Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. Seeing at 06:00, we'll go ahead and call this meeting to order. So I call the 03/18/2026 City of Lincoln Planning Commission meeting to order. Roll call, please.

Gilbert?

Here.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Here. Commissioner Jackson? Here. Commissioner Jerry Johnson?

Here.

Vice Chair Manning?

Here.

And Chair Eric Johnson?

Here. Looks like we have a quorum for sure. Next item, three, Pledge of Allegiance. And I've asked Commissioner Manning to please lead us on that. Thank you.

Now item number four, agenda modifications. Do we have any agenda modifications this evening? Alright. Seeing none, we'll move on to item number five, public comment on non agenda items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. Citizens may address the planning commission on any item on the agenda when the item is considered.

Citizens wishing to speak may request to speak by raising your hand when requested to do so. So currently this is an opportunity to speak on non agenda items. Please limit your comments to three minutes. So I'll go ahead and open a public comment. And secretary, do we have any hands raised online, or do we have anyone in the chamber that wishes to speak?

I did not receive any comment cards before the meeting for the public comment section. I do not see any any hands raised on Zoom, and no hands raised in the room.

Okay. Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public comment period. And we'll move to item number six, informational items from the staff. Does the staff have any informational items?

Not at this time. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you. Item number seven, disclosure of ex parte communication. Do any of my fellow commissioners have any communication to disclose? And we'll start at my right with Commissioner Gilbert, please.

Doesn't oh, there it is. Mister chairman, I have none.

Mister chairman, I have, exchanged emails with, John Jewett and with, mister Braar. And that those are the only two.

Nothing at this time.

Nothing. And, I did exchange emails and have conversations with Amir Sidhu and John Jewett as well.

Excellent. Thank you. And I I as well exchanged emails and phone call with Amir, Sidhu and email with Steve Braar and email with John Jewett. Alright. We'll move on to item number eight, consent agenda.

All matters on the consent agenda are considered routine business and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of the items unless a request to move remove a specific item or separate action received. Any items will be removed and considered after remainder of the consent agenda. Do any of my colleagues wish to remove an item, which I believe we only have one, for discussion? And, do we have any anyone want to discuss anything on that?

I'm moving to the consent calendar. Consent calendar.

Second? Think that was a tie. Okay.

Jerry beat me to the

tie. Okay.

That was close.

Second. Alright. Got it? Okay.

Would you like a voice call or a roll call?

Yes. We'll do a voice call, please. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? No. Alright.

Chair Eric Johnston, if you could ask for abstention, that would be wonderful.

Okay. Any abstentions? Thank you.

And then the vote would be six zero zero and zero.

Yeah. Alright. So that takes us to item number nine, public hearings. So we'll start with item nine a, Freedom Rentals condition use use permit, CP modification, and looks like we have Efrain Sanchez, senior planner, that will give the staff report tonight. Please, Efrain.

Good evening, planning commissioners. Efrain Sanchez, senior planner with community development department. The project we have before you is a conditional use permit application to operate U Haul service business within an existing building and parking lot. The project submitted by Orey Ayala, who is both the applicant and the property owner. The project site is located at 561 7th Street in Downtown Lincoln near the Southeast corner of 7th And F Street.

The property has a general plan land use designation of community commercial and in zoning of commercial. The project site is surrounded by light industrial McBean factory to the North, duplex residential r two to the East, commercial city parking lot to the South, and commercial far West rent and ready mix to the West. It's approximately two twenty feet from this building. The proposed project will share office space with the existing Allstate Insurance office and barbershop. On 07/19/2024, Planning Commission adopted a resolution twenty twenty four dash 17, which approved a CUP to operate a rent a car service business known as Freedom Rent A Car.

This original CUP conditionally authorized the applicant to accept and reservations and process returns with a fleet of three midsize sedans, which were permitted to park on-site. After several months of operation, the applicant placed the car rental business on hold after incurring, significant losses due to customer related vehicle damages. And therefore, on 09/15/2025, the applicant submitted the current request to modify the CUP to operate a U Haul rental service business. Chapter 18.44, parking and loading, indicates commercial use buildings shall provide one parking space per two fifty square feet of floor area. Therefore, the 1,700 square foot building is required to provide seven off street parking spaces.

Currently, the site provides nine off street parking spaces, which exceeds the required parking requirement for commercial buildings. It is anticipated the applicant will use an off-site RV storage facility under a separate paid agreement to park a fleet of six U Haul vehicles rather than park on-site or along public streets. The day to day operations are managed as follows. Reservation pickup. When a reservation is received through the U Haul reservation system, the operator retrieves the assigned U Haul vehicle from the off-site storage facility and brings it to the designated on-site parking space for customer dispatch, capable of fitting the large 22 foot long U Haul trucks.

The on-site activity is limited to providing the keys and releasing the vehicle to the customer and typically takes approximately five to ten minutes. Vehicle drop off. In some cases, U Haul vehicles may be scheduled to be dropped off at the business location. When a vehicle is returned, the customer provides the operator with the keys. And within approximately ten minutes, the operator personally drives the vehicle back to the off-site RV storage facility for staging.

This process is designed to minimize on-site street parking demands with vehicles not remaining on-site beyond the brief customer ten minute pickup or drop off window. It is anticipated that using the one parking space at the U Haul rental service as a loading zone will not reduce parking spaces for their primary Allstate office and barbershop below the required minimum. The Freedom Rental business operates will operate between eight to 05:30PM, Monday through Saturday. The site plan, as you can see here, this is the site this is the site plan. Here's the eight vehicle parking stalls, the ninth one over here.

And then this is the one the parking stall that's is 22 feet long, and that's the proposed loading zone for the U Haul vehicle.

Oh.

Now there it goes. I was seeing a mouse on my end. Apologies. Okay. Eight parking stalls here, the ninth one there. And then this parking stall, 22 feet long, which has the capacity to fit the larger, U Haul, vehicle, which you can see the specs here of the of the U Haul. And then the lower one, or the shorter U Haul is 19 feet long.

Mister chair, if I could. I'm not sure I'm clear I'm not clear, on which are the truck parking spots, and what are the customer parking spots.

So the U Haul vehicles will be parked off-site at a separate No.

I understand that. But when they come onto the site, where will the trucks park?

In this, loading zone, the parking stall to the north right here. It's a parallel parking.

Parallel parking?

Well, people drive on the satellite image, if they drive up F Street, they park in here and then just go into that stall.

Commissioner, so this, location, they're proposing to have a drop off at pickup only. So, as someone comes into their business and has the, arranged time to pick up a U Haul as as they do now, The U Haul will be driven down from an alternate location, parked in that spot by the operator, and then the keys will be checked out by the customer and then taken from that spot and moved off-site, if that helps a bit.

So there will only be one one place one truck parked at a

time? Correct. So they will have to manage their reservation system to accommodate that.

The proposed U Haul rental service is consistent with the economic development policy 6.1, as it adds another commercial use to commercial property that complements the existing insurance company. The existing commercial building will house three separate businesses. The proposed U Haul rental service does not trigger the need for providing additional parking spaces as there is no proposed expansion to the building. Both General Plan Policy T 3.2 and Chapter 18.44 of the Lincoln Municipal Code are requirements for new development. According to the project site plan, the parallel parking stall at the northwest corner has a dimension capacity to serve as a loading zone for the larger U Haul trucks.

Supported by the analysis provided in the staff report, the CUP application requesting to operate U Haul rental service at 561 7th Street has been found to be consistent with the applicable general plan and zoning standards. This leads us to our recommendations. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, consider the information contained in the staff report and testimony of the public, and take the following action. One, determine that the project is exempt from CEQUA and two, adopt a resolution revoking the existing conditional use permit previously approved under resolution twenty twenty four dash 17 and approve a conditional use permit application for Freedom Rentals based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval as presented. So that concludes my presentation.

If the Planning Commission has any questions, we also have the applicant here in, the room if you have any questions for them.

Thank you, Efrain. So I'll bring it to my colleagues, for the moment. Do you does anybody have any questions or comments? Alright. So, with no current questions or comments, we'll have another opportunity. I'll, now open the public hearing. Citizens wishing to speak on this item may request to speak by raising their hand when requested to do so. Please limit your comments to three minutes. Secretary, do we have any hands raised online or anyone in the chamber that wishes to speak?

Chair Eric Johnson, I did not receive any cards before this agenda item. I did not I do not see any hands raised in Zoom, and I do not see any hands raised here in the room.

Thank you. I will now close the public hearing and bring back to my colleagues. Does anyone have any additional comments? And if none, would anyone like to make a motion? Chair Gilbert, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I intend to, vote for this. However, I wanna make clear to our staff that converting from rent a car to rent a trucks and, accepting a plan that basically says there's only gonna be one truck at a time is is, you know, I think is penny wise and pound foolish. There'll be times where, for whatever reason, there'll be multiple trucks.

And it's gonna cause some problems in that area if we allow that to affect the other merchants. I went by there the other day and, specifically looked at the area. I sat in my car for about ten minutes. I watched the traffic. And, on the good days, this plan may work.

On the bad days, I don't know about that. So I'd like to caution staff that, you be very sensitive to the other merchants in that area who could be impacted by trucks blocking their parking place, and that we let the applicant know that we are very sensitive about whether that use permit will continue on in the future if it starts to impact the other merchants significantly. Thank you, mister chairman.

Thank you, commissioner Gilbert. Anyone else have any comments? Or

I I share Peter's concerns, but the comments were well made.

Lenny? Yeah. I share the same concerns, so I'd like to pass it on to staff and just ask some questions on it is hard to conceptualize the idea of one truck at a time in a parking spot. I also saw those those parking spots below, on the bottom half of your image. That's the city parking lot. Right? K. So are they allowed to park the trucks down there?

Yeah. The on the site plan, the adjacent parking lot, that city parking lot, and so there is a condition of approval that states that no U Hauls can be parked on that parking lot.

K. So how who monitors this, and how do we make sure that that these these are being followed?

Yeah. So practically speaking, and this was actually initially bought to us as a result of some concerns from citizens that were put forward to code enforcement. And so code enforcement would be the one of the agents that would be utilized, should there be should there be issues. And this we have been had lots of communications with the applicant about these concerns, right? The size of the lot, the, limited parking, as well as issues of getting in and out of the lot, parking on the street, so many so many things, all the things.

And so the applicant is aware that staff also is attentive to this, and that we shall continue to be attentive to this. Our code enforcement department, as you know, is one person, and we do not engage in, like, actively seeking issues. She doesn't drive around looking for things to side on, but for a property that has received a previous complaint, that makes it more sensitive and more interesting. And so close to City Hall, all of us walking out of the building for lunch, we will know if there are trucks parked in places where they're not supposed to be. And so the applicant is aware of all of that.

You mentioned that the properties had a previous complaint. What was that?

About the trucks.

Oh, so they've been there? U Haul trucks have been there?

They were they were parked on the street. They were parked on the street, sir.

Excuse me. Could I ask my colleague to mic up a little better so we could hear you? You're asking you're asking some good questions. Alright.

K. So, alright. So so there has been a complaint. Because they're on and that is that what brought us here today for the most part?

It was quickly resolved, and we did, communicate with the applicant and just educate them on the proper way to go about getting an amendment to their CUP, which they were dutiful in coming forward and cooperating and communicating with us, their plan, their desires, their needs. And so staff, as we do, you know, assisted them through this prod processes, which is what brings us here this evening.

Okay.

I'm okay for now.

Okay.

If there's some other questions, I might have follow ups on those.

Okay. I do have one follow-up. Yes. So just out of curiosity, where are the trucks located are going to be brought in?

Yeah. So the applicant has identified that, the off-site parking is at the RV storage near the airport.

Near the airport. Okay. So it's here in Lincoln. Yeah. Okay. Very good. Thank you.

And just one comment. I just wanted to make sure that, under the, conditions of approval, the trucks are barred from parking on the street, correct? I mean, isn't that the whole

Yes. Purpose behind correct. Yes. Yeah. There's a condition of approval that states, no U Haul vehicles will be parked in the, on the street in the vicinity of the site.

Alright. Just to confirm that.

Remaining?

Question, maybe a comment. It sounds pretty problematic. How would how does a renter know that they can't drop it off on the street?

Yeah. That is the obligation of the operator to inform, just like when you pick up a rental vehicle or you pick up any U Haul track, right, they let you know when you're returning the vehicle, this is when and where and how you return it. And so that it that does fall on them.

And just to remind, the planning commission, the applicants here in in the room, so if you have any questions for them too.

I guess, does anyone have any questions of the act applicant?

I'd like to, just indicate, you know, I've made the first comment, and apparently, there's a lot of my colleagues that have the same kind of thoughts. And that's why I said and reminded everybody that, this will be done with a conditional use permit. And we have, at the city council level, revoked these in the past where someone did not comply and was impacting the community in a negative way. And that's why I I wanted to be public that our staff is on notice to monitor this. And if it starts causing problems for the city hall employees, for the business and neighbors, the people that live around there, that we will immediately be able to take action.

So I think by forewarning the applicant, they're they're gonna if they're smart, they're gonna take all caution to make sure that they don't get a phone call from the staff. Thank you.

Can you had someone say additional comments? I mean, my I'll I'll make some comments. Like, I I really wanna see businesses thrive in Lincoln, and I want this business owner to thrive as well. I empathize with them. I see it's gonna be a challenge. And, I mean, I guess I I'm a business owner. And like you said you said, what's that? Pennywise. Right? I mean, things sometimes seem like they're gonna be okay, but it's gonna be tough. I I empathize. I I don't see how that's gonna work. But all the power to them, and I wish them luck.

Alright. Thanks for those comments and questions. Do we have anything else from the commission? Yeah. Great reminder. It's a conditional use permit. So if there are any issues, that's enforceable. So I'll entertain a motion.

Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion that we approve the applicant.

I will second.

Alright. We have a motion and a second. Secretary, may have roll call, please?

And I'm assuming this is a motion and a second to find the item exempt from CEQA and adopt the resolution?

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you, Nida. I was about to do that. Roll call, Commissioner Gilbert? Yes. Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jackson? Yes. Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Yes. Vice Chair Manning? No. And Chair Eric Johnson?

Yes. The motion passes 5,100. Thank you. So now we'll move on to Item 9B. This is the BRAR pre annexation proceedings and we'll have Mel Pobelanes, Planning Manager, give the staff report please.

Good evening, Mel Pavilanes. This item before you is a request by Steve Barr of SSB Ventures for the Barr annexation proceeding. Just a brief PowerPoint presentation summarizing what your commissions already received last week for review. The applicant is here for if you have any questions for them and as well as myself. As well as we did receive one public comment today about an hour ago, so hopefully you have a copy of that.

I've met with the the commenter, Chris Davis, this morning, and she followed up with this letter said about an hour ago. So I haven't had a chance to review the comment, but we'll continue on with with any coordination following this meeting.

You know, I apologize, Mel. Is that the one

you were asking me about earlier? Because the only one that I have is what Tom gave me. I do not have Okay. We're happy to either read that comment into the record if the commission would so choose at the time when we asked for public comment.

Okay. Yes, please.

My my apologies. I it came in about an hour ago, so I just go sorted through my emails and everything. So before you is a request by Steve Broad Ventures for an approval or preannunciation request to formally file an application final station with Pasco County LAVCO. Steve's property is a 115 acre property in an incorporated area of Lincoln within Plateau County. It's part of an island b, area encompassing loads five and seven specific planners.

There's no development proposed with this preannunciation request. And as I mentioned, this is proposed by Steve Brower of SSB Ventures. So the property that Steve owns is, this in red dashes, South Of 65. Existing Lawson Lane borders the property on the West side. Moore Road, which kind of meanders on east to west as well as to the north, borders Moore Road borders on the south side of the property and then partially on on the east side of the property.

And I mentioned as I mentioned earlier, this property is in the unincorporated area of Lincoln. It is subject to and not within the city of Lincoln in, in other words, and it's subject to the rules and regulation of Placer County. It is within the Village 5 specific plan area, which I'll have another slide that shows the area. So this is the Village 5 adopted Village 5 specific plan. This this property, entire plan has not been annexed in completely as discussed in the staff report.

Part of it has been annexed as as Village 5 A, which I'll cover here in a in a few minutes. The property, Steve Barr's property, again, is in red dash lines, Moore Road, Nelson Lane, and Highway 65 to the north. The property has a line designation under the the, specific plan of VRR or Village Rural Residential, with a density of two to five to one units to an acre units per acre if it develops. As discussed in the staff report, Village 5 in its entirety tried to annex a few years ago. It failed annexation in its entirety back in 2023.

In '24, Village 5 A did annex, and 5 A is the one outlined in red area. But as a result of that Village 5 A annunciation, it created islands, in particular Island A and Island B in blue. For context, I have Steve Brock's property. Again, it's in red dash line right there. And these islands are not property, as I mentioned, it's not it's not part of the city as you would have to they elected not to be part of the city as part of the annexations in the past.

But Village 5 A is is been annexed. And, of course, the request before before you tonight is to be considered for pre annexation. Detailed analysis is provided in the staff report, including the process for this is essentially your commission will make a recommendation to the city council, which the city council could consider and then authorize the city manager to formally file initiating an access application with LAVCO. If approved, more of the Allen B would get filled in and potentially develop, such as mister Barth's property. And and the more of these Allen's get filled, the better for an older older growth of the city can be can be can be achieved.

And then, therefore, promote policies and within the specific plan as well as the general plan. Next steps, after your commission, makes an action tonight, it would then go to the city council with with a positive recommendation by your commission. Then the city council will consider that action and, makes its render its own action of potentially authorizing the city manager to file to initiate application with LAVCO. There's concerns, of course. There's a process that we'll have to go through. The city will be will be the applicant for the annexation, but we'll be in collaboration with the applicant to get all the materials submitted with LAVCO.

As

summarized in the slide and detailed in the staff report, staff recommends the plant commission deem the project exempt on further environmental analysis under CEQA Section fifteen thousand one eighty three and forward approval of the bar pre annexation proceedings to the City Council for formal annexation application to pass to County Lavko. That's all that I have. If you have any questions for me, let me know. Unfortunately, the the comment wasn't forwarded to you. That's my bad, but I will get that over to you for your consideration. But I I could read it also if if you'd like me to. In that way, I have our copy right here.

Yeah. Yeah. I'll have you do that maybe in one sec when we open it for public comment.

And prior to commissioner comments, I just if I may, would just like to share that, you know, the city believes in orderly annexation, and we did make a verbal commitment to to LAVCO when these islands were created to attempt to fill them in as possible. But I think it's also important to note that the city is not interested in attempting to annex any parcel or any piece of land or any home that is not interested in coming in. That there are sections that have expressed that they are not interested in being part of the city, that they wish to retain their property rights under, the county, and we respect that. You you have seen me defend property rights in front of this commission. We respect it strongly.

And so I think that's important for this commission to hear and for the members of the audience, here and listening to know as well, that, that this has to be something that you want in order to annex into the city. That said, this particular project, we really prefer to see projects that are fully baked, that have a development plan that can demonstrate a true value to the city. This project does not do that, in my humble opinion. It is the annexation of raw land. Going through the process this way will actually preclude this piece of land from being rezoned for two years after it's annexed in, should it be successful.

There is a large portion of it that is in the overflight plan of the airport, which places significant restrictions on a piece of a big piece of it. Does solve part of the island, but not fully baked. And I'll turn it over to you, Commissioner.

Thank you for the presentation and additional information. I'll bring it back to, my colleagues. Does anyone have any comments or questions?

Commissioner Johnson? I'm little confused. Is staff recommending approval of the annexation?

We are recommending approval. However, we just want to make it clear that this is not the ideal project that we would normally like to see.

Thank you. I'm not confused anymore.

Any other questions or comments for now? Okay. With that, I will now open the public hearing for this item. Citizens wishing to speak on this item may request to speak by raising their hand when requested to do so. Please limit your comments to three minutes. Secrete or I guess before we get to that part, I'll, turn it over to Mel to, please read that letter as part of public comment.

Right now? Yep. Yes, please. So, dear mister Pavolinos, thank you for taking the time this morning to discuss the upcoming public hearing this evening related to the proposed property annunciation of the Barr Ventures property located directly across Moore Road. Just for the record, her her property let me got a map here.

Miss Dave's property is there's four properties here within seven. The the third one from the from the right, but the second this one right here is her property. It's a 10 acre property. This one right here where my shaking arrow is. Alright. Oh, you can see it?

Wait. Sorry. We can't see the arrow on our side. Just the just the circle.

Okay.

But you're saying it's the

It's the green one. Yeah.

More green one. Yeah. So second from the left.

From the

left. Yeah. Going yeah.

Although considered to be within seven specific plan, we ourselves remain unincorporated. We have not been added within the state of limits. We have this as we have discussed with myself, my parents built my home here almost fifty years ago. I have live I have lived here in this home for over thirty five years. Our family has raised livestock on this property for four generations.

I have seen many changes since graduating from Lincoln High School, but it's but it's it's always been our wish to continue tradition in agricultural here on this place. With the annexation of property around us, I wonder when it would I wonder when or if we might be required to be annexed within the city limits. Is there a protection in place that guarantees us the right to continue to be involved in agriculture to raise cattle, horses, chickens, goats, and other various livestock, work and mow in our fields, maintain, repair, or build new barns and fences as we have for close to fifty years. Is that a right transferable to another family member down the road? Additionally, will we be required to connect to the city sewer and sewage oh, water and sewage?

How will traffic be addressed on these local connecting county county roads? How will they be maintained? Not only as it relates to this annexation, but to the proposed development on Nelson Lane. Several years ago when they proposed the installation of the landfill facilities on Athens Road, one road over, we were promised constant monitoring and pickup of the connecting roads as well as regular maintenance of the connecting roads themselves. Moore Road has become one of the most traveled roads for the landfill trucks, both private and city owned.

And unfortunately, it is rarely monitored for garbage dumping and is notably one of the worst maintained. Again, I want to thank you for your time this morning and the opportunity to voice my concerns. I appreciate your offer to forward this letter to the commission, council members, and any related staff. Sincerely, Chris Davis. Two seven seven five Moore Road.

Thank you for reading that in for the record, and I'd like to just ask. I assume it'll be made an attachment on there too. So thank you. Secretary, do we have any have you received any cards or any hands raised online? Anyone in the chambers?

Actually, chair Eric Johnson, I did receive a card from Chris Davis. So is Chris Davis here? If you would like to make a personal comment, you could step to

the

podium. After, Ms. Davis will be Albert Schreiber.

Yeah. Mel did a great job of reading the letter. The only thing I might add that is not in this letter is you talked a little bit about the flight plan there. Like I said, I've lived there for many years, and and there's more and more airport traffic, you know, planes that fly over the house than there ever were before, and that that's understandable. But when you get to talking about the the noise and whatnot, I literally can sit in my living room, and I can watch the plates in my kitchen rattle when the, you know, the planes fly over.

So, I I would think that that'd be something for you to consider in all of this, and I don't think that's gonna change or get any better. So that would be the only thing I would comment. We my husband and I, we fought against the annexation for years and, because we wanted to continue to have animals there. And even though there might be some type of protection, whether it was grandfathered in or in some kind of overlay, I know that that could definitely change things as things progress. So, those would just be my concerns.

When I read the paperwork, it said, if my voice wasn't heard or, concerns weren't raised, that basically we were shit out of luck. So I'm I'm saying it now. Thank you.

Thank you, Chris. The next one

If we can call Albert Schreiber to the podium.

Good evening, Albert Schreiber. Moore Road. First, I'd like to make it clear that I'm not opposed to this project. To elaborate, I'm not opposed to anybody doing what they want on their own property as long as it doesn't it's not illegal or doesn't, drastically affect, somebody next to them or around them. That being said, I do have some comments and questions.

I only learned about this being on the agenda, yesterday morning. I, was coming to this meeting for, one of the following agenda items. Thought I'd read through the agenda, and, there it was. So my property is contiguous to mister Bars. Normally, because we have so many parcels and landowners on our property, we get multiple notices.

We got no notice for this. And so that was frustrating to just find out about it yesterday. So then I you know, going through the staff report, I I I found the public comment section, and there was only two comments on this whole thing, which seems a little surprising. But I was reading through the LAFCO one, and LAFCO's recommendation is that this annexation gets tied into two other annexations. And one of those was the, Moore Ranch East project, which I've never heard of.

I know where the property is, but when I I'm not very techy. But when I tried to find it on the city's website, I could find nothing about it. I I've got no notice about it either. And when I talked to some of my neighbors, they didn't hadn't got any notice for either the Broward project or the, Moore Ranch East project. So that's kinda concerning.

How much time do I got? A minute left. Perfect. So as I said, not opposed to this project. I would like clarification that, if not only the Davis property, but the property next to it, the Hansen's, if they get sucked into this unwilling, does the egg overlay that covers Village 5 cover them as well?

It should. I believe it does, but I think there should be clarification for that. And the other thing that, miss Davis brought up is that, you know, there's a lot of back and forth when the whole Village 5 thing went through about whether you would have to tie into city sewer and city water. And so because it's not their choice, they shouldn't have to now, tomorrow, or anywhere down the road. And if they do, it shouldn't be at their cost because it's not their choice to be in this mess. Their choice is to stay out. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Albert.

Can you state your name? I don't I did not receive any other cards. Okay.

That was all the Okay. Then we'll turn to

No more cards. No audience raised online. And if you could please state your name.

Sure. Mister Chairman, members of commission, Marcus Loduca, 1508 Eureka Road, Land Use Council for Para Ventures. I just wanted to clarify a couple of things. One, in terms of the comment about this is not fully baked. This property has both, general development plan and Village five specific plan land use designations.

Just like other properties have come in without specific development projects, but with a specific plan, land use designation, and general development plan designation under that specific plan. We are gonna be subject to, all the, provisions of the specific plan as are all other properties that have already been annexed to the city. The other thing relative to overflight, if you look at what that plan use designation is, it's village rural residential. Very, very, very low density, in terms of the, number of units that can be placed on the property. And that was done during the specific plan process in recognition of that overflight.

So it wasn't like that was ignored. Otherwise, you wouldn't have been able to have that plan, move forward, through the LAVCO process and good annex. As to miss Davis and mister Scheiber, we will absolutely be in contact with them. There is no intention whatsoever to, bring along in this annexation request anyone who would not wanna be annexed, consistent with city policy and the city standing on this. And I know mister Scheiber's long efforts to ensure that was the case.

That's why this property is one of the larger properties left in all the islands. In fact, it may be the largest property left in all in the islands, to be able to come forward, and it's one owner. So there isn't like saying, well, we need all these other people to join us in order to be able to get access or get have be adjacent to a road or anything else. This property can stand alone. But, again, we do have land use.

Thank you.

Thank you, Marcus. Secretary, do we have any additional hands raised or anyone to oh.

We do hear out in the audience. If you could please state your name.

Hi. Steve Brewer. I am the property owner, and, I had sent emails to, all of the commissioners. I just wanted to introduce myself. I just wanted to also echo that, with original Village 5 annexation, this property was part of that proposal.

It was taken out, I think, primarily in large part because there was some opposition from the neighbors in my area. And at that time, I still wanted to be annexed, but to, you know, assist the city staff and allow the other annexation to go through, I was willing to wait. And now I wanna move forward, and that's why I put brought this forward. My property, as Marcus mentioned, you know, is already part of the specific plan, has a land use designation. It's not raw land, as we described earlier, and it's no different than many of the other parcels that were already annexed in terms of where it is in the development cycle.

And for a variety of reasons, there's there's a purpose in why I wanna have an annexed now before I have, you know, a map or other things to come along with it. So I just wanted to share those comments. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you, Steve. Do have any other hands raised or?

There were none online, and I do not see any hands raised in the room.

Okay.

Okay. We probably need to tag team some of these questions if you wanted responses to any of the comments.

Yeah. Do you want to do that now before closing public comment or

No, we have to close public All comment first,

right. I'll close public hearing is now closed, and I guess I'll bring it to the city staff to address anything.

So just addressing some of the general comments of the community members that aren't being annexed in. Again, the city, as we've stated, has no intent of forcing anyone to annex in. And if you in fact, City Council, provided direction to staff about a year and a half ago that if you are not annexed into the city, we won't be providing you water and sewer. So there's not an avenue for us to require you to have water and sewer. There aren't lines that go out there, and so there's a function or a way or a method or a desire by the city to have these properties connect to our system.

It's an additional burden, and without them being annexed into the system, they're not really contributing to the system. So they don't want it, we don't want it. And as far as, road maintenance for the roads that are in the county, don't have a lot of control of those roads that are in the county. So Athens Road, the part of Moore Road that's not currently annexed in, those are all county roads. Once roads are annexed into the city, then either, the city or and or the developer, depending on the community and how it's developed in, becomes responsible for that road maintenance.

And, I think I've hopefully made it clear, regarding the property lights. Mel, I don't know if you can respond to the ag overlay for this particular property.

Yes. I was talking to miss, miss Davis this morning. There is there's many documents related to the annexation of Village 5 or attempt to of Village 5 A that involves right to farm provisions or some some sort of regulations or requirements that if you're in a county, you can continue to be do your your farming and other activities that that you being part of the county. And but, of course, once development happens and then if you decide to annex, then you're being subject to the rules of the Village 5 specific plan. There I believe there's also one it's a pretty standard documentation.

There was also one in votes 7. By no votes five, there is one. I've seen it myself. I just need to coordinate that with miss Davis so she'll feel comfortable and assured about her concerns and maintaining her livelihood being part of the county. Regarding the the the noising that

Oh, yes. I actually have an update on that as well. Apologies. I I wrote that down and didn't make a comment on it. So in fact, at the airport committee this morning, they have been discussing noise over different area of Lincoln, but still noise nonetheless.

And the committee is currently considering how to move forward, if there is something to move forward on. But we did, they did touch on what could be, considered a simple solution where, pilots are notified to use, I believe it's called noise abatement, procedures where the way they take off and land, ends up being a bit quieter than than now. And so that is, something that they are currently looking at and considering.

Thank you for that. Regarding the noticing for projects, our standard noticing, is 400 feet radius from the property line. So it's in excess of about a 100 feet beyond the state regulation. So we exceed that. And the projects that were referenced earlier were pre applications.

They're not formal development application. It's just more a the way I describe it is, like, a a feasibility test to see what could be, what what could be had at that property. Somebody has to apply for the pre application and get feedback from from staff, but it's not a formal application. There's no so there's no noticing required for those types of application, just just for the formal applications that are in process with the city. So those and there were there are pre applications.

The the properties that are East of east of miss Davis property were the ones that were that went through the process. And, again, the normal is needed. It's more of an informal review by staff and and for the benefit of the applicant to get more comments or input on the potential to develop the site those sites. Ag overlay, as I mentioned, there are over ag overlays. That will remain within ag in Village 5 at least, and I'll coordinate that with miss Davis further.

And I'll also double check to see if there's any Village 7, ag overlay zones as well as any protection provisions, as it relates to properties that are maintaining within the county. So I'll coordinate that further with the status. Lastly, with regards to, her comment about how would traffic be addressed, to these local connecting county roads. When development happens, there's a it it goes to a slew of of traffic analysis within as as a with regards to how they're impacting the areas around them. And, of course, the the baseline information in these cases is the village five analysis and it's EIR.

So that's always the the the the baseline of where we start from. And from there, we analyze it further to see what needs to be ensured that county standards are being met to ensure safety along those roads. But maintenance, yes, there'll be coordination of times with county with regards to who's doing what portions of of the road because they there are these instances in which development stops at a certain point. And then but its impacts could go beyond that. And then in some cases, emergency services needs to be coordinated and collaborated with the county.

Make sure make sure that there's no there's no confusion on who goes when and which which which entity which jurisdiction is responsible to do and what. So there's always that coordination that happens. In some cases, there's agreements entered into between the county and the city that way it's all coordinated and ensure that there's no safety is ensured.

Thank you, Mel, for all that, Anita. Alright. With, with that, I'll bring it back to my colleagues. Does anyone have any additional questions or comments at this time before we consider a motion? We did. We closed it. Yep. Yep. Yeah. So we closed public hearing, anyone has any comments or questions?

Please.

Thank you, mister chairman. You know, the city went to a lot of effort in several of our areas, including this one, form an egg overlay so that certain people could be protected. And we made it very, very clear, when we did the first one when I was on the city council that that, you know, we could not protect the future. They can change laws. They can do all kinds of things.

But as far as the city's position at that time, and the staff bought in completely because they were the ones that had to document it and bring it before us, that we would protect the rights of Albert's when he did not wanna be part of the city. And we found that as time went on, in some cases, the next generation took over. I think of one in particular in another part of the city when the next generation took over. When, unfortunately, the father who wanted to do certain things passed away, the family wanted to become part of the city. And so the city then worked and incorporated them into another area.

So I think we've we've got a history here, at least as far as I I can go back about fifteen years, of being very sensitive to what people want even though it costs us a lot of time and extra money and extra staff time. I think we owe it also to the people like the applicant that's here tonight, that if they're ready to move forward, we should be supportive of it. And so I will move to determine that no additional environmental analysis pursuant to CEQA is required and to adopt a resolution recommending city council authorize the city manager to formally file an application with LAVCO for this prop project's property.

I second it.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Secretary, may I have roll call, please?

Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jackson? Yes. Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Yes. Vice Chair Manning?

Whether a

motion with such a long comment should allow other commissioners to comment, in my opinion. And so, I agree with this project, but I but I I do have comments after the after his comment. But based on the rules of order, a motion's a motion with a second, and the meeting goes on. So

You can you can make your comment. You can make your comment, Yeah.

I mean, I I was part of the the planning commission when this project when the overall project came came forward. And one of my big concerns at that point was, because I'm very sensitive to the landowners and the legacy of families that are out there to allow them to do what they wanna do. And I had a yep. I had a real problem with the with the ag overlay at the time, and I don't know if it's different because I stepped away from from the planning commission for a term. But the ag overlay at the time, the way I understood it was a city ordinance that could be changed based on a city council that that wanted to change it by a majority vote.

And, I just feel like that's that's I wouldn't that concerns me, especially when I talk about when people talk about these islands and you have a family that wants to do what they wanna do. And as that island starts closing in on them, it becomes inevitable. And you have council people and past council people like mister Gilbert and, who may have been sensitive at the time, and that was the spirit of that ag overlay. But as time goes on, you could have a new council that votes in favor to just abolish the ag overlay. And, that is a concern of mine.

And I appreciate, Nida, your sensitivity to it too, and I believe it completely. But as we all know, this commission's gonna look a whole lot different in years to come. And in years to come, these islands are gonna get smaller and smaller. I think that was a major mistake of the city. I had a problem with it at the time. I think it was done like that probably strategically, and I think that was wrong. And I appreciate that this project has even that everybody agrees that I we didn't see anybody that's stepping up and saying no to it, but that they have concerns, and I have those same concerns. I will vote yes on it, but I want those current concerns to be on the record.

Thank you for that. I guess as a matter of comments, do we need to reconsider anything or no, just move forward? Okay.

And your vote, Chair Eric Johnson.

Yes. So motion passes, six yes, zero zero.

And zero.

And zero. Thank you. Six zero zero zero. Alright. Thank you. So we'll move on to item nine c. This is the Stardust 12 project. So I'll turn the time over to again, Mel Pavilanes, planning manager, who will introduce a consultant.

Yes. Thank you, commissioner. Mel Pavilanes, both Adrian and I, Adrian primarily will be stepping in for on behalf of Mikaela. Adrian Graham has been involved with Village One since the beginning, 2013, I believe, even even maybe earlier. So and she had written authored the EIR for the for the virtual and specific plan, even helped me out in in moving forward with a couple of projects, the waterfront project, the amendment to the specific plan back in '22, and a couple of the projects.

And she agent has assisted the city, Mikaela, in particular, on several projects, mainly Level Ranch, Parkwood, and Stardust. So Stardust 12 will be the next one in line. And before you, Adrian, we have a presentation for you, and Adrian will take the lead here. And then staff, myself, and and engineering staff will be will be for any questions in support of Adrian. Thank you.

Good evening, planning commissioners. My name is Mel Set. It's Adrian Graham. I'm a planning consultant assisting community development department on a number of village ones projects, and we'll be standing in for Mikayla this evening. The project you have before you is the STARTUS 12 project.

This presentation will be fairly summary, but there is quite a bit of detail provided to you in the staff report. So the two fisted. So tonight, we'll be discussing a number of items, the, entitlements that are requested by the applicant, various components of the project, staff findings, the environmental determination, and the staff recommendations. The applicant, Jen California twenty eight, has oh, sorry. Going here.

I apologize. Has requested several entitlements, including an amendment to the zoning and land use designations of the project site in the specific plan, amendment to the general development plan, approval of a small lot tentative map, and then as part of that, we're also asking for adoption of the addendum, the the CEQA addendum. Of course, the role this evening for the Planning Commission is to make recommendations to the city Council with respect to these entitlement requests. So the Stardust 12 project site is located here in the easternmost edge of the Village 1 site. It is just South of McBean Park Drive and East of Stardust Drive, which is in the county, and it is north of the recently approved Stardust project.

As you know, there have been a number of projects that have been approved. Mel just listed some of them in the Village 1 specific plan area, most recently the Parkwood project, which we'll be also be discussing a bit this evening. So the, small lot tentative map for the Stardust 12 project provides for 84 residential units. It also includes two open space lots, a utility and pedestrian parcel, and an emergency vehicle access parcel. All of the residential units would be village medium density residential, VMDR, and they would be single family homes.

The lot sizes would range from 3,200 square feet to about 8,900 square feet. The average lot size is about 4,000 square feet, and as you can see, those lots in the center of the site are fairly uniform in size. The larger residential lots occur on the Eastern edge. Access would be provided via an off-site connection here to Level Ranch Road. Level Ranch Road has previously been known as Oak Tree Lane.

So that is how vehicular access would be provided to the site. Also included in the project are improvements along here, along McBean Park Drive, essentially widening the pavement to the south to the project boundary and providing lane striping.

Let's see.

Mr. Chairman, could we interrupt with questions, or do want to have questions retained until the end of the presentation?

Maybe we'll wait until then.

Okay. Thanks.

In addition, an emergency vehicle access is provided here. This would EDA would connect to Stardust Lane, which then connects up to McBean Park Drive. This would be an EDA only. There would not be regular access allowed through this. So I'm going to I pretty much covered that, so I think I'll skip that slide.

So one of the components of the approvals tonight is request to redesignate and rezone the land uses in the project site. Currently, the, about half of the site is zoned for village country estates and about half for village low density residential. The project, as proposed with the 84 units, would have an average density of 7.6 units per acre, which is higher than is allowed under either the VCE or the VLDR zones. So therefore, the project applicant proposes to rezone and redesignate the site to those portions of the site to village medium density residential. So you would essentially have then 11 acres of VMDR and 1.8 acres of open space.

The open space would be unchanged. Now, this exhibit illustrates how that would be achieved. So on the left, you see that the east westernmost portion of the project site is currently zoned for low density residential, while the eastern portion is zoned village country estates, which is a transitional zone. The specific plan intended for it to provide both a buffer and a transition between the more urban uses within the village one site and the rural uses out in the county, which occurs immediately east of the project site. So actually think the conversations that went on just about, the village one annexation issues previously also pertinent here.

One of the concerns when you're next to the rural residential areas is that they actually allow farming activities. Those can be considered nuisances when you bring in by residents of more urban uses. And so this VCE zone was going to provide a bit of a transition there so that you reduce the likelihood that people would consider the rural residential uses a problem. The applicant has proposed several ways to incorporate some of the elements of the VCE zoning into their project to minimize the potential for conflicts with the rural development to the east. That includes, as I indicated earlier, you have larger lots on the eastern boundary.

They're wider and deeper, which gives you more flexibility with respect to siting your residences and other improvements. In addition to that, there are only six lots that residential lots that would occur on the eastern boundary. And that density along that edge is similar to the density provided on the recently approved STARTUS project immediately south. They are also proposing an amendment to the general development plan that would increase the rear yard setback to 20 feet for the parcels that are adjacent to the county boundary. And so that will give you, again, more separation between those rural areas to the east and the homes in the Stardust 12 project.

Finally, there is mitigation in the environmental impact report that the project would have to comply with that states that any homeowners that are located adjacent to county the county boundary have to be provided with the county's right to farm ordinance so that they're aware of what could take place essentially across the street. Another consideration with respect to this rezoning and redesignation is that under the VMDR zoning, you can develop more units than you would be able to develop under VCE or low density. And in fact here, the 84 units that the applicant is proposing, it's about 36 units more than the specific plan and the EIR anticipated under the existing zoning. As it happens, Gen California twenty eight, which is the property owner, they also developed the Parkwood project, which was just recently approved. That project came in at 42 units less than had been anticipated.

So if you consider Parkwood and Stardust 12 together, then you would see that the net number of units would actually be would drop some. So the applicant is proposing that the units that they didn't develop on Parkwood apply to Stardust 12. What that means from a practical standpoint really is that there would not be an increase in the Village 1 specific plan in the number of residences or the population relative to what the specific plan anticipated and the EIR analyzed. So staff did analyze the project for consistency with the general plan, with the Village 1 specific plan, with the general development plan, as well as the city's subdivision ordinance and found that with the amendments that are proposed with respect to zoning, etcetera, that the project would be consistent with these plans. In addition, Citi has prepared draft conditions of approval.

They're attached to your staff report, and the intent of these conditions is to ensure orderly and timely implementation of the project. You will see both standard conditions of approval as well as some that are project specific. They also include all of the applicable mitigation measures from the EIR. These conditions are subject to verification of compliance by the city, and the applicant has reviewed all of the conditions and agreed to them. So with respect to the environmental determination under CEQA, any time you have a discretionary action like this, you have to determine if there are impacts that here we have a specific plan, EIR, that's already been prepared, so we're asking, are there any aspects of this project that would increase the severity of significant impacts.

We prepared an addendum to the EIR that concluded that, in fact, that would not occur, and that is because, in large part, as I said, there's no increase in population or traffic or anything like that with respect to Village 1 as a whole, because there were fewer units developed elsewhere. So the increase in units on this site doesn't have that effect. And in addition, the EIR assumed that the 11 acres would be developed. So, as a result, there's no additional analysis that needs to be done from a CEQA perspective. And finally, the so the recommendations of staff tonight are that you adopt several resolutions.

First, to adopt the addendum that concludes that the Village one EIR adequately addresses the impacts of the project second, to amend the specific plan regarding the land use designations and zoning third, to amend the general development plan and finally, to approve the small lot tentative map. So that is the end of my presentation. As I understand it, there were no comments public comments received on the project. And also I just want to point out the applicant team is here tonight to answer any questions you might have specific to the project.

Thank you, Adrian, for that report. Before we do public hearing, I know I have colleagues, that would like to say some comments or questions, please.

Alright. I'd like to, ask if you could bring up the attachment for project layout. I'm not sure what's your chart for, but it was this staff report. That's it. On the, our left hand side, there are some topography, contour lines.

Unfortunately, they don't, I believe, extend, or at least if they do extend into the project site itself, I can't read them. But a couple things raised my eyebrows in the staff report that would cause concern. One was that slopes within the project varied from five to 10%. A 10% slope is one heck of a slope. I can tell you riding a bicycle up 10%, it's a large effort.

And I see some contour well, and and then, also in the staff report, but not mentioned in your report, was the off-site improvements of two storing drain retention basins. Again, that raises concerns perhaps of major alterations to the site and redirecting water, in some fashion other than the natural flow of things. Can you go into some depth on what we're looking at here? And this is a massive grading project that goes from steep contours to dead flat?

Well, would suggest perhaps the applicant could address specifically how they anticipate grading the site. I mean, it's typical to have some cut and fill in these kinds of projects.

Well, let me just jump to a general plan concern. The general plan says that under land use policies that whenever practical, the city will encourage new development to be oriented towards adjacent creeks and wetland areas and provide visual access to these areas. I'm thinking that's not the case in this situation. So that's the concern. I'm I'm the overall concern that I'd like addressed by the applicant.

And I would point out that the open space is the area. They do have water quality basins. That's pretty common within the Village one projects. And the this the area that the 11 acres to be developed is consistent with the specific plan and fits in with the overall concept for the specific plan with respect to open space.

My real concern is general plan consistency.

And well, and and I would just the specific plan was found to be consistent with the general plan. So we're just piece But, of if you'd like, I could ask the applicant to Please. Address the grading

Good evening. Jason Reed, Wood Rogers, civil engineer, principal in charge on the project. Regarding the grading, the existing slopes are 5% to 10%. You are correct on that. But the proposed grading varies from 0.5% to 3%, which is typical for a single family detached residential projects. There is a grade break that let's I don't know if I can get how do you

work the magic printer? Okay.

So there is a natural grade break that bisects the site running generally from the Southeast to generally the middle on the western boundary. That grade break directs water in a natural manner south towards the southwest corner, which is where we've placed this lot b water quality basin. And then on the northern side, there are two existing culverts that extend under McBean Park Drive and convey water to the north. One is located roughly here, and the second occurs over here a little bit further to the east. Those are in existing localized depressions.

It's not something where these basins are anticipating to cut further than existing, so those are plenty deep as they are now. The site immediately south of McBean Park Drive is generally gonna be filled from existing condition, so it'll be more level with the road. There is a a little swale as it sits today. Regarding the general, there are no no creeks or wetlands at the site currently.

K.

If could continue a little more on that. The the on that same exhibit showed on it the cross section for for January, and there's a swale, shown on that.

You're correct. The grading section b, I believe it is, on the grading exhibit associated with the tentative map package. Yeah. The buyer retention basin.

It shows a a swale there, a drainage swale, I assume.

Why is there a drainage swale and and not a a buried culvert conduit? So the existing the cross section for McBean Park Drive does not include curb and gutter. It's an open shoulder. The drainage will convey into the open space landscape corridor. The treatment that you're or the swale you're seeing there is part of the bioretention basin for stormwater quality treatment. From there, it will be a piped system to go underneath McBean Park Drive and continue north.

K. Who, maintains the swale?

That's part of the city public drainage system. I believe it's a 2,018 dash one or 2,018 dash two CFD that the project will ultimately be required to annex into for maintenance?

Dash one.

Dash one

of the LSA Yes. Maintenance

Yeah. And if I could just remind, commissioner Johnson to stick close to your mic when you lean towards your computer for telling me they can't hear you.

Thank you.

Do you have any additional comments?

It has to do with housing diversity. Mister Reed, probably, thank you for your usually, housing diversity refers to affordability, different kinds of homeownership or rental circumstances such as apartments or condos as well as housing. But so far, I've seen all the only housing I've seen on, Village 1 is, single family homes of not exactly affordable housing. Am I missing something?

No, you are correct. You are correct. Yeah, that in in this, you know, that that this village says and I'll probably lean on Mel for this specific plan, but I don't believe that it identifies any of the higher density or the, like, style, type dwellings, within it.

Please.

Actually, there is the the water the waterfront development.

That's right. Waterfront.

That's right. It has an approved design review at the corner of Southeast Corner Of Oak Tree Lane and, McBean Park Drive. It was approved by BioCommission three years ago. It's for a 271 unit apartment complex on the top and then offices and retail at the bottom.

Yeah. And there's also so there's the high density residential and mixed use zones, which both provide are anticipated to be those higher residential densities, such as waterfront.

Okay. I don't mean to monopolize this thing. Let me step back for Oh.

I just I also wanted to make one point about But you're

asking so many great questions. I mean, honestly.

Just with respect to drainage, I also wanted to make the point that the drainage system has been reviewed by city staff and our conditions of approval that address the drainage system as well.

Okay. Actually, let me ask one more question. Go for it. The the back lot line on the northernmost series of lots, What is what's going on there? Are is there a some kind of a sound buffer? Is there a picket fence? Is there a stone fence? How does how does all that play in?

I believe

fencing along Stardust Lane, correct? Adrienne, if you could remind believe it's fencing along Stardust Lane.

I don't mean Stardust Lane, mean 193.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Yeah, McBean Park Drive at the north?

Yes.

McBean Park Drive has that is I'd have to go back and look at the specific coin cross section. I think that's open, yeah, but with bike path,

know,

It's the so, yeah, there's that large easement between the homes and 193, but I I have a feeling you're inquiring if there's gonna be some sort of a sound wall or something like that there.

Yeah. Or whatever. I mean, what do you what what do they see from the backyard? What do what do we see as we drive by?

They're going to see fencing.

Yeah. So it's just your your standard six foot tall

Right. But Wood fencing. Setback, I mean

Yeah. Yeah.

From from the road.

With landscaping and sidewalk Yeah.

There there is some landscaping in that easement.

I do have a follow-up question now on that. You know, when you see Sun City and you see the other developments that are off of 193, it is more of a sound wall. It is more of a brick wall. Why isn't it that we're actually doing that for this subdivision as well? Just to show the continuity. It would look kind of chopped up if you started, you know, with something that's a little bit more sturdy, more of a sound barrier, and then all of a sudden, well, here, brand new subdivision, and we're gonna go ahead and just put a, you know, a wood fence in, which doesn't have a lot of sound properties. And I'll tell you right now, also, Sun City has that easement as well. Yeah. So I think that it should be a continuation personally, and it would give more sound buffering.

And I don't know, Mel, if you have access to the specific plan, shows the cross section of the road. I would point out that for this project, for example, you've got

quite a bit

of area between the roadway and the units themselves, and separation is an important part of noise reduction. I don't have a well, I can't use it from my computer anyway.

You have

I'm wondering

to a

One ninety three is gonna get busier and busier.

Yeah. I'm wondering if if Jason Reed, do you have any exhibits that shows the perhaps a grading plan or the cross section? This has the cross section on it, but it doesn't show on on the map on the bottom.

Oh, at

the, that's true.

Okay.

Okay. You may add Jason Reed. I am I'm pulling up the specific plan on my tablet here currently. Bear with me for just one second while I get that cross section. Based upon the circulation exhibit 4.1 of the specific plan amendment, village one, it is following cross section d. Cross section d. One second. Cross section d does call for a wall at the property line at the rear, so there would be a six foot block wall.

Appreciate that. Thank you. I love it when I'm corrected.

Thank you for finding that to clarify. Do any of my fellow commissioners have any other comments or questions at this time?

Just comment. I'd like to make a comment if I can. So, like, I I support this project, but, my comment's more on a bigger scale, and it's to to the commission and also to the planning department and the rest of the city is I'm now in this is my second term on the planning commission. And, in my first term, I there's a consistent pattern that I really think we all should look out for. And we love to pound our chest and tout our award winning master plan in our city, but, we're consistently seeing amendments to that plan with zoning changes.

And there's and one of the big consistent changes is lowering density. And while I'm sensitive to that, especially developers, because developers are gonna build what is popular at the time or what is in demand, which is a little bit or higher higher density.

You guys

knew what I meant.

So I understand that that those products are more in demand today versus lower density projects. But when we keep changing small projects and big developments and we do a little one here and we think, oh, that's just a little change. It's not gonna do much to it. I mean, let's face it. This is 90 something homes. It's not gonna change a whole lot. But when we start adding all those up because we see these things over time, we change the overall development, which is no longer that award winning development. It may be it might not have the same feel or desire from the professionals that plan that development in the first place. I look at what we did in Bello Breeze. We changed several of the developments to a higher density.

Right? And I've I think this is at least our second one in Village 1, if not more, where we've done the same thing. So I don't know what the what what the solution to this is other than maybe a review of our master plan, which we've talked about, which is extremely costly. But what I see is I see this commission approving these projects one after another. And what those are doing is those are changing the overall development from its intended desire.

And that intended desire was done by professionals at the time that we all agreed to. And I don't think when you do it one by one, we get that comprehensive look of the entire thing. We're just looking at one little chunk, and this is the best example of that. And I think we need to start considering that a little bit more moving forward.

That's a very fair point. It is. And I would I would remind the commission that the the change in the density of this project is a subtraction of a density in another project. So there's this particular, developer has two projects within Village 1. They had a certain number of lots and or homes allocated on that project, and they under they're under building.

So they're not building all the ones they said they were going to. And so they have asked to transfer those number of units to this area instead. And so the total overall between those two projects is not is unchanged and unchanged is the unit count for the overall village. And it certainly is is more challenging, right, when you have a village that has multiple developers, multiple projects coming in over periods of time, but we do remain cognizant of the total number of units within the general plan. It does sometimes, like in this case, end up in specific plan amendments where we're asking to change the types of the makeup and etcetera.

And, you know, the general plan is a document that was what year? Remind me, please.

2008.

02/2008. '8. It's 2226. And it is intended to be a fifty year document, but a fifty year time frame for a general plan is a very long period of time. As you say, times change, needs change, the views of the community changes. And it's not something that we're blind or ignorant to, the length and the age of that general plan, and it may be something that we consider to move forward and reevaluate.

Fifty year plan, I I I understand that we're what are we now? Eighteen years into a fifty year plan. So if it's a fifty year plan and we're in eighteen years, I think there we should have some concern. I do in this specific plan, I I said it at this at the beginning that I I support this project, and my overall concern is not about this project.

Right.

And I and I recognize that they underbuilt Yes. One area and they have this other one. It's the overall what we're doing.

Right? I'm agreeing with you.

Yeah. Know you are. I know you are. But but kind of. And it's the overall, right, of what we're doing. When when they develop these projects, you look at 12 bridges, it has a little bit of everything. Mhmm. Right? And that project was built at the beginning or closer to the beginning of our master plan. And it has a little bit of everything, medium density, high density, lower density. And that's that that is viewed as kind of how a community would be would be planned. And what we're doing is we're getting rid of a lot of this low density housing, and I've seen that as a consistent pattern going to more of a medium and high density. And I think we're on a problematic path. That's my comment.

I'm agreeing with you completely, sir. And I think this is something that council has discussed lightly, and they're the ultimately the ones that would tell us move forward with this.

I have a comment. Please. Just

for many years, I was involved with the League of California cities, on a regional level, and they have a tremendous amount of data about how cities develop from going back to the first cities when gold was discovered, you know, etcetera, up to the relatively recent past. And if you would do a little research or have somebody do it for you, you'll find that, typically, a, city new cities, and in a great to a great ex I grew up in a new city, raised my family in it, but to a great degree, Lincoln is kind of a new city because it's been around since the eighteen hundreds, but it remained a very small city. And now it will grow from the first 10,000 people, which were in the first fifty years or so. It will now grow to over a 100,000. And the history is that as cities grow and the economic value of the community grows as the commercial development and industrial development comes in, higher priced jobs, etcetera, you start finding that they do build on bigger lots at the end of the project.

And the League of Cities has done that's that's not gonna satisfy us here in little old Lincoln, but it is something that has happened here in California over the last fifty, sixty years. So you might wanna take a look at those and may make make it may make you feel a little more comfortable with what's going on in our town.

Thank you for your comment. Do you have any additional comments at this moment? We'll come back again. Alright. With that, I will now, let's see. Open the public hearing. Citizens wishing to speak on this item may request to speak by raising their hand when requested to do so. Please limit your comments to three minutes. Secretary, do we have any hands raised online or anyone in the chambers that wishes to speak?

I did not receive any cards. I do not see any hands raised online, and I do not see any hands raised here in the room.

Okay. Thank you. With that, I will now close the public hearing and bring it back to my colleagues. Does anyone else have any additional comments? Yeah. I appreciate the comments raised. I do agree with Commissioner Manning, Vice Chair Manning. Thank you for that. I just want to comment. I appreciate that there is some thought put into that transition zone, that buffer to make those a little larger to maintain, some of that on that east side.

One of the things that I noticed, with with the map there, the EVA access, not a deal breaker for me, but just wanted to throw that out there for the engineering or fire department to maybe consider, I know it's gonna be closed off, but there's a way to design the gate to allow just pedestrian or bicycles to pass through that section.

Yeah. It's been it's been indicated to either be bollards or a gate. And so it's not determined at this time which of the others it will be. We do have to be sensitive of our of the residents within the county, which this is on the county line, of their concerns and not wanting people to cross into their property from either this development or from their property into this development. So it's a balance.

Sure. Okay. Yeah. Just something I noticed that maybe consider, if if it makes sense or not. So with that, would anyone like to make a motion?

I'll go ahead and make a motion for the Stardust 12 project to move to adopt the resolution recommending City Council adopt the proposed amendment to the twenty twelve Village 1 specific plan EIR, approve Village 1 specific plan amendment, approve Village 1 general development plan amendment, and approve a small lot tentative subdivision map.

Second the motion.

All right. We have a motion and a second.

So so just to be clear, couple things. Number one, just to make sure the motion reflects as mentioned in staff's recommendation in the, in the agenda. Red word for word. Yep. And, secondly, you can take them all at once as long as nobody's gonna vote differently on any one of the items. So we would just ask whether or not anyone's gonna vote any different on any one of the items. If not, it can be taken, all in one vote.

So we have a motion and a second to take all in one all in one vote on this. Secretary, please.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Commissioner Jerry Johnson?

No. I I find that this plan is not consistent with the general plan that I helped bring forward twenty years ago, and so I'm voting no.

Vice Chair Manning?

Yes.

And Chair Eric Johnson?

Yes. So this passes five one zero zero. Alright. Thank you for that.

All of them at one time, or would they wanna know whether the council or the, commissioner who voted against it want the record should reflect what it is about the project that which are the different items that we approved.

So part of the motion was, it included all four of the items that's, in staff's recommendation. So the no would be reflected on all four of them, for the reasons that was stated by Commissioner Johnson.

Very good.

That would be reflected in the minutes.

Thank you.

Thank you for the clarification. Thank you for clarifying that. All right. We'll move on to item 90, West Lincoln Square commercial project. Thomas Cruikshank, associate planner, will please give the staffing report.

And if you would indulge me, just offer actually, beg Thomas to let me lead him in. So this is a a really nice project. So the one thing that Lincoln lacks, I think, that we can all agree on is commercial, commercial development, the availability for people to shop locally. And that is very evident. We recently, received some information, and I think we had a gut feeling that our sales tax leakage was a significant percentage.

So there's, like, an estimated amount that everyone has assumed to spend on sales taxable items throughout a year. They place a dollar figure based on your income, the makeup of your household, And then they say, alright, if this household is going to be spending X dollars on sales taxable items, resulting in X dollars of sales taxable amounts, how much of that is being spent within Lincoln? And, we recently received some information that our sales tax loss as a as a result of lack of commercial is almost 50%. It's about 43, 46%. That is pretty darn significant.

Significant. This particular area that West Lincoln Square is in is also an area of the city that is severely underserved by commercial, type enterprise, and the ability to provide just your basic amenities to the residents. And so one of the reasons that we're very excited to bring this project forward. Also, I'll say when Sean and I started with the city about four years ago, I would have given, you my shoes because I can't give you my shirt because that's, you know, that would lead to all sorts of problems. But I would have given you my shoes for a commercial project and, and my purses, which I have a few of.

And, we couldn't there was just no interest. We were talking to commercial developers and like, yes, yes, yes, but not yet, not yet. We're not ready. We're not ready. And now, suddenly, within the last six months, there is tremendous movement within the city that we are very grateful for.

I'm sure you're hopefully aware that Ferrari Fabulian did break down break ground just recently, and they have a very aggressive schedule with wanting to have sticks up within it's the 2027. The twelve Bridges Retail Center is moving forward, full steam ahead. And now we have, this particular project, Lincoln Square West. We've also received some beginning information on Lincoln Square. And so we have now four commercial projects that are moving forward with, it looks like, good speed and well intentioned and well financed and the ability to actually bring these things to fruition to help reduce the lawsuits to the city, which helps us keep our firefighters and our police officers employed.

And with that, I'll turn it over to Thomas.

Thank you, Nina. Good evening, Planning Commissioners. Thomas Crookshank, Associate Planner with the Community Development Department. Project before you tonight is West Lincoln Square Commercial. This presentation is a summary of the project.

More detailed project information is available and outlined in the staff report provided. Lastly, as of this meeting, we have received public comments, which are included both as a memo here tonight and in the staff report with response. Tonight, I will discuss the project location, request entitlements, findings environmental determination and staff recommendations. This project is located in the Northwestern portion of the city, Lincoln within the special use District B or Sub B specific plan and general development plan area. Specifically, this site is a 40 acre commercial zone parcel at the Northeast corner of Highway 65 and Nelson Lane.

The application proposes 15 commercial buildings of varying size and use totaling approximately 245,000 square feet of development. The requested entitlements are as follows: a Zone Text Amendment to the Sudby General Development Plan, specific development plan development permit design review, amended commercial portion of an approved tentative parcel map and conditional use permits for oil change facility, fuel stations with extended hours, alcohol sales and consumption and drive through uses. The first entitlement request is for a Zone Tech's amendment to the Sud B general development plan to change the automobile service station from not permitted to allowed only with approval of a conditional use permit. The second entitlement request is an amendment to the commercial portion of the approved Piri Ara Laga large lot tentative subdivision map. The approved commercial portion of the map contains seven commercial lots, three landscape and open space lots.

The amendment to the commercial portion of the map proposes 15 commercial parcels, seven landscape infrastructure and drainage parcels. The right of way dedication for Oak Brook Drive, which is located on the north. Select, adoption, conditions of approval and other features of the approved large lot map would remain in effect. Oak Brook Drive, on the north side of the project site is constructed as a separate project,

not as

a part of the West Lincoln Square. The third entitlement request for a specific development plan development permit. On November 20, the design review board reviewed their primary components of the project, excluding the major retail tenant. The board expressed their overall support for the project's design and architectural direction while recommending refinements to some architectural elements and paint colors. The board also requested that the major retail tenant portion be brought forward for review at a future meeting.

On 01/30/2026, the DRB evaluated the major retail tenant component along with the previously requested design updates. Following this review, the DRB issued a recommendation for approval to the Planning Commission. The West Lincoln Square project site will be anchored by an approximately 181,000 square foot major retailer with associated fuel station. The proposal also includes banks, an oil change facility, a tire center, a second stand alone fuel station, six quick service restaurants with drive thru, a multiuse tenant commercial retail building, a sit down restaurant, a car wash and some electrical vehicle charging area. The major retailer would be positioned in the southeastern portion of the site, along with a bank automotive retail and dining uses located along Nelson Lane and Oak Brook Drive.

The the design includes, select tree species, shrubs, and ground cover, which provide natural appearance visual screenings along the side perimeter. A master sign program has been included with the entitlements middle, which proposes a 70 foot internally illuminated pylon sign along the southern portion of the site adjacent to 65, and that is letter a here. Internally illuminated monument signs, b are located at entrances along Nelson And Oakbrook Drive. And then there's a logo sign c, which is also proposed to be located along Nelson Lane and Oak Brook Drive here and here. For context, the Lincoln Crossing Target shopping center pylon sign is 65 feet tall.

The approved 12 bridges retail center pylon sign is 81 feet tall, and Rockland's Whitney Ranch shopping centers further south on Highway 65 is 70 feet tall. The final entitlement request is for conditional use permits. The project proposes drive throughs at the Pad 1 major anchor pharmacy pickup, oil change facility at Pad 4, car wash at Pad 5, banks at Pad 3 And 10, quick service restaurants at Pad 7891213 And 14. The Sud B general development plan does allow two drive throughs by right without a conditional use permit. A conditional use permit for alcohol sales and or consumption is required by the Lincoln Municipal Code for the two proposed fuel stations at Pad 2 And 11 and Pad 15, the sit down restaurant.

A conditional use permit for fuel stations with extended hours is also required by the Sudby General Development Plan at Pad 2 And 11. With recommendation approval of the Zone Text Amendment, a conditional use permit is required for automobile service station, the oil change facility at Pad 4. The West Lincoln Square commercial project has been found to be consistent with the City of Lincoln general plan, the airport land use compatibility plan as this is in the overlay zone, the sub b specific plan and general development plan, Lincoln Municipal Code Title 17 subdivisions and Title 18 zoning Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA, an addendum to the SUDD B specific plan certified environmental impact report was prepared as part of the project's evaluation. The project site had previously undergone environmental review for commercial development and the analysis, determined that the West Lincoln Square commercial project would not result in any new or substantially more severe environmental impacts beyond those previously identified. As previously stated, public comments have been received by staff.

The staff report discusses comments received during public review. Staff have responded to those comments in the staff report. After the agenda was published, the same commenter sent an additional comment letter provided as a memo here tonight. The memo does contain staff responses. Staff recommends that the planning commission conduct a public hearing, consider the information contained in the staff report, testimony of the public, and make the following outline following actions outlined here.

Adopt resolutions determining the addendum satisfies the CEQA requirements, recommend city council approve a zone tech zone text amendment, recommend city council approve an amended tentative parcel map, and resolution to approve the specific development plan design review and adopt conditional use permits for alcohol sales and consumption, fuel station with extended hours, automobile drive throughs, and automobile service station use with drive through. This concludes my presentation. Members of the applicant team are here and present and available to answer questions along with staff.

Alright. Thank you, Thomas.

Amar Sidhu. I'm the owner and the developer of this project. And I primarily wanted to thank the design review board for their professionalism. We came with a we thought an excellent design, multigenerational multigenerational stone stucco beautiful buildings, and they added and enhanced with their comments and their professionalism. So we went back.

And I just wanted to share with you that we spared no expense to make it into an absolutely beautiful and impressive and I hope some of the elevations are in there. The only other thing I want to mention is that four or five buildings that I will build, of course, will be to that standard. But all the other buildings that I may ground lease or sell will have to adhere to the same design standards that developed for this whole shopping center. And I'm very proud that, you know, this being next to the freeway will be a multigenerational. You know, some buildings last for forty years.

We all see buildings that are 40 years old, and they still look beautiful. That was our intent. And my whole team is here, Greg Bardini with civil engineer, Tom Murphy, architect, traffic consultant, and landscape designer, We're here to answer any questions or ameliorate any concerns the commission may have. Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you, Amar. So let's see. With that, I'll bring it back to my colleagues to see if there's any comments, please.

Thank you. Serving on the design review board, I can certainly concur with your comments. I especially appreciate the fact that you had taken our comments from the first meeting, brought back and addressed those concerns. I thought the landscaping recommendations were excellent, and I just want to have that on record that we did go over colors and concepts and landscaping very, very thoroughly with this project because speaking to, Anita's concerns, this is a needed commercial, development on the West Side, and, we'd like to make it a win for Lincoln if if possible. Yes.

Yes. Okay. Alright. Commissioner Gilbert, please.

Welcome to Lincoln.

Please. As a resident who lives in this area, we are very excited for this groundbreaking. Our services, we need to go quite a bit of ways to, you know, go grocery shopping, go to a pharmacy. So to have it in our area with all of these different types of services is going to be wonderful for our neighbors. And it's, I think I I mentioned to this commission that, my neighbors come to me all the time now and ask me, when is this going to happen?

Well, I think, yes, I can start saying that, the reality is here. One thing I wanted to add too, and, Anita, you did say something about a shortage, you know, or at least, you know, a very large percentage of our population that are going outside of our city to do most of their shopping, which,

you

know, that's going to happen when the services are not here. But the services being here, not only is it going to actually entice the folks here, our residents of Lincoln, to do that, but I see our neighbors in Sheridan and Wheatland who do not have the services that we do. So I think that is going to also be a very boon for us, for people that are actually commuting back and forth through Lincoln back home. So I'm very, very excited about this, this project. Thank you very much.

How about this side? Any comments or questions at this time?

I was sitting in a chairlift on a slope of Mammoth Mountain last week, and was approached from someone that knew I was on the planning commission in Lincoln. And she says, where the heck are you gonna get a grocery store on the West end of town? And I says, well, you'll be happy to learn that it's on our agenda. So there's a lot of people interested in this development, and I'm certainly pleased that you're going forward with it. A question, though, on the circulation, traffic circulation, particularly pedestrian and bicycle. Can you show us how that how that works

Yeah. I can

from neighboring residential areas?

I'll pull up the diagram.

For clarification, you're looking for the circulation within the commercial development itself?

How people get to the commercial development.

Okay.

So the

general or, sorry, specific plan does list, a very loose diagram showing detached sidewalks, bike trails, etcetera. So this is what is provided in that sub b plan. However, the site plan for the the West Lincoln Square does contain connections to if you see the, I I can't, point while I while I have my thumb drive in, but I'll zoom in here. The traffic circle here serves as a connection to neighborhoods. That's where the the sort of busy boulevard next down and goes into the neighborhood.

This is where there are detached, sidewalks that come out of here. Bike trails are along this road here on the north side of the the project site. And, d give give me a sec. I'll pull up the site plan back here. And The main pedestrian connections to the neighborhoods coming from this Northeast Side.

There is an approved small lot, residential subdivision map to the north on this portion. You can't see the mouse. Directly north on the right half essentially of this property. The left half here where it says future commercial, that would be commercial on that side. But there are required pedestrian connections to the neighborhood, And the general development plan describes, a method that all of these neighborhoods should be connected by foot and or bike trail to this development to encourage it.

The general development plan, additionally requires bike parking at each, business. And it's hard to see on this plan, but there is a symbol indicating that that will be included on every single parcel here.

Very cool. Thanks, Tom.

You're welcome.

And I apologize for bringing that on you. Try not to do that. No problem.

We're ready. We're ready for the questions.

Apparently. Nice job. Thank you.

I guess you're recognized everywhere as a planning commissioner, so that's exciting.

Mammoth Mountain.

Yeah. Commissioner Manning.

Aside from getting grocery and shopping up on the West end of town, I know that's been said a lot. I'm really excited about the fact that we're we're doing things along Highway 65. I call that Highway Commercial. I feel like that's 's huge for the city. I think we've missed some opportunities in the past 12 bridges. We got a high school on the on where the freeway is at, and we've got medical buildings. We we soon just changed some zoning there to to get something that resembles a bit of Highway Commercial. But the Highway Commercial is huge. Capture all the traffic going up and down 65, I think it'll be great for us.

Do you have another comment? Just one more comment. It's a question. But my question is, what percentage are you at lease wise?

If you could please please turn to the microphone.

Are with nondisclosure agreement. Understood. Can't everything until the leases are signed. But I will tell you that we are talking to we think within the next sixty days to ninety days, and we're gonna go with Oakbrook drawing submittal next week. And we think, literally, 70 or 80% of the shopping center will be filled.

We are getting a lot of interest. We think it's primarily the location and exactly what all of you mentioned. But, also, we think that the quality of design that we have is attracting very high quality tenants. That's the best I can tell you. We have probably six or seven LOIs already, and we think there are three or four coming. And a lot of these retail tenants don't have a presence in Lincoln right now. So I think residents of Lincoln would be happy to get exactly like they don't have to go to, you know, 15 miles, 20 miles, half an hour to some of these tenants.

That's the best I

can share with you. Until we have a signed lease, nobody wants to need to disclose that.

No. No. Yeah. Completely understand. That was a very good answer. Thank you.

Yes. Yes. No. We're we're very, very pleased with the interest we are getting.

Amar Amar, sorry. While you're up there, one of my questions was, I'm just curious, you kinda answered it. It sounds like there's a lot of interest. So the intent, I guess, would be to Can

you speak out a little bit?

Sorry. Yeah. So sounds like there's a lot of in intent to move forward, I guess. Is there, like, a time frame of when you're looking to Yes, start like breaking exactly. Yeah, I can

answer that. Next week, we're going to submit the drawings for Oak Brook and the roundabout. It's fully designed. SP Mann and Wen have been very, very helpful to get us to a point where we think landscape design is being done. Kevin is here. So we anticipate within the next week to submit those drawings. As As soon as those drawings are approved, we intend to go and hire a contractor to start construction. We actually wanna break ground this year. You know? We always like to start construction before the rainy season and get as much of dirt work done because it's very difficult to do dirt work and grading in December and January.

So our desire is that if we get these drawings approved within four to six weeks, that we'll start construction within two weeks after that. Because, like I mentioned, we have so many tenants that are already there that at least four buildings are all of these. We can start as soon as we get the drawings done, you know, with Greg and Tom. Of course, we need to get the entitlement first before we can submit it. But there's not gonna be a single week wasted. As soon as we get the things approved, we start construction.

Excellent. Well, you. Sure. Thanks for sharing that. All right. No further comments at the moment. I'll now open to the public hearing. Citizens wishing to speak on this item may request to speak by raising their hand. When requested to do so, please limit your comments to three minutes. Secretary, do we have any hands raised online or anyone in the chambers that wishes to speak?

I did receive one card if Albert Scheiber can come to the podium.

How are doing?

Good afternoon, evening, Albert Scheiber. The gentleman to my left is, mister Steve Hackett. His, son-in-law was not able to be here tonight, so you're stuck with me again. So, mister Hackett, lives, directly across, from this project on

240. 240.

Is that better? Yeah. Thanks.

Okay. So mister Hackett lives directly across from the proposed Oakbrook Drive Street. I went to the city and asked for some clarification on stuff. I'm still not clear as to whether Oak Brook's gonna be built now or not. So I need to back up a little bit for a little history.

When Nelson Lane was a narrow two lane back road, there was a probably, give or take, 14 inch culvert that ran under Nelson Lane towards Mr. Hackett's house. When the when Nelson Lane was expanded to to what it is currently, that one culvert went to, I think, it's like five culverts now, and some of those multiple size, larger than what was there. So the result is mister Hackett's house is flooded. So when this not this project, but this area was annexed, we were at LAFCO, and we raised the point that that that drainage needs to be corrected.

And so because we're unclear as to whether Oak Brook's gonna be built now or not, we just need to be on record that, at LAVCO, the city assured mister Hackett that it would be taken care of. So that's the first concern. The the the next concern is, right at the end of Oak Brook in front of mister Hackett's house is a proposed stoplight. And it's unclear, is the stoplight gonna be put in now? Is it down the road?

And how does it affect mister Hackett's property, which is directly across from Oak Brook Lane and where the stoplight is is is on the map? So one additional comment is that, mister Haggart's son-in-law has been working with somebody at the city. I'm not I'm not sure who it is, but they're happy with the conversations they've had, and, they they wish to continue having those good conversations. Anything else I missed?

Still put me in the hole.

So so what mister Hackett said was the big concern is his house flooding again. So, Nelson Lane is was razed and, like I said, a lot of water. I wish I could show you the picture I have on my phone of the culverts, but it's crazy. I I don't know why they did that, but, we're not opposed to the project. We just wanted to get all this on record so that mister Hackett's house doesn't flood again. Sure. Good?

Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Albert and Steve, for raising that. Do we have any additional hands raised or anyone in the audience?

I did not receive any cards in online, Chair Johnson. There are no hands raised. Anyone in chambers want to speak? I don't see any hands raised in the room.

Okay. Perfect. With that, I will now close public hearing and bring it back to my colleagues. And I also want to ask if staff has anything to wants to address anything that was brought up.

Good evening, Commissioner Chair. Yeah, so we're in contact and the city is aware of issues at that subject property. And I think we're working towards a solution with Amar's engineer on that Oak Brook project, Tony Freyji. And so I believe we're working on a solution. We're going to redirect the flows that get discharged right next to the property to further north. Yeah, I mean, resident is I can give him my information after the meeting so that we can connect and hear his issues and deal with that. Thank you.

Okay. Go ahead, Thomas.

I can answer the timing of Oak Brook Drive. That is required when the commercial property develops or the phase two residential, which is located to the east. That road will be built out in its entirety, and that is for this project and for the housing. So it will be there. And it the commercial development is not allowed to build without that.

Okay. Excellent. Thanks for answering that, and, thanks for being in communication with with the family there. Let's see. Do Does any of my colleagues have any other additional comments or questions? If not, I'll entertain a motion.

And unlike the last project, given the nature and scope of this particular project, it would be the staff's recommendation that this this these resolutions be, done one by one.

Okay. Alright. So we

have I'm happy to read the resolution titles one at a time to avoid, the commissioners from having to read through them or to, you know, condense them down for you if

you Perfect. I believe we have eight. Correct? And Yeah.

Okay. So, the first resolution is, the recommendation to determine the addendum, certified environmental impact report, for the special use district B Northeast quadrant specific Plan as the appropriate level of documentation satisfies requirements of CEQA based on the determination that no new substantially more severe impact would result from the project, etcetera. And so, if there is a commissioner who wishes to make a motion Approval

of the as stated.

Second. Okay. We have a motion and a second.

I'm sorry, I missed who

motioned. Thank you.

Roll call vote. Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jackson? Yes. Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Yes. Vice Chair Manning? Yes. And Chairman Eric Johnson?

Yes. And that one passes 6 000.

Alright.

Mr. Chairman, would suggest we just go around the dais here. The read one? Okay.

Alright. The second resolution is to adopt a resolution recommending the city council adopt an ordinance to approve a zone text amendment to the adopted SED B NEQ general development plan, amending the zoning category for automotive service station smog centers not including major repair or overhaul from prohibited use to allow with approval under CUP.

I'll make a motion as stated.

Second.

All right. We're kind of going in over. All right. So we have a motion and a second.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Manning?

Yes.

Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jerry Johnson? And Chairman Eric Johnson?

Yes. That passes six zero zero zero.

Okay, next resolution recommending city council approve an amendment to the commercial portion of the original approved A and P Lincoln LLP property large lot tentative parcel map in connection with the proposed West Lincoln Square commercial tentative parcel map, etcetera.

I'll second.

Alright. We have a motion and a second. Did you get who it was? Yeah.

Second? Roll

call, please.

Okay. Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Yes. Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Vice Chair Manning?

Yes.

And Chair Eric Johnson?

Yes. That one passes as well. 6,000.

And next up, adopt a resolution approving the specific development plan, development permit, design review for the proposed West Lincoln Square commercial development in conformance with the design and development standards of the SED B, NAQ specific plan and general development plan. So moved. Second.

All right, we have a motion to second. Hutchinson and Johnson.

Come on, Jeanie. Stealthy

over here. Roll Okay. Call, please.

Thank you. Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jerry Johnson?

Yes.

Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Vice chair oh, commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Vice chair Manning? Yes. And chairman Eric Johnson?

Yes. So that one passes as well, 6,000.

All right, we're halfway home. The next one is a resolution approving the conditional use permit for alcohol sales and or consumption consistent with the Lincoln Municipal Code, Section eighteen twenty two-thirty.

Move that one.

That was Manning.

I think it was Manning.

Our second was Gilbert.

Call. Vice Chair Manning?

Yes.

Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Yes. And Chairman Eric Johnson?

Yes. And that one passes as well, 6,000.

And the next one is a resolution approving the conditional use permit for automotive drive thru consistent with Lincoln Municipal Code eighteen twenty two-thirty for PADD one, PADD three, PADD five, proposed quick service restaurants at PADD seven through nine, PADD 10, quick service restaurant at PADD 12 through 14.

I'll make a motion as stated.

That was Jackson.

I'll second it.

Seconded by Manning.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Manning?

Yes.

Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jerry Johnson?

Yes.

And Chair Eric Johnson?

Yes. And that passes as well 6,000.

And the next one is a resolution approving the conditional use permit for automotive service station with an associated automobile drive thru consistent with Lincoln Municipal Code twelve eighteen I'm sorry, eighteen twenty two zero three zero for pad four.

I so move.

That was Jackson. I'm sorry, Jerry Johnson is the motion.

I'll second it.

Seconded Manning. It

is Commissioner Johnson and then Commissioner Manning. Roll Yeah. Call, please.

Commissioner Jerry Johnson? Yes. Vice Chair Manning?

Yes.

Commissioner Gilbert? Yes. Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Jackson? Yes. And Chairman Eric Johnson?

Yes. And that passes as 6,000.

And the final resolution adopting a conditional use permit for fuel stations with convenience stores at pad 2 11 with extended hours.

So moved. Second.

Hutchinson and Gilbert.

Roll call vote. Commissioner Hutchinson? Yes. Commissioner Gilbert?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson?