

Good evening members of the Planning Commission.

Good evening.

The request for tonight is to amend and there's a correction here in both the PowerPoint and in the staff report. It should be to amend title 12 of the City of Vacaville Municipal Code by adding chapter 12.34 entitled to create new policies, procedures, and standards for establishing and regulating entertainment zones in the City Of Vacaville. For background on this item, staff brought a study session to City Council on January to present this topic to the City Council to get direction from them to see if they wanted us to look into this further. We also presented the idea of a parklet program. Although tonight, will just be speaking about the entertainment zone.

I will provide some background because we did conduct community outreach for both programs at the same time. So senate bill nine sixty nine was enacted in 2024 and it authorized cities to establish entertainment zones. And these zones allow alcohol to be consumed on public streets, sidewalks, or public rights of way within the zone boundary. An ordinance is required for the program and it outlines the administration, procedural requirements, and enforcement and review protocols. The second component of the entertainment zone is a management plan which contains more detailed requirements and information for zone operations and a new management plan would be established for every entertainment zone that's created.

Right now, we're really only looking at one area but it is possible to have multiple areas. So the goals of this program is to activate Main Street and prominent public spaces in Downtown Vacaville, also to increase revenue for downtown businesses and catalyze a broader economic stimulus in the city to create vibrant public spaces, increase social activity and enhance community culture with new entertainment and design. As for the project timeline, in January and February we conducted outreach. We did a variety of outreach strategies including mailing notices, posting a survey, creating a project web page, going door to door, posting our newsletter and social media posts. And then we held two committee engagement meetings in February at the McBride Senior Center.

And we held a city council study session in March and then we posted a public review draft of the ordinance and management plan as well for review. And here we are in phase three where we are presenting to the Planning Commission to get your recommendation and feedback on the program, and then we will present this to city council again on June 9 for our first hearing and a second hearing would be in June 23. And if they choose to adopt the program, then it will be in effect July 23. And mid to late twenty twenty six, that's when we'll look into doing the Parkland program and we'll come back to planning commission and present any materials for that program with you all. So as far our approach to this program, we're calling it the Main Street Entertainment Zone due to its location.

It is currently proposed to be a pilot program that will only operate during the twenty twenty six Creek Walk concert series, which will sunset on 01/01/2027 unless the city council chooses to extend it and continue it further and broaden its operations. So for the ordinance, it outlines that a special event permit will be required for the program. A management plan will be required for the zone. It establishes a general window of 10AM to 10PM where zone operations can occur where people can purchase the drinks and go outside for certain events. But this is restricted when someone goes in for a special event permit to tighter time frame only during event hours.

General liability insurance will be required for each of the businesses that would like to participate and there are provisions for violations and penalties and a biannual review will be required for the city. So we'll need to present to the City Council every year on zone operations, looking at things like safety, just making sure everything's working okay and that there are no problems and if any adjustments need to be made. As for the management plan, we again identify that this is a pilot program. We identify an entertainment zone lead or a possible lead, some participating businesses and that the fact that city approval will be required. So anytime that a business would like to participate in the zone and sell their beverages for outdoor consumption, they need to request approval from the city, the police department will review it, parks and rec, our department as well as some others just to make sure that safety and any possible issues are prevented.

So in addition to that, we also identify events, activation and programming for the zone. So identifying which events operations will occur in, any activation in terms of the design of the spaces, the types of activities, people can have games, you know the ping pong, games like that really to liven up the activities as well in addition to just alcohol. So for the Creek Walk concert series, hours of operation would just be from 06:30 to 09:30 which are the current operating hours. And for health and safety measures, security plan will be required to be provided at the time of the special permit application submittal. And there will be age verification protocols as well as signage just informing everyone of all the rules.

There will be staff and police presence to ensure that everything's being followed. So this is the current proposed boundary and this is for events that would like to incorporate Andrews Park. So this would run for the pilot program. So all of these businesses here would be able to sell their beverages and their patrons would be able to walk down to the Creek Walk concert series for the event. And this is an alternative boundary which would be eligible after the pilot program for events not including Andrews Park.

Again, allowing all the same businesses but really this boundary is just to prevent people from wandering off into Andrews Park when there's no event there. And again, here are the outreach methods that we enacted in this process. We tried to make it very extensive. We wanted to hear back from all residents and businesses to make sure we address everyone's concerns. And we did receive a large amount of survey responses.

These results are actually as of April. So 29 out of 37 are in favor of the entertainment zone program and 23 out of 37 were in favor of the parkour program. Some concerns that people had were street closures. So we're not proposing new additional street closures, only events with existing closures at this time are being considered. Monitoring patrons and public safety.

So police assessment will occur on a case by case basis for every event and could require things like private security, staff monitoring measures, anything that's deemed necessary by the police department and any other residents or city council or planning commission if you guys have anything that you'd like to see as well we can make sure we incorporate that. And the fact or the idea of businesses being able to cross the streets with alcohol, this was a topic that came up. So we confirmed with ABC that businesses will be allowed to sell their beverages and people will be allowed to cross the street to get into Andrews Park and to other events. And for the Parklet program people are concerned of a loss of parking downtown. So this project is exempt from CEQA under the common sense exemption given the fact that these new regulations will not create new impacts.

And then as for the City Council study session on March 24, they also expressed some concerns and comments. The first being the pilot program, can we end it at any time because this will run for the full series of the Creek Walk concert series. So we can end it early if there are big issues that are occurring. And we also received a question regarding the application process, if multiple events can be submitted under one application and how long the permits last. Typically the permits only last for one year and you can't group them together, it has to be individual application per event.

And there's no cost to apply but a fee is being considered based on the event size and other conditions. There was also a question regarding town square events. There was a desire that the events that are focused in the town square should have zone operations restricted to this area and not pour out into the street. So staff updated the management plan with this option. And enforcement, there were questions regarding if police would have the full authority to enforce all local laws and regulations related to alcohol consumption, and they do.

Businesses that create a nuisance or violate regulations may be excluded from zone operations, find or face other civil penalties. And as for the boundary, they requested that we consider expanding it. So this is what we had originally proposed And you could see there were some businesses here left out that serve alcohol a little further down Merchant Street. So we just updated the boundary to incorporate these businesses here. But for the most part, all of the businesses that serve alcohol in downtown are included in the boundary.

So to conclude, we will be going to the city council on June 9 and then the second reading will occur on June 23. The ordinance and management plan will be sent to ABC in June 2026. They really just take it for their records. It's not for their approval. They don't need to approve the ordinance or management plan.

And it will become effective on July 23 in time for the rest of the Creek Walk concert series. And we are recommending by simple motion that this that the planning commission recommend that the city council adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Vacaville, including that the entertainment zone ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to section one five zero six one b three of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines and introduce an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Vacaville amending the Vacaville Municipal Code by adding Chapter 12.34 entitled Entertainment Zones to create new policies, procedures and standards for establishing and regulating entertainment zones within the City Of Vacaville. Any questions or comments?

Thank you so much for the presentation. I'll now open it up for commissioner questions and comments. We'll start with Commissioner Beaumont.

Thanks, Damir. I have one question and that is under the Main Street Entertainment Zone boundary Attachments two and three. It reads, participating businesses will be allowed to sell alcohol from their businesses and monitor the zone to ensure consumption only occurs within the Main Street Entertainment Zone boundary. It sounds to me like they're the bouncers and the Vacaville Police are just hanging out. So they have no enforcement ability. So the way it reads, it doesn't make sense to me that they're going to monitor the zone and enforce the boundary zone.

So they'll be required and they'll have a direct line to police department. So they'll be required to report any incidents that occur and obviously mitigate any conflicts that arise if they can, the bouncers until police can arrive. But for the most part, it's primarily to serve as monitoring the boundary, making sure people aren't wandering outside of the boundary or that they don't know where the boundary are. They're more of a guide in that sense and they also enforce the fact that the age verification. So ensuring that no minors are consuming alcohol as well.

So the businesses are going to be inside selling alcohol, is that right? That's their job?

Yes, but they could, depending on police's requirements, have staff that are also present outside as well. And that's something that will be identified in the

So that will be in coordination thirty:fifty with the police department that they'll have people walking

Yes.

Zero Trying to enforce however they can or if they can't then get a hold of the police department?

Yes. And for a lot of these events too, Parks and Rec staff will also be present like the Creek Walk concert series as well to assist with this.

So with the business, with the budget cuts that the Police have, is this going to be an extra thing on them or the business is going to pay extra for the Vacaville Police to do extra duty? Because I don't see how they're going to manage this particularly under their budget when they're cutting back on a lot of things.

Good evening.

Good evening. You bring up a very good point and you know, each time that we receive a special event permit, we'll review it to determine what it may or may not require from the police department when it comes to resources and staff and that could very well play a factor.

So would you charge the businesses in this area an extra fee for the amount of manpower that you would expend for that the event? Or would you see if it meets into your budget of who you have covering the city at the time?

Yeah. I think it depends on the on the size of the event and what the resources that are gonna be required from the police department. You know, the police department will do everything that we can to support downtown businesses. And so however we can make sure that people who are attending this event are, you know, enjoying it safely, we would do our best to provide that. But it really just does depend on the event.

If they're providing, if they're able to provide security, that would be a factor that we would consider. So it's it'll be a case by case basis. But yes, I mean if we are, asked to staff a large event, the staffing challenges that we are currently facing with the, with our budget is going to be a factor. And if it's something that we cannot assure can be done safely, then that would be considered in the approval process and it could be very well denied.

So the pilot program runs through the summer concert only, and the police department, I assume, has regular patrols during that timeframe?

Yes. Currently we do staff Creek Walk, specifically within the area of Andrews Park, but hopefully, you know, we're available if the need is surrounding that area. So it just depends, again on what what the event looks like and how big, the actual boundaries are and something else that is going to be important is to establish the clear boundaries ahead of time so everyone is on the same page and it'll be important for the police department to work closely with the lead that's identified so everyone's on the same page as far as who is doing what ahead of time. So that plan should and will be clearly established.

Thank you, officer.

Since you're here, enforcement, when we've looked at the entertainment zone ordinance, have you seen an uptick in other cities and issues when they when they have these?

I have actually spoken with one nearby agency that recently enacted a similar ordinance and it was actually anticipated to potentially have more problems than they're seeing right now. They've only had a couple of events, but a couple of things that they mentioned that are important. One is that clear communication ahead of time lets you to evaluate each event afterwards and see what was working, what could have done better, and and learn from that. And what's important with this is that there is a sunset on this, and so we're finding that, you know, this isn't, going as planned or if there's an uptick in enforcement that, you know, is causing, you know, problems on a regular basis, that can all be taken into consideration when counsel decides if they want to extend this program or not.

Okay. What prevents a constituent from purchasing some a drink from a restaurant that's not participating, taking said drink outside and then going to the event like at Andrews Park? Like what's the enforcement on that? Is that allowed, not allowed?

Sure. So within the boundary of the entertainment zone, whoever is leading this event and working with that identified lead has to have a plan in place that's approved by the police department says, Okay, this is what the cup is going to look like, this is what the wristband is going to look like, this is how they're going to provide age verification when they're selling the alcohol. And so if there is a violation of that, if police are present, you know, whatever is whatever is a violation of the law is still a violation of law in the entertainment zone. But that could be monitored, within their security plan as well as far as who's identified as as responsible for making sure that this is also happening, and then that could be addressed both from you know a criminal aspect as well as there's you know the it's clear that there could be civil ramifications as well for these businesses and so it's again that would be important for them to understand before the permits approved.

Okay, thank you.

And to add to that point really quick as well, some businesses did also some of the bars address that point that their patrons would want to go outside and that they would be the ones to have to really make sure because they become liable if their patrons start stepping outside. But as captain mentioned, they will have cup requirements, so only the participating businesses will have the actual cup. So all of the staff that are present in the area, everyone involved is gonna see who does not have a cup and who has alcohol and will be able to check from there, tell them to dump it. If they don't then police will get involved.

Okay, so as the cost of inflation and things arise are we using the same cup every time?

It'll be different per event.

Okay.

Yeah, there'll be specific branding.

Okay.

Make it special.

Thank you. Commissioner Vanta.

Thank you for the presentation. So as I'm understanding this, it's for one this is a pilot program specifically for one event or the series of events, correct?

Yeah. One event or a series.

And the management plan states that the businesses would need to have a permit or they'd have to apply to be to participate in it. Correct. If this goes well, and we continue to do this annually, will they have to apply every year or for every event, or if there's different events, like say they want to participate in the Creekwalk series, do they need a special permit for that one, but then there's a downtown car show, they want to participate in that one. Do they need a separate permit with the city for every single one?

Yes. Currently, that's how we're proposing it, but the city could decide as an administrative policy that we wanna change it and make it a little more flexible and be able to allow people to combine. That's certainly

a Or maybe the one or something? Okay.

Yeah.

And then I know, again, this is a pilot program for a specific area and we're calling it the downtown one. But say this goes well and then there's another area that says, we want to do that too. Would this same ordinance be kind of applied there where we start the whole process over again where there's we would need all these same amount of hearings to go forward?

The ordinance would be amended but that will be a quick process really just to identify the new zone and the boundary but a new management plan will be needed and that's not quite an extensive process that would need to occur, but we still wanna make sure that we're doing good outreach in whatever area that we decide to set up in.

Okay. And then when the management plan is established, there's a lead for every single event, right? Is there a point where because a lot of these questions are gonna come down to the management plan. Is that gonna come back and be presented to council at any point in time or will that be all ministerial?

It's all gonna be presented now currently, but we'll keep Planning Commission and City Council both informed, but that'll be handled administratively within the city but we'll definitely make sure that City Council

So is there an identified lead in this one already in this pilot program?

Currently, we're looking at the Downtown Vaccaro Business Improvement District. They've expressed interest. We're just giving everyone one last chance to let us know if they think otherwise, if a particular business wants to take that responsibility. But currently, we're looking at the Downtown Background Business Improvement District.

Okay. I just think it'd be important to start having them present some of these ideas as well. And then piggybacking off the budget question, have there been other events in the past three to five years that have been that have happened in Downtown Vacaville that have required an increased police presence? And what is the fiscal impact or the hour impact of increased officer presence needed?

So so, you know, the police department has participated in several citywide events, Merriman on Main, fourth of July, Fiesta Days. So that's all part of something that we've been participating in for several years. And with the budget deficit that we are facing, each of those events are currently being carefully analyzed to determine how and if the police department can provide sufficient resources for each event given the budget that we're facing right now. And so it's going to depend and it's definitely a factor that we are looking at as we get closer to each event.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Next was Commissioner Leroy.

Yeah, had a couple questions. The first is I saw that the Police Department is consulted, but fire EMS are not required to to to weigh in on whether they have needed increased presence or availability?

Is that They'll I believe they review, events currently with, special events, so it'll undergo the same process, and fire will also be routed over review.

Okay. I just didn't see that in the package,

sorry. The

blocking or the participation, I see the area, are they blocking off streets?

So no street closures now like with this pilot program for the Creek Wall concert series. There will be signs up and again people along those boundaries but no fences along the streets. However, along the park boundary I'll pull that up.

Because will traffic be not allowed in those areas? Is that the intent? Because there's gonna be people in the street, right, walking around is what

I'm Ideally, no. Just ideally, they'd just be taking the sidewalk and not just walking and wandering all over the street. Cars will still be driving through there. That was a concern people had. But again, it kind of really just functions as it's kind of a common sense. But when it comes to alcohol, it can be tricky. But again, with the current Creek Walk concert series, the streets aren't blocked off and people who are intoxicated could also just walk out and wander on the streets. It's kind of tricky there. But, yeah, it's suspected that people walk along the sidewalk to get to the event.

Okay. I and I may have read it wrong. I thought I in this presentation, it talked about being able to walk on the street like it was an open area. So maybe I misread that.

Only for future events that have street closures like the car show. Streets are shut down for that.

Final one and it came up from the comment here. Is the city providing the cups to the patron or the to the businesses? Is that The what's

businesses will all be in charge of providing the wristbands, the cups. So they'll to

buy the same cup or a cup that is identified by everyone that

Yeah, it'll be a unified cohesive for that event and the entertainment zone lead will be tasked with making sure everyone's on board with that and using the same materials.

Okay. And is anybody policing that? Like if a business doesn't pay the permit but uses a cup?

Speaker The lead, the is on the lead and then they'll inform us and then we would, of course, have repercussions for that. We could possibly revoke them from participating if they don't want to play along.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next was Commissioner Hampton.

In a preface, I think this is great. I'm glad the city is moving towards this. Think it's a very proactive approach to continue to develop culture particularly in the downtown area. That's my preface. A couple of quick questions. Okay, first of all, it sounded like and thank you, I think you guys collaborated with the Downtown Business Association. They had their feedback and they were actively engaged in this process.

Yes, and they were enthusiastic as well about the program.

Okay, good. The consideration for structured fees versus I'm hearing relative fees based on the events. Is there any consideration for future that there'll be structured fees that way it's not relative? If I'm on one end of the, you know, and I have two or three businesses down here versus the other end of the, of Main Street, you know, I'm just concerned that some of the businesses may feel like, okay, I'm business A and, you know, my fees should be lower. So are there going to be structured fees? Is that something that you're considering?

Currently no fees at all to apply for a special permit, special event permit application. That's how it currently works. But our city manager's office is considering possibly incorporating fees in the future and that would be structured in making sure it's fair for all businesses that want to participate.

Okay, because that would obviously supplement UNIDENTIFIED

PD and assist with the services needed.

Second question, looking at the map, again given future consideration, I'm curious why East Main was not part of the defined district.

Yes, really there's only one business here that serves alcohol and they didn't express any interest in being a part of the program. We could always amend the zone boundary to include them if they want to, but we're also keeping in mind the 700 Park development here as well, trying not to have operations occur too close to them. That was something that City Council brought up. We're going to play it by ear, see what the community feels is appropriate and go from there.

I'm just thinking of future considerations. For example, you've had the Farm under Fork event downtown and that was a closed off area where you closed the streets off. I thought that was a very successful event downtown. You've had jazz and music festivals, okay. Obviously separation of bands and venues for those bands, you know, the broader scope of venues, you know, obviously if, you know, I'm, if you've got six or seven bands, know you've had jazz fests and other things taking place, you know, I think that extended boundary could be a consideration, particularly if you're doing live music at variety of venues within that district.

So also because that's an area where you could close off the street, okay, traffic is not real heavy there and keep the downtown street open. Would just say even though there is maybe no interest currently for that East Main Street, is give consideration, particularly for future, as flexibility towards hosting venues, closing off streets, and obviously looking at venues where if you're getting multiple venues for a large event, particularly if they're live music, you might want to stagger those. So just my thoughts.

Absolutely and I think City Council echoes their sentiment. Definitely wants to they wanted to see it expanded as large as possible. We had to reel them in a little bit, tell them just want to make sure operations run slowly before we go a little further.

Thank you. Commissioner Vargas? Yeah. So just a comment, you know, the

I'm concerned about the staffing, safety, and fiscal implications and impacts to safety, I have to say. I'm a staunch supporter of safety. Having been a public sector guy, work for working in public sector currently, and so support safety percent in downtown events. But I would encourage the city because this sounds like it's not just an issue of safety for your own officers, but also for the citizens of Vacaville. And then factoring in the kind of the fiscal landscape that safety is in right now, kind of a scrutiny from the public about being over budget.

I know what it's like to be over budget. You're they scrutinize every single penny. Overtime is always the biggest thing, right? What's overtime being spent for? My assumption is, is that these requirements for overtime, for example, you take Fiesta Day, was coming this weekend, that's a big event, right? It's not just specific to the city of Vacaville, we get folks from Vallejo, Fairfield, so you have to factor in the individuals that visit our city that we don't necessarily want in our city, right? And so those are my concerns and the hope is that the city will work with safety, that's police and fire to ensure that we are safe, this is a safe city and we want to continue to be. So that's my only comment.

Absolutely, and that's exactly why I want to do this incrementally and any step of the way if we notice problems or adjustments need to be made or if the whole thing needs to be canceled. We haven't committed to anything, so

I thank you for the presentation.

Commissioner Dingmann? Yes. Thanks, staff, for a great presentation. And Captain, thank you for being here. Thanks for what you do for our community. Really appreciate it. Just a couple of comments and kind of echo Commissioner Vargas' whole point on public safety. And I love this entertainment zone boundary and, you know, getting everything moving in our downtown. I mean, we want Vacaville to be a great place for our families, great place to go, but the public safety aspect is one that I think we can't overlook. It's funny, you know, earlier in in our program tonight, we talked about getting rid of the community benefit contribution fee.

We keep reducing fees, but we keep asking more from from our our city staff, from our our public safety, folks that are out there. And so I think we just have to continue to evaluate that. None of us want to have more taxes and, you know, fees for our businesses. We want to encourage growth. We want to encourage people to get out there, but I think we have to be realistic of, you know, the demands this is gonna place on the police department and, you know, fire department and other public safety folks.

Then, even the business owners, it's gonna be a lot to ask of them and, you know, let alone, you know, figuring out which cup you're supposed to use in a wristband for each event. So, I think I think it's still a great thing. I think the pilot program's definitely the way to go, but as this potentially expands, I think you're gonna really have to pay attention and make sure we take care of, our public safety folks. That's all I have.

Going down Main, there's housing there. Did we do any outreach to those property owners to see how they felt about it?

Yes, all property owners within the Downtown Vacaville, downtown specific plan boundary were notified via mail.

Any feedback or any comments?

Just the surveys, but they were anonymous, so we didn't know which ones We did identify in the survey who asked who's a resident versus who's a business owner. There were quite a number of residents who did respond but nobody particularly commented any concerns about their residents or being affected for those properties further along

in

Wild West Main?

I think it's a great idea. I'd like to see other areas of Vacaville have it like Nuttree, outlet. I mean, it could really help a lot of areas and businesses that are struggling to revitalize with with their economy. Commissioner Banta?

Sorry. Had another comment. A question and comment. So I know that there was the senate bill that allowed cities to be able to do this. What specifically spurred our city to want to to explore this? Is it just because we have the ability to do it or was it kind of advocated about by somebody or a group?

Yes. Believe it came from several business owners downtown. Part of it was the Townsquare Music Series. There were COVID allowances for outdoor alcohol consumption that were set to expire this year. They've since been expanded but when that went away, there was a desire to keep those types of events going and possibly expanding.

So we heard from businesses regarding that and then also the fact that we do have an alcohol vendor for events like the Creek Walk Concert Series and some businesses felt that kind of takes away from their business because they can't sell and have their participation in the event as well. This kind of gives them a little bit of an equal playing field.

Thank you. Due to that being the kind of the reason for wanting to have it, I guess my comment would be that if the lead the entertainment zone lead, there could be some sort of conversation or requirement to gather input on, it bring more businesses to downtown? Was there increased alcohol consumption? Was there increased sales? Did it bring were more people staying in Vacaville on the weekend for this event so that it could be replicated in different areas of Vacaville? Is it really driving more, more sales, more economy? Is it keeping keeping people here spending time downtown or is it just another which is fine if it is, but is it just another benefit to the people that are already spending time downtown?

Yeah. That's an excellent idea that we will run by the entertainment zone lead and I know businesses are already tracking that sort of information because they presented that to us with events like the Townsquare Music Series, they noticed an uptick in customers and things like that. We would anticipate that it would only continue to grow with a broader program.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments? Okay, we still need to open it up for public comment. I'll close public comment. Any other commissioners have any feedback? If not, I'd like to ask for a motion. I make a motion. Commissioner Dingmann with the motion?

I'll second.

Commissioner Vargas with the second?

You got to read it. Yep. If you can pull it up.

Motion. You guys have it?

The motion, so I can read it.

Thank you. No,

it's long.

Oh, Lord. It's hanging. You said yes.

All right. Commissioner Vargas. Right. Motion for adopted resolution for the City Council of the City of Acquirel, concluding the entertainment zone ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 1561B, Subset three of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines and introduce an ordinance of the city council of the city of Vacaville amending the Vacaville Municipal Code by adding chapter 12.34 entitled Entertainment Zones to create new policies, procedures, and Standards for Establishing and Regulating Entertainment Zones within the City Of Vacaville. Thank you. I'd like to call for a roll call vote.

Commissioner Bacchus? Yes. Commissioner Beaumont?

Yes.

Commissioner Dingmann? Yes. Commissioner Hampton? Yes. Commissioner Leroy? Yes. Vice Chair Banta? Yes. Chair Wilkerson?

Yes.

Motion passes.

Thank you. And thank you, Captain, for coming on. Thank you. We'll move on now to our business item this evening, which is to receive a presentation on the general plan consistency review for new projects in the fiscal year 2026 and 2027 capital improvement program. We'll first hear presentation followed by commissioner questions and then we'll open up for public comment. Will we please have the presentation?

So tonight's request is for the Planning Commission to determine that the proposed twenty twenty six-twenty twenty seven capital improvement program is consistent with the general plan. Capital improvement program is the blueprint for building and sustaining infrastructure in the city. It identifies major improvements to City Of Vacaville facilities and it also identifies how they implement general plan goals, policies, actions. Government code sections sixty five thousand four hundred one and sixty five thousand four hundred two require a consistency determination with the general plan. And to summarize the projects that are included this year, there are 55 new projects and they really fall into three categories.

The first being master plans, feasibility studies and models. The second being repairs, maintenance and infrastructure improvements. And the third being new buildings, structures and facilities. Here are a list of some of the master plans, studies, and models. Some noteworthy ones are open space master plan, Andrews Park master plan, an update to the Lower Lagoon Valley Lake Restoration Plan.

There's also an update to the city's travel demand model. And here are a list of some of the major repair, maintenance and infrastructure improvements. We have some city hall fire alarm replacement, roof replacements, playground replacements, the installation of downtown bollards, improvements to water and sewer infrastructure and Foxborough Parkway roundabout expansion. And as for new buildings, structures and facilities, there's a sports field complex as proposed to be constructed and two neighborhood centers at Sierra Vista Park and North Village area plan two and a police asset storage facility. So we are requesting a recommendation by simple motion that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council of the City of Vacaville determine that the capital improvement program for the twenty twenty six-twenty twenty seven fiscal year is consistent with the Vacaville General Plan.

Are there any questions or comments?

Yes, thank you for the presentation. I'll open it up for questions or comments from the Commission. Commissioner Beaumont.

Thanks, Sameer, for that. Real quick question, may have answered it. Are these projects listed in any order? Are they proprietary S-one through 55?

There's no particular order. They were just listed private by private, yeah.

Is Item No. 20, Travel Demand Model, is that a software update? Is that what that is?

UNIDENTIFIED Would our Assistant Director happen to know? I would think so. I think it's a I mean,

it sounds like it, but I don't know.

I can help a little bit, specifically because this came up in the context of the development impact fees when we were discussing those last year. So the traffic demand model that is talked about in this project list is essentially we have one currently. It predates COVID, and so there's been a lot of changes in traffic patterns and the city that warrants the development of an update to, yes, essentially it's a software program that is proprietary to the city that shows how traffic patterns are moving so that we can use that to help support the projects that need to be built in the future.

Yeah. Okay. That's what I thought. Okay. And 2728 are ball field lighting, lighting of the ball fields. The surrounding neighborhoods been surveyed to make sure that that's gonna be no problem for the neighbors?

So typically with these projects, when we identify them here, eventually come back as specific entitlement requests. That's when we would do the public outreach.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. And the last one I have is 35, which is another sports field complex when we just did Centennial Park. So I'm just wondering why that's on the list when we're spending so much money at Centennial Park.

I'd be happy to let our parks know about your question, but I'm unable to.

Well, I just looked at it and I'm going, man, Centennial Park is a big thing and, you know, we're spending tons of money there and I'm just wondering why it's on the list when we're just doing a huge park for the whole city.

I'll just add that it's likely included in our master plan for Parks and Recreation Services, but we can follow-up with our director, our Parks Director.

Okay. I just had the question. That's all. Thank you very much.

Isn't that one private public partnership as well, that new sports complex? Isn't that going to be a private public private partnership?

I'm not sure, but we can follow-up.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Leroy.

Yeah, this is my first time hearing this stuff. Obviously, it's not my second meeting. Is it appropriate to ask, like, the Foxborough Roundabout expansion? Do you know details? Like, have they thought about getting rid of it? Like, it seems like there's an accident a week down there or some sort of damage to the roundabout. I'm just curious what's being done to fix that.

I don't

know if that's appropriate to ask at this forum or if there's some other forum.

No, no, it's a good question for Next this time we should probably invite some colleagues from public works. But we can follow-up with you on that.

Okay. We'll Thanks.

Anybody else have any questions? Nope. Okay. Station 72. I see that's on the list. We aren't we rounding out that station? Thought I saw something. I

think just the engine or the medical. I don't think the whole station is getting browned out. Think it's a service out of the station.

You. Anybody else? Who owns Irene Larson? Does the city own Irene Larson, or does the separate entity own Irene Larson?

A city or county? Is it county?

I that that's why I'm asking the question.

Croatia was it. Sorry.

Can we find that out? Because I know there's a lot of speaking from personal experience, there's a lot of softball and baseball teams that play there, but there's no bathroom facilities. And so that's a concern when you're playing a game, have six new kids, hey, bathroom break, potty break, and we gotta go to Mountain Mike's.

Sure.

Or something like that. So I'm just curious on who owns that and then if the city does own it, Irene Larson has been in the same it's been it's been the same way since I was a kid playing T ball out there. So just wondering if there ever be any improvement to that part.

Sorry, that

was We can follow-up.

Oh, we can. Yeah, we can.

Thank you.

Any other commissioner questions or comments? I'd like to open up the public comment. Coming? Closed public comment. Commissioner discuss and provide feedback to staff, please. I don't know. I'll make a motion. K. Commissioner Vargas? Yeah. I'm ready to make a motion. K. I'd like to make a motion. Commissioner Vargas wants to make a motion. Can I get a second?

Second.

Second by commissioner Leroy.

By simple motion, recommend that the City Council and the City of Vacaville determine that the capital improvement program for the twenty twenty six, twenty twenty seven fiscal year is consistent with the Vacaville general plan.

I'd like to roll call vote. First from Commissioner Vargas and the second from Commissioner Leroy.

Commissioner Bakers?

Yes.

Commissioner Bermondt? Yes. Commissioner Dingmann? Yes. Commissioner Hampton? Commissioner Leroy? Yes. Vice Chair Banta? Yes. Chair Wilkerson?

Yes.

Thank you. Motion passes.

Thank you. That ends our business. We'll now move on to our department monthly report. Assistant Director Garcia, please proceed.

Thank you. We have a couple of updates this month. On April 28, city staff received building safety proclamation from the city council. Staff presented information that highlighted the work of our building division, reviewing and inspecting development projects to ensure structures are constructed and maintained in compliance with the California Building Code and local regulation. Upcoming items for the Planning Commission, we have the Northeast Growth Area Planning Study coming to you next month and also the general plan amendment streamlining zoning text amendment.

Pending items that we're still working on that will come to you soon are the Sapphire Luxury Apartments, Blackville Islamic Center, the Orion Outdoor Digital Billboard and Peabody Allison specific plan study session. So a quick update on building division activity. These numbers are as of April 21. In comparison to last month in March, we saw a little decline in the overall number of building permits that were issued, but we are still increasing in the number of inspections that we completed overall. So again, this kind of just shows that information in graphic form, although there is a slight decline when we compare the numbers to last year, there is increasing since February and January, which is good.

Similar here, our monthly averages are slowly increasing, they're lower than last year but much higher than February. And then this is the overall kind of graph showing solar permits and also ADE permits. We had four in April, which is not too many but at least we're still seeing them. And then passing it on to our Planning Manager, Brevan.

Thank you. In terms of District 1, we received a parcel map application to it's a simple subdivision of two parcels, Site Two-four. District two, general plan amendment for Parcel M. This was one that went to council last year regarding Kairos and extra land that they had that they'd like to have residential development occur on. District three, we approved the project for Kairos for field lighting.

District four, this is sort of a very simple project to add some improvements to the VCS Sports Field. Nothing really happened in District 5 last month. District 6, development agreement amendment, minor revision that occurred for Randogate and the Harvest Ridge project which was before you. In terms of updates to advanced planning projects, Peabody Allison, that's still an ongoing project. We recently were able to have the cities move forward with water and sewer water and storm rain analysis, so that's ongoing right now.

MSR continue to have dialogue with LAFCO about the project, including there was one meeting today, I believe. Entertainment zone, you just heard. Pro housing designation, this is one that city council approved last year. We submitted our application and there's been some back and forth on additional items that the state needs to see. East Legiontown, a very large project that's still ongoing and it's I think the main goal here is to get the draft EIR started and ready for the public in the 2026.

Northeast growth area planning study, again, moving forward and find and finalize some technical reports. And then the item that assistant director mentioned about streamlining general plan amendments, that's going be coming to you and then on to counsel later this summer.

Thank you, Planning Manager, Bernd. So just a couple of updates. We're happy to report that our new economic development manager started last week, Amanda Portier. So we're excited to have her on board, and we're going to be coordinating with her to hopefully have her come and do a study session for you in the next couple of months once she gets her feet under her. And we're also looking at reviewing planning intern applications, and we're hoping to hire two planning interns, college interns and one economic development college intern. So really looking forward to that process. And those are our updates for this month.

Thank you. Any questions, comments? Okay. We'll move on to item 12, commissioner comments. This portion of the agenda is for commissioners to inform each other of items of potential interest to the other commissioners, such as interagency meetings or other announcements as appropriate. I'll start going down the line

with Commissioner Beaumont. I'm good. Thank you.

What?

Commissioner Banta?

I'm good, thank you.

Commissioner Dingmann? Airshow.

I'm good too. We'll keep it consistent on the

sense of the trend, okay. Commissioner Vargas?

See you back and we'll have fun.

That's all I got. Commissioner Leroy? I'm good. Commissioner Hampton?

I'm gonna land the plane. I'm good.

I have two items. I first wanted to thank our mayor, Carly, city manager, Sabita, assistant city manager, Georgian, chief Poland, I think that was all who was there today. They presented at the Northern Solano County Association of Realtors marketing meeting about choosing a path. And so it was great to have 60 people in the room, 40 on Zoom, all engaged, all asking questions of just about what path we're gonna potentially go down. So it was great to see that presentation. I appreciate them for coming to speak to us. And lastly, Black Oak restaurant was torn down today.

Oh, no.

And so like, I don't know if anyone knows, but it's been closed for a long time, but Black Oak restaurant was a place where a lot of people would go and eat, a lot of deals were made, a lot of fun was had. My family and I went there for a long time. I think my dad had an actual corner that he sat there with his buddies, and so was driving by today and I actually saw it tear down, getting torn down. So that was a hopefully, whatever's coming next, it will be just as as fabulous as that. With that, I will say our next meeting is Tuesday, June 16 on 2026. Thank you, and I'll adjourn this meeting.