Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, and welcome to the 02/26/2026 meeting of the City of Sacramento Planning and Design Commission. Bear with me. I'm kind of winging it. I didn't bring my script here tonight, so I'm kind of reading off the calendar. But we'll hopefully cover everything. I think the do we have a quorum?

Let me go ahead.

Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Could we do a roll call?

Thank you, chair. Commissioner Blunt?

Here.

Commissioner Hernandez? Absent. Commissioner Caden?

Here.

Oh, I'm sorry. Vice Chair Caden? Commissioner Lamas?

Here.

Commissioner Lee?

Here.

Commissioner Mesias Reid? Absent. Commissioner Nybo?

Here.

Commissioner Ortiz? Here. Commissioner Ruschke? Here. Commissioner Tao?

Here.

Commissioner Thompson?

Here.

Commissioner Young? Absent. And chair Chase?

Present. Here.

Thank you.

We have

a quorum.

Thank you. I'd like to remind members public, in the chambers, if you'd like to speak on an agenda item, please turn in a speaker slip, down front here before the item begins. After the item is called, we will no longer accept speaker slips, and you'll have two minutes to speak once you are called on. We will now proceed with, today's agenda. Before we proceed, I want to announce that, Item two actually, should do the Atlantic acknowledgment first, right? Yes. Could we rise for the land acknowledgement and then we'll stay standing for the pledge of allegiance.

Please rise for the opening acknowledgements of in

honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and tribal lands. To the original people of this land, the Nisenan people, the Southern Maidu Valley and Plains Miwok, Patwin Winton, peoples, and the people of the Winton, Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federally recognized tribe. May we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside us today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather together today in the active practice of acknowledgment and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous people's history, contributions, and lives. Thank you. Please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States

Of America, to the Republic, which

Thank you. Our first business today is approval of the consent calendar. Clerk, are there any members of the public who wish to speak on the consent calendar?

Thank you, Chair. No, I have no members that wish to speak.

Okay. Thank you. We have no speaker slips. Are there any commissioners who wish to speak on this item? Seeing none, we will proceed. Is there a motion for approval of the minutes? Commissioner Blunt?

I make a motion to pass this item.

Thank you, Commissioner Blunt. Commissioner Caden. Second. We have a motion and a second. Clerk, can you take a vote?

Thank you, chair. Let's see. Commissioner Lee?

Aye.

Commissioner Tao?

Aye.

Commissioner Lomas? Aye. Commissioner Nybo?

Aye.

Vice chair Kaden?

Aye.

Chair Chase?

Aye.

Commissioner Hernandez? Wait, what does it say? Sorry. Ortiz. I apologize. Commissioner Ortiz? Aye. Commissioner Marcias Reid? Aye. Commissioner Blunt?

Aye.

Commissioner Rescue? Aye. Commissioner Thompson? Aye. Thank you. The motion passes.

Thank you, Clerk. The we'll now move on to public hearings. Before we move on, I want to announce that the item number two on the agenda, the business and license and regulations has been continued to 03/12/2026. I think that would be in two weeks. So I hope no one has come out just for that. We will now proceed to item three, Del Paso Boulevard Alcohol Sales, P25-eleven. Presenting that would be Deja.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Deja Harris, associate planner with the community development department, and I'm here to present the Del Paso Boulevard Alcohol Sales Project. This item p twenty five zero one one is a request for a conditional use permit to authorize the sale of distilled spirits within a 1,600 square foot neighborhood market in the limited commercial c one zone. The market is located on the Southeast corner of Del Paso Boulevard and Verano Street and is surrounded by both single family and multiunit residential. The market currently sells beer and wine through a ABC type 20 license, which will be replaced with a type 21 license, if granted, for the sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits.

The new alcohol display would be located behind the point of sale system and accessible by employees only. There are no changes to the existing beer and wine sales proposed or exterior changes to the building. Notification of the project and the hearing were provided to all neighborhood associations, residents, and property owners within 500 feet of the subject site. Site was also posted at the with the hearing information. Staff received two letters of opposition and three letters of support from nearby residents, as well as a letter of support from the Hagenwood Community Association, which were included in the staff report.

There are also four e comments expressing support for the project. Staff recommends the commission approve the requested entitlement subject to the findings of fact and condition of approval in the staff report. This concludes my presentation and staff and the applicant team are here should you have any questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Deja. The applicants have a presentation or not? Okay, thank you. Do we have any questions, members of the Commission or staff? Oh, sorry. Before that, do we have any public comments on the item?

Thank you, Chair. Yes, we do. Can I have Falona please come up? And then next will be Harpett. Is it Frolona Atarato? I'm sorry, I'm probably mispronouncing that. Okay. Can I have Harpett please come forward to the podium? Harper. Okay. Shane? Shane Camino? Can Camino?

Hi, my name is Shane Canano. I live around the corner from said store. He actually helped me quit drinking while I was drinking. So I've been clean for like fourteen years. I've known Tony, I don't know, ten plus years. I just think it'd a good idea to give him his license and continue living. That's all I got to say. But I am in support of it.

Thank you for your comments. Can I have Daniel Sabala please come forward to the podium?

Good evening, commissioners. Daniel Savala. I am a North Sacramento resident, live in the old North Sac neighborhood. I'm coming here to support Tony today. I wanted to come and give kind of some context.

I created, during the COVID pandemic, a brand called Cerveza Landia, which was a way for me to help celebrate Chicano and Mexican brewed craft beer. Took me on this whole journey throughout Sonoma County, Yolo County, and Sacramento County. And as you've seen me here before speaking in support of licenses and in representing licenses, I wanted to provide some context of, Historically, we have suffered in in all over California with an overconcentration of convenience stores or liquor stores. Prior to the early nineteen nineties, most of those stores were unregulated or under conditioned cause it didn't require conditional use permits. What you have before you today, what Tony's had to go through was a loss of a partner through a divorce, which made his license, his type 20 license, he couldn't use it anymore.

The only license available to him was through a lottery, which is through the type 21, and so here we are. He's been a great operator. I've known him for almost ten years. Came into the store and realized he wasn't selling beer anymore and he was waiting through this long process. You have a guy who's been a long time business business owner in North Sacramento. He's going through the only process that's available. He's well regulated. When I first met Tony back in 2013, he was only selling six packs and above. His license has always been highly restricted to protect the neighborhood. And from what I read on the staff report, he continues to do so.

So I just wanted to come out and just as a beer advocate and as a resident of the neighborhood, I think he's just the perfect candidate to continue operating a successful business by having a type 21 license that will be regulated, his hours of operation, leads, not being able to sell singles, restricting the bottles of seven fifty milliliters. Those are good, sound conditions that help keep neighborhoods safe, and that's why I'm here to support it, and I hope you will too. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Can I have Marquise Bibbs please come forward? And after Marquise, Michael Sims.

Hello. Michael Sims. It'd just be helpful if he had if he could do expand his sales and continue. I don't personally drink, but a lot of people that elderly and some and people I know that can't really get out and about on their own send me out to go pick up the groceries and whatnot, and sometimes that includes alcohol. And I it'd be a lot better to just go to his store, which is right next to my house, rather than go to another store in the area that often has people hanging out and around that I'd rather not deal with. It's just the safer place at his store. So that's why I'm here. That's all I got. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. William Johnson. And after William Johnson, have Lacey Barrie.

I'm just here to support Singh for for getting the license, and he's been a good business person in my neighborhood. Just hope you guys, grant us some license.

Thank you for your comments. I have Lacey.

Hello. Good evening. I live in the neighborhood, a Storr. He has been an amazing man, not just in his business, but in his personal life with us that live in the community. And I really hope that you do grant his petition. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. I have Lisa Ortiz and then Jason Randwell. Lisa Ortiz?

Hi. I'm disabled, and I'm a neighbor of Tony's. I don't drive. He's four houses down, so I'm able to walk to Tony's. And if for some reason, I run a couple pennies short, he covers me until I can pay him back. He's an asset to our neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. And the last speaker I have is Jason Rodway.

Hello. I am a business owner in the same area that mister Tony is in. I also have liquor there. And these two, video officials also approved it. He's gonna be my competitor, and I still am in favor of him getting it. So that's all I have to say. Thank you. I'm in favor.

Thank you for your comments, chair. I have no more speakers on this item.

Thank you, clerk. Are there any commissioner questions of either staff or well, the applicant the staff speaking for the applicant. Seeing no questions, we've had the public is there a motion on this item? I'm sorry. Commissioner Thao.

Thank you, Chair Chase. Is the applicant here tonight? Oh, hey, Tony, right? Yeah, just a few concerns from the community and just want to Tony, get this crossed. You know, we didn't see that there's a lot of community support for this application.

There's also concerns from neighbors about the music. And I think that's something that I thank you for. I see that the community association supporting the project. A lot of neighbors are here supporting the project, which is also great. But I would also want to ask for your commitment for some of the concerns addressed by some of the neighbors here about after hours hanging out or loud music as well with the security.

I know the PD also imposed a couple restrictions some good restrictions on the business as well. And you've been a good operator. I heard from the community that you also live in the community. And so in the past, we've had businesses that comes in and opens up liquor stores in low income communities like ours. And I, you know, represent North Sacramento as the Planning Commission.

And I have to look out and make sure that the best interest of our community is there. And, you know, there's a unique scenario where you live in the community, you own the business, and you are so we are looking to look at this as a positive example of what a small business can do to with the community. And so, I just want to make those comments for that, you know. With that, I don't see any other commissioners with any comments. So I would make a motion to, pass the item, to move the item.

Thank you, commissioner. We have a motion. Is there a second, for this? Commissioner, is it Reschke or Thompson? Thompson. Commissioner Thompson.

I second.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Clerk, could you take a roll?

Okay. Please have patience with this. The names are not in this order of the seating chart, so it's going be kind of random like it was the first time around. Commissioner Blunt? Aye. Commissioner Hernandez? Absent. Vice Chair Kaden? Aye. Commissioner Lamas? Aye. Commissioner Lee?

Aye.

Commissioner Mesias Reid? Aye. Commissioner Nybo? Aye. Commissioner Ortiz? Aye. Commissioner Reschke? Aye. Commissioner Tao? Aye. Commissioner Thompson?

Aye. I also just want to add thank you for being a good citizen. It seems like you've impacted your community.

So Thank

you. Commissioner Young, absent, and vice chair or I'm sorry, chair Chase.

Yes.

Thank you. The quorum pass or the motion passes.

Thank you. Thank you for everybody 's support us.

Thank you. We'll now continue to item four on the agenda, which is the Flooring Road Quick Quack Car Wash, P25-thirteen. And I think Danny Abbas is making the presentation.

Thank you, and good evening, Chair and members of the Planning and Design Commission. I am Danny Abbas, and the planner for this item. If I could, I would like to start with, for about ten seconds showing an aerial on the overhead and then moving back to the presentation. Perfect. Thank you. This item do you want me to turn let me rotate this?

No. Back.

That works better. Oh, should I flip it again? Put north up.

If you turn it so that you can see it, like it it reads properly to you, yeah, then it'll display.

Okay. Great. So this item is a request to establish a quick quack car wash on a 1.15 acre portion of 14 acre parcel at 3815 Florin Road near Franklin Boulevard. The proposal requires approval of a conditional use permit and site plan and design review entitlements. Conditional use permit is a zoning instrument to review the location and conduct of uses known to have a distinct impact upon the area in which they are located.

They are discretionary in nature. Staff are tasked with assessing the proposed uses impact, suitability, and consistency or inconsistency with adopted city documents. In this case, staff does not support a car wash use at this site on Florin Road and recommend the the the commission deny the use permit request. General plan map m three, identifies Florin Road as candidate high frequency transit corridor in the subject site as a part of a designated transit oriented development area. The site is near the Florin Light Rail Station, high bus service high service bus transit with a bus stop located adjacent to the site, and planned increased bus rapid transit service.

Bus service here works in concert with light rail service with buses going both ways on Florin Road providing direct drop offs to the Florin Light Rail Station. The South Area Community Plan speaks specifically to the land use intent of infill along the Florin Road, high frequency bus corridor as uses that are oriented to and supportive of transit. An oriented use is clearly misaligned with this vision. What's being shown is less than one mile stretch of Florin Road. The blue dots are bus stops, and the orange dot is the Florin Light Rail Station.

There are six bus stops within less than a quarter mile of the site. Nearby frequent buses go north, south, east, and west. And those along Florin Road, including the bus stop next to the site, connect directly to light rail. Those are the two dots next to the orange one. The area of the proposed project has excellent transit proximity and service.

Transit supportive uses, not car washes, will help support existing and future bus service. Regarding future bus rapid transit, it is like most plans in the city that don't yet have an exact timeline or complete funding. There's a plan or expectation to align with so that planning can reliably create a compatible environment worthy of future transit supportive investment. Back for a second. The requirement of this proposal or any other at this site is to dedicate right of way to accommodate a BRT lane, which provides active evidence of the intent to progress bus rapid transit.

This dedication area is seen at the front of the site as the paved and landscaped section. The proposed use is an abundantly available service in the area with four active car washes less than a mile from the site, including a tunnel wash almost directly across the street. Staff does not find that another car wash in a concentrated area would provide the surrounding community with service that is needed. The general plan recognizes the stretch of Florin Road as a high injury network next to a top five Vision Zero corridor identified as having the highest number of fatal and serious crashes involving people walking, bicycling, and driving. Staff find that a car wash exacerbates known public safety hazards and is a fundamentally incompatible use at this location and inconsistent with the aims of the city adopted Vision Zero Action Plan.

General plan map e j five represents communities cumulatively impacted by environmental justice issues. The subject site is a section that has both county and city land with what within what is deemed as a most disadvantaged area. Some of these issues include poverty, transportation, safety, air pollution, and access to health care. The site is also within a state designated SB five thirty five and AB six seventeen areas, which have disproportionately high air pollution burden and aim to reduce local emissions. Staff maintained that the best opportunity for a commercial use to reduce air pollution.

Is for to offer services to pedestrians cyclists and transit riders Especially in an area that is walkable with high quality transit service. Additionally this furthers basic city adopted climate action goals. Staff received correspondence from the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District and Civic Thread, formerly Walk Sacramento. The air district commented that a pedestrian oriented use rather than an automobile oriented use would be consistent with the public health aims of AB six seventeen and would support sustainable transportation investments. Civic thread commented that the proposal is inconsistent with adopted multimodal safety and clinicals.

Staff believe that a commercial use at this location should support transit, promote walkability, prioritize transportation safety, reduce congestion, protect air quality, pursue climate goals, and address environment injustice and equity. Therefore, staff recommend denial of the discretionary conditional use permit for a quick car wash at this location. Only through our collective commitment to the vision of the general plan and recognize good planning principles, will corridors like Florin Road be able to flourish and transform into the vibrant pedestrian environments we know they can be. Land use is the most important component of that transformation. Thank you.

That concludes the presentation. And I believe the applicant has a presentation prepared. Is that correct? Okay. After, both staff and the applicants would be available for any questions if there are any.

Thank you. Thank you, Danny.

Of the attachments? Click through it? The rendering, the site plan? Yes, There was a site plan in the with attached to the staff report. Yes. The rendering.

No.

The the attachment to the staff report, is that possible to do that? No. It's not an additional one. Let me pull up here. The project plans, attachment number four.

Is that possible? The August actuary? Yes. Yes. Thank you.

Sure. For sure. And I also have a handout for the commission. May I place it on the desk? Thank you very much. I'll just get started. So good evening, chair, vice chair, members of the commission. My name is Leticia Ramirez. I am with Thatch and Hooper, and we represent the applicant QUICQUAC. Here with me today is Vance Shannon, the director of entitlements for QUICQUAC Nick Wecker with Core State who assisted project planning architecture, as well as John Teofilo who completed the CEQA document for the project.

Also here is Ryan Hooper with our firm. It's not easy for an applicant to come to the commission with of denial. Others have proposed a similar use on the site and face a same same face the same response from staff. Therefore, they abandoned their plans and the site has remained vacant for the last thirteen years. Because of this history, the applicant intentionally reached out to the community to determine if there was community support for this project before they initiated their application.

They went door to door, spoke to a 113 residents. A memo detailing these efforts was included with the staff report. What they found is that there there is overwhelmingly positive support for this project. The top responses were that individuals supported the project because it will bring jobs to the community for young people and residents. They support the project because they need or want the service.

They support the project because it will beautify an empty concrete piece of property. One of the results of this community engagement effort was Kwikwak Connecting with the Rose Family Creative Empowerment Center, a nonprofit led by Ms. Jackie Rose that serves youth in South Sacramento. Ms. Rose submitted a letter of support for the project, which was emailed to the commission and published on e comments.

This connection led to QuickQAK hosting a career exploration day for youth with the Rose Family Center. You'll hear more about this from the youth participants during public comment. For quick quack, this community outreach is not just about getting a project approved. It's who they are. The company's mission statement is to change lives for the better.

That includes giving back to the communities they serve. The app then also revised its site plan designed to include a unique design element, which I'm attempting to show with the rendering. And this design element is a pedestrian amenity along the entire frontage of the parcel on Florin Road. The inspiration for this feature is the city's twenty forty general plan policies relating to improving the pedestrian environment within corridors. There is no other quick quack in California that has this feature. This amenity provides shaded bike storage, and I think I'll pause just to

I'll be there in

a minute, thanks to technology. So, this amenity provides shaded bike storage for quick quack team members who ride their bikes to work. It includes a leaning bench for visitors or passerbys, including those waiting at the bus stop west of this parcel. From a design perspective, mimics a storefront and creates an urban feel, similar to what is seen at the Safeway in Midtown. It has multiple benefits from an aesthetic and functional it's creative, and it shows high design standards and caliber project that we think will set a standard that, for whatever comes next on the remaining 13 acres of this parcel, will also have to meet.

With respect to staff's take on project's consistency with the general plan, we believe the analysis misses the mark. We prepared a document which we shared with the commission tonight listing the 15 general plan policies that the project is consistent with or furthers in some fashion. Case law is clear that when determining whether a project conflicts with the general plan, the nature of the policy and the nature of the inconsistency are critical factors to consider. Here,

there

is no mandatory general plan policy that expressly prohibits this use at the site or that the proposed project is inconsistent with. From a general plan perspective, the project is more than half a mile distance from station. Therefore, it is not inconsistent with land use policy 4.1. The project is constructing an enhanced sidewalk. It features a pedestrian plaza.

All of those items are consistent with the mandatory policies under the land use policies of 4.9, 4.1, 1.15 for the mobility policy as well. From a VMT and emissions perspective, the project is reducing VMT as required by this general plan. By locating a QuickQAK at this particular location, QuickQAK is constructing a project closer to where a number of their members live, and they know this based on membership data. About 80 per 70 to 80% of customers at QuickQack are members. This is not a destination in terms of a car wash.

Most of the trips are passed by or diverted. So, they this project, in and of itself, will be resulting in less VMT than any of the other commercial uses allowed under the existing zoning. Staff also mentions air pollution in AB six seventeen. At present, there's no specific emission reduction policies or mandates under that effort. It is merely a program to monitor emissions.

I think I'll just give a pope on the rendering. But courts have also said that consistency with the general plan can also be found if a project furthers the objectives and policies of the general plan, and does not obstruct their attainment. Again, this is where it's really important to remember, that the project is a private investment in infrastructure that will facilitate the expansion of BRT. When it comes to BRT, you need a bus lane, and you need the dedicated frontage and setbacks, and that's exactly what this project is doing. Through private development, the city is being able to facilitate investment into making that infrastructure happen so that BRT can actually come to fruition.

With respect to staff's claims that the project will exacerbate existing pedestrian safety concerns, there's simply no evidence in the record to support those claims. Instead, what the record shows is that public works reviewed the site plan, proposed conditions of approval to ensure that the driveway and curb cut is consistent with the city standards, which address safety concerns. In addition, the sidewalk is actually being set back further away from Florin Road, which will create a more positive and comfortable pedestrian experience for those who travel along Florin Road. Also, they will be constructing a bicycle lane where there is none. I'll close by saying tonight that the commission has the opportunity to activate a vacant site with a project that enjoys community support, that will serve as a catalyst catalyst for future development by setting a very high design standard.

It will construct the needed infrastructure to facilitate BRT on Florham Road, and will create jobs where there are none. We urge the Commission to approve the project by finding that it is consistent with the general plan and making the required findings under the zoning code for the CEP and design review. The applicant team is available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. And thank you, staff.

Thank you. Are there members of the public that wish to speak on this item?

Yes, sir. I have some members that would like to speak. The first person can I have is looks like Bishop Chris Baker? And then after bishop Chris Baker, I have Phoenix on the rise.

Good evening, staff. I'm not a business killer, but I've been in my community over thirty years, and we just opened a quick quack on Franklin And Mack, which is, I believe, maybe a mile. And when I looked at the sites I'm in support of businesses, but when I looked at all of them, you have one there, you have one floor in Franklin, then you wanna do one on 65th. Well, when I go up and down the street, here's what I want you to understand. I'm in the faith base.

When I go up and down Franklin, Florida, and I talk to those senior citizens that was kicked out of their places because they couldn't afford the rent, and they're sleeping on the ground. That should be a location looked at for senior housing. I'm not against any business. Hell, I brung food for less up there, and they got other locations. This should be looked at as housing, low density housing for seniors.

We need to take a look at our communities. How many of our seniors are sleeping on the streets? I have nothing against quick quack, but I'd rather see a development go there for our seniors to have somewhere safe to sleep. I've seen it today and I literally wanted to pull over and cry because these folks are getting checks. They have nowhere to live. But we need to look at all these vacant lands and start putting some positive things together with developers and getting our seniors out of the coal. And I am not in support of this bill, and I want you to oppose it. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Can I please have Phoenix on the rise come to the podium?

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Kaysen Myers. I'm a student at Luther Burbank High School and a member of Phoenix on the Rise, and I'm here this evening to ask you to hear my voice. I went to the Quick Quack Center of Excellence to learn about the company, its management, operations. We toured the plant, talked with the project manager, and talked with the regional manager. All the employees told us that they really enjoyed working there. We want those jobs in our neighborhood, so please support this application.

Good evening. My name is Kaomi Myers. Hear my voice. I am also a student at Luther Burbank, and I am a secretary in BSU and a member of Phoenix on the Rise. I recently learned that QuikQuak makes our own equipment at the center of excellence, and we are allowed to take a tour to examine how all the fabrication is done. They make they have everything from different materials that are used to create magnificent things from soaps and wipers. I was really impressed and learned that it takes a lot of skills and management to do so in this kind of establishment.

Good evening. My name is Isaiah Swan, and I want you to hear my voice. I am a student from Luther Burbank High School, and I want to become an architect. At the center of excellence, I was able to ask questions to the architect who designed this building. She not only reviewed the plans with us, she also detailed various educational plans with us.

She detailed being wait. What? Oh, she also in the project. Oh, she also had the project engineer overseeing the QuakeClark operations.

Good evening.

My name is Zakias Warren, and I'm a student at Fern Bacon Middle School. Hear my voice. Quikwak is a good community neighbor. They support food bank, schools, Little League, and soccer programs. We need partners who contribute back to our neighborhoods, not just to take money out.

My name is Jayla Cook. I'm good evening. My name is Jayla Cook. My I'm I'm a student at Parkland Elementary. Hear my voice.

Good evening. My good evening. My name is Keisha. I attend Rosemount High School. Hear my voice. During the visits to the Quick Crack facility, we saw how the companies innovate we saw a new flooring mat cleaning and wait. A new service piloted by one of the shops.

Good evening. My name is Kaylia Myers, and I'm a fifth grader that attends Parkway Elementary. Hear my voice. We visited a quick crack to get an up close feel of the operations, its management, and people. We saw the process of the cars entering using technology of the license plate recognition that moves the cars through faster and the automation of the conveyor that takes the cars to get washed.

Good evening. My name is Liliana Barker. I'm a student at Simon Simpson Center. You will hear my voice. Quikwak employees, 15 to 18 people at each location, and many are young high school and college students.

Good evening. My name is Malaysia Geddes. Hear my voice. I am president of the BSU Black Student Union, and I'm here tonight as ambassador of Phoenix on the Rise and to remind all of you that our voices have value. We're tired of the crumbling sidewalks that we have to walk on every single day. We're tired of the blight. We're tired of the dirty lot that that is the entry to our neighborhoods. We're tired of being patient. We're teenagers. Hear our voices and support this project. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. The last speaker will be Tony Johnson.

Good evening. How is everybody? Good. So good afternoon. My name is Tony Johnson.

I'm employed at Rose Family Creative Empowerment Center where we serve families in this community through local outreach and neighborhood programs. I believe building a quick quack car wash at Florin And Franklin will be beneficial to our community. It will improve the cleanliness along the corridor, reduce illegal dumpies, create jobs, and provide a safe, well maintained space that helps deter loitering and blight. Investments like this help revitalize our neighborhood and support residents who take pride in where they live. I respectfully ask city hall representatives to say yes to this project.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your comments chair. Have no more speakers on this item.

I know it can be intimidating to speak in public, but you all did a great job and thank you very much for turning up. With that, I'd like to open this up to commission questions. Commissioner Reschke or Thompson?

Can you clarify how long this lot has been open for? I think you said it, but

About twenty thirteen. Are you asking how long this site has been vacant for? Yes. Circa 2013.

Okay. Fifteen years? No, I'm not mapping good. Was that twelve? Thirteen. Thank you. Sorry.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Naybo.

I have a quick question for the applicant. In your presentation, you said that the sidewalk improvements will be across the entire frontage of the parcel. Did you mean the entire parcel or just for this small amount that will be?

Just for the developed site under this application. The? Yes, which is just Florin Road.

I'm sorry. Along the entire frontage of the parcel on Florin or just the part where the project is?

Just for the part where the project is.

Okay. Just the front of the project, not the entire person. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Thanks for the clarification. Thank

you, Commissioner. Any other Commissioner comments or questions? General Ortiz.

Yeah, I'm having trouble reading all of my documents in my it's really small. I see that we have a letter here from the Air Quality Management District, and I can't get it any bigger. Could the staff address the specific position of the Air Quality Management District?

They commented that a pedestrian oriented use would be more in line with public health aims associated with AB617 considering the site's location within there. And also, it would also be more in line with sustainable investments for transit such as bus rapid transit.

I'm sorry, I missed the first part. What is the it that would be more aligned?

Pedestrian oriented a use that can allow for people to arrive by foot, bike, or transit.

Which by conclusion is not but they are not taking I appreciate their interpretation of what would be ideal for this site, And that's why I couldn't open their letter. Do they take a hard position that this violates specific standards? I understand the public health air quality standard. Is there any other basis for them? So it's hard to pose. Let me ask you that.

There is no specific standard that it violates. So they weren't referring to anything like that. It was a comment about the general aim to reduce local emissions and be in consideration of local air quality issues.

I appreciate that. And So this is a challenge we have often when we have a lot of competing ideals of what should ideally go there versus what is proposed to be here. And I struggle with this because I've been in this place before when we discussing the drive thru for Raising Cain, where I thought it was a challenge because RT had designated a light rail line. The drive thru was inconsistent with that. I took a position to oppose the project for that reason.

And here we are again with what should be ideal in this site. And I appreciate that. What are those principles that would guide us some other type of more pedestrian oriented project? But we have a pretty compelling, unique quick quack by all standards. This is not the standard quick quack that I've seen.

It looks like they've gone to great lengths to make this a very attractive site with a setback and a wide. So that's the challenge I have is, you know, it is a site that has not had anything there for some time. And anything's a net plus at that corner. I'm familiar with it well. I understand that the light rail is right down the line.

The frontage would appear to enhance the ability for those who would seek to walk to the light rail line rather than impede it. So I'm struggling because we struggle between the ideal versus what is before us, and whether or not the quality of this project would have a considerable improvement in what is a pretty challenging and blighted area. So I just want to walk through my process of trying to weigh these competing interests. Yeah, it's not your usual quick whack site. I mean, it's a pretty fancy one.

But again, do we have these standards? And why do we have ideal goals, particularly in communities that have challenged know, do we and this would not be settling, but do we do less than ideal because it is something that is a net gain? So that's what I'm struggling with right now. I'm just thinking out loud, I don't know. And I appreciate the representation about jobs for the community, but I did speak I just want to be real transparent. It's probably 15 jobs. They're all part time. There's no full time. But I think it would be ideal for students. And there's no guarantee it has to be from the community.

But they are, I think they ought, will in good faith seek to recruit. But I also think it's not a promise to hire for the community. They can't legally do that. And these are not full time jobs. These are three hours, four hours. So it would be less than a living wage. But if you're a student, if you're a college student or a high school student that's looking at a part time job, then indeed they can hire from the community, that would be awesome. But I also don't want to overstate the likelihood of these being 15 full time jobs at this site. Rest my comments.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Blunt.

Yes. Thank you,

everyone who came to speak, especially the students. I think you did a marvelous job. So thank you for that. So I also want to speak to the first speaker. I'm sorry. I didn't catch your name. But I was moved by your comment. And I would like for staff to so when you were when staff was giving presentation, it was this site is preferable for not a quick quiet car wash, but for some other type of commercial, but not residential. Can you clarify on why?

The staff would support residential at this site. It's a great site for housing. Housing is a use that is allowed by right at the site.

Okay.

So

I know that this was formerly a car dealership. Correct? Are there issues with the soil? Is there I mean, like, how much because I I'm I'm just I'm thinking, like, it seems kind of natural for it to go from a place where a lot of cars were to a place where a lot of cars are going to be, and not necessarily where people are gonna be because that could lead to all sorts of yikes problems. So I'm just kinda curious on, how much of a nightmare would it becoming a housing residential sort of situation be?

Chair, Commissioner, I'm Scott Johnson with our environmental planning unit. There is a, I believe it's a closed case. So, the site is on a list which prevents any categorical exemption from being used. However, sites like this can be reused. It would just there might be some extra cleanup that would need to be done. Okay. But it wouldn't prevent future residential.

Okay. Interesting. No. I learned a lot just then. Okay, that's all my questions for now. I yield my time.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Tao or Lamas? Oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner Kaden. Sorry.

Yeah, thank you, Chair. Yeah, so this has been I think a challenging one for me. I think you know Commissioner Ortiz brought it up right there's a lot of similar themes here to kind of previous applications that you know I I supported as well, you know, the recommendation of of denial on. You know, the staff recommendation tonight, it's so it's it's relying on ideas and policies that that I obviously support. You know, I wanna see areas like this become more walkable, bikeable, accessible via transit. I wanna see, you know, some of the the higher intensity uses that we're talking about. You know, I completely agree on the vision zero point. Right? It's like we need to to treat street safety as a as a crisis. Right?

And and we need to treat our vision zero corridors like the same way that we talk about housing in this really kind of, you know, crisis mindset. I think part that I'm struggling with on this one is that we also at the same time, and we talk about this a lot. Right? We wanna be able to provide clarity to potential businesses around you know what we want where and what's allowed where and I think the challenge in this case is that it's it's not as explicit I think as it as I think it could be. You know I I really like our our TOD ordinance or transit oriented development ordinance because it makes it really, really clear, right?

Like we want to prioritize people oriented uses. We want to preclude auto oriented uses. And we're doing that within a seeing in And you have a pretty good idea about I think what the what the city is is sort of looking for in those areas. And I think that's why I felt pretty comfortable I guess voting to to deny in in, you know, similar situations in the past like for that project most recently because that was within a quarter mile of that buffer. And and we we sort of made it very clear through this, you know, through this document what the vision was there.

And I think so, you know, it wasn't, you know, explicitly mentioned right tonight, but this is outside of that buffer. So, you know, it's referenced as close to the light rail station, but it's, you know, it's it is, you know, a three quarter mile walk as as I measured it to the floor and light rail station. And, you know, I'm a big believer in in kind of treating frequent bus routes and and bus rapid transit. I think, you know, as as just as kind of worthy of that same treatment, but that that isn't the way that we've talked about it in our in our TOD ordinance or or TOD policy. You know, I think Florin does have the potential to to be a more frequent bus corridor, but I think right now it's not fifteen minute frequencies.

I think it could be. And I think, you know, I think we're a little bit overstating the the BRT component. I I don't really know or haven't seen any concrete plans at all for BRT on Florin. So, you know, I I I don't think this is like a priority for RT in the same way that we've seen kind of the green line extension. That's a conversation like that we were talking about before is like well this is maybe far away but at least there's a reserve right of way.

There's a lot of planning like that is a preferred scenario that has been in effect for almost twenty years now. I mean it's not even comparable to me to Stockton in the sense that that's a project for bus rapid transit that we've really put a lot of planning and time into. I think that's something that we're actively in the process of selecting a preferred alternative for and there's sort of money behind. So think it's a little bit more challenging to, I guess, me, look at our general plan and know for sure that this is a transit corridor that we are saying we do not want any auto oriented uses to be allowed on it. Because I think it raises this sort of series of questions.

Right? Is it like is it all commercial corridors that have bus service that we're saying that on? Is it bus service above a certain frequency? Is it, you know, bus corridors that are also top five Vision Zero corridors, corridors that have a lot of redevelopment potential? Right?

Like, I think it's not obvious to me what the objective criteria that we're using are here, which I think, you know, should be really the goal of all of these processes. We wanna try to create objective criteria by which we're saying yes or no. So I think if if we wanna hold out, I think, in these situations for more transit supportive projects in places like this, I would actually be really supportive of providing that clarity, I think, in our policy and kind of expanding the area that we're providing that clarity to beyond just a a half mile of light rail to include certain bus corridors that that really want we wanna prioritize as a city. But I think until then, it's actually quite tricky for us as a commission to kind of make that call when we're sort of you know, the zoning allows this. Right?

It was mentioned before. Right? The zoning does allow this through a conditional process. It's not precluded. So, again, I I support, I think, the the underlying goals of what staff is laying out here. But I do, I think, worry a little bit about the the subjectivity here. And I think there's you know, if there is an appetite, if we wanna kinda have this conversation as a city about precluding auto oriented uses in all of our bus corridors or even along the select bus corridors that was highlighted in that map M3 from the general plan. Yeah. I would completely support that. And I think maybe that's something that we can talk about as part of the zoning code overhaul.

But I think that would need for me to be a little made a little bit more explicit and kind of incorporate that that into our our two d policy with, you know, the year. A very point.

Comments. Thank you, Vice Chair. Commissioner, And is it Tau or Lammas? Lammas?

Thank you, Chair. And thank you everyone who came to speak on behalf of the item and staff who helped prepare the report. I think and I also want to thank the commissioners for their comments, very insightful comments. And I'm also kind of on the defense about this proposal. It's a tough one.

I think for me, especially when we hear about how good the applicant is and all the good work that they're doing in the community, it seems like they're really trying to engage with kind of the local schools, the local youth group, and trying to be a true community partner. And also being responsive to their some of the design requirements that the city is looking forward looking for and trying to increase their setback and support, folks, that may be visiting the site on on bicycles. But at the same time, I I am trying to be receptive to the city's intended goals here and trying to support additional uses for this site that maybe aren't, auto centric and that would allow for more pedestrian access. And, to the first speaker's point, there could be other uses that, could be a benefit to this location, including housing, affordable housing, senior housing, and make it particularly competitive probably for some state funding as well, given the proximity to transit, access and the fact that it has by right approval to build housing in the location. So I'm grappling with that.

And so I I appreciate and recognize the city's intent here to try to to deny the project and try to support additional uses for this site. So just wanted to share my comments with the commission. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Thompson of rescue.

Thank you yeah and thanks to those who who spoke as well. Appreciated that I think the applicant shared this is not a destination that it's used by local residents and the rendering was really beautiful I was able to look at it on my own screen the whole time you were speaking. So that was nice. And I think the site plan is really appropriate the way that there's just one drive in, and it goes to the back. There's not, like, a u shaped, like, two drives.

However, this area, like, basically from 14th in the North to Meadowview in the South, it's really, really hard. We're talking about bus, but we're all also talking about other types of non car travel, such as biking or walking, to cross 99 Franklin, and the light rail tracks if you're going East West. The the opportunities to do that are mostly the fast and more dangerous roads such as Florin, Meadowview 47th, Fruitridge. And there's a few, like, overpasses for the freeway to go east, like, if you're traveling East West across the city, but then you get stopped by Franklin and no roads really line up across Franklin from each other. And then you wind into a neighborhood that doesn't have an outlet, and then you're stopped by the tracks.

So really, walkers, pedestrians, and cyclists are really diverted onto these roads, such as Florin. And it would be, I think, really, you know, a shame to put another car oriented business there. I do appreciate that we don't have as much of a clear mandate to avoid it as if it were one half mile from the light rail, but I'm thinking less of transit riders and more of pedestrians and cyclists because of its distance from the light rail. And I think for people living east of the freeway, yeah, just if they wanted to get to that light rail station, it's it's very difficult. And and let's see.

So so, yeah, I think the site plan does everything it can in the rendering with the you know, on on one hand, it's it's really nice to have that extra wide sidewalk or that extra deep sidewalk and the roof with the, you know, sort of, like, arcade there. But I think that's also kind of a place where depending on the the situation, it could just become, like, dirty and and not not taken care of. And then also, you know, pointing out that there's four other car washes within a mile of this. You know, well, I don't wanna stop. You know, if another business feels like they can compete and and succeed there.

I think that they should be able to do that. But, from a neighborhood perspective, it doesn't seem like it's needed. So, yeah, again, it's this is hard one. I'm I'm torn, but I I am concerned about pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Thank you.

Thank you commissioner commissioner Nybo.

There are a lot of similarities between this project and the one that a couple of weeks ago up in Natomas, a month or two ago. I think and by the way, if I may just say point this out, I'm the one who made the motion to move against staff recommendation. I know Stacia remembers because I remember that look in her eyes. So the comments I'm giving are in light of that. I think there are some critical differences between this project and that project.

I thought that that project was reasonable moving forward because it was a little remnant parcel. There wasn't anything else that there was no grand idea that was going to go on that parcel. It was like an acre or something. It was pretty near to a proposed light rail that may or may not go there within our lifetime. This, however by the way, the lead is buried on this particular site plan.

The corner is owned by the same property owner as this parcel. This particular of property isn't a remnant parcel. What we're doing is we're contemplating creating a remnant parcel today. This 14 and a half, 15 acre parcel when you include the corner is a huge piece of property. It is a huge opportunity. Light rail exists already. There's plenty of clarity that the applicant had before they came before us. It's not like they were surprised and we're playing gotcha with them right now. They knew that when they proposed that there was going to be problems today. They knew that.

So they went out and they went to talk to the community and they tried to raise it. They tried to make a nice project. It's a nice project. I'm a member of QUICQUAC up until right now. I'm sure that all of them are about to get cancelled.

Nonetheless, project. Know, they put a nice wall up front. There's some nice nice street frontage but it doesn't make up for the fact that it's we're never going to be able to connect the north part of the property with the south part of the property to Florin as effectively as we could without this quik quack. I think there's a lot of big issues here, but as we've heard, this area needs housing. It does need housing.

And there is a lot of use at that light rail station. I know this property really well. I know this neighborhood really well. My son goes to Luther Burbank, and he takes light rail at least twice a week, maybe three times a week. They're constantly using that light rail right there. It's a used place. This neighborhood, I frankly am slightly offended when I hear blighted because I don't think this neighborhood is blighted. I think this neighborhood is a very vibrant neighborhood. It's a growing neighborhood. It deserves better, no offense, than a remnant piece of property right here on this corner.

That's my thought. So unless there's any big issues, I would like to move staff recommendation of denial. Did I say that the right way? Yeah. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. So we have a motion on the table. Commissioner Ortiz.

I was going to ask two questions of staff. One, Vice Chair Kaden referenced the one quarter mile from light rail, and this project is three quarters of a mile away from light rail. Is that relevant in your analysis?

Excuse me. The project is so if we're talking a walking distance or as the crow flies, of course, there's some difference. A walking distance around twothree, maybe threefour of a mile is accurate. In terms of as the crow flies from the light rail station platform, it is approximately a half mile plus 300 feet.

But it is not within a quarter mile of the light rail station. And why is that compelling? Think in his argument, there's a distinction that does not speak to rejecting the project.

Okay. So there an ordinance which is basically an implementation piece. There's a zoning instrument specific to light rail, and it does not include bus service, which this area

has But a lot bus service, of

that was a specific piece for distance from light rail service. What staff is looking at is the overarching policies, visions, maps, goals in the general plan that speak more generally including bus service as well. And we're looking at it from that perspective. It is true that the specific transit oriented development ordinance for light rail distance does not apply to this.

You're applying that's not a applied light

rail, public transportation, including bus. Well, I don't want to interrupt. If anyone could help me sort through this, why it's relevant.

If I may, to your question though, and Commissioner Kaden bringing up that distinction, basically it comes down to the quarter mile or the half mile, we wouldn't be here tonight because then it would not be permitted. So, I think what Commissioner Kaitlin was saying that now that we're in a discretionary period Got it. Which Danny did bring out. That's why we're here before you tonight, because you do have the discretion based on what we've presented and what the applicant has presented to make that decision.

Thank you. That clarifies that there's discretion outside of that one quarter mile, but that one quarter mile is an absolute. Okay. The other question is, I seem to recall, maybe I'm miss recalling, is there a bike lane that is proposed by the, in this project, a very wide sidewalk, which is lovely. But I mean, know people need to ride their bikes on the sidewalk when you have really streets like this. Not safe. But is there a bike lane also proposed in the improvements by the proponent?

So the area where there's landscaping and a sidewalk, that is the area that is dedicated. It's dedicated right of way for future bus rapid transit. So there's a future BRT lane that would go in that area as well as a bicycle lane. And so at a point at which that would be developed, then that paved area, that landscaped area would be gone.

Be removed? Yes. So somewhere down the line we'd have a BRT shared bike, bus lane, but it would remove a good chunk of that, either the landscape and or the wide sidewalk. Okay. That's wow, okay. Thanks for clarifying that. I'm done with my questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Lee.

Yes, thank you, Chair. I just wanna say that I'm really familiar with this area. I actually grew up not too far from here. I even went to summer school at at Luther Burbank High School, and I also even worked at the shopping center right across from her kitty corner to here. And I've, you know, really seen this area change over the years.

And commissioner and I I really appreciate your comments. You you really hit the nail on the head. You know, I I too voted for Raisin Canes, and I recall that that was you know, we were sort of split on that vote and I think that to what commissioner and I will say, you know, what's different here and my comment is, you know, we have to blank slate to to potentially start something new here and you know, I agree with the first speaker. You know, we need more housing. You know, homelessness is is a growing crisis.

It's been a crisis for a while. And, you know, approving this could really set the stage for turning the entire parcel to be even more auto oriented. You know, Florida Road is is extremely high traffic and and it's, you know, essentially almost a freeway. So with that, I second commissioner Naples and support the denial.

Thank you, commissioner. Before we take a motion on the act on the two motion on the motion and the second. I'd like to comment. I'd also, like many others, I know this site very, very well. As an architect, I was hired by Paul Blanco, who was the car dealer who was in the process of buying this site from Cal Worthington and his dog Spot many, many years ago. Well, so we heard I think from staff that this site has been vacant since 2013. It's been empty though. There were buildings prior well over twenty years ago when I was working on it. They were just sitting vacant when the Chevy dealership did close down. And that never the purchase by Bob Blanco never materialized.

He was looking at a variety of uses out in that back northern large northern portion there, which as I say never materialized. But I spent plenty of time on the site and around the site to get a good sense of it. It is I think it is certainly very auto oriented as it is right now and I don't see that changing in the near future. Not only those car dealerships going to be there, there are tax revenue to the city. So they have value.

I don't think they're going to be done away with quickly. Do like Commissioner Nyboe, I'm also a quick and quick member. I must say I go to the one near Costco in Cal Expo area. This, I think, it was pointed out by the applicant and the frontage along the design of the frontage along Florin is unique. I mean, it doesn't exist on any other quick quack.

And I find myself wondering, a, I think the design is very good for the project. It's better than most that I've seen anywhere. And I also can't help but wonder if that chunk, even though it's not huge frontage along Frolling, could not be a potential catalyst for other development that will come along. It's setting a tone for pedestrian frontage along that street. And staff could say this is what anyone else that does come along is going to be picking up and following on.

It still leaves a huge chunk of land for housing or whatever else may come here. But as I say, I've worked on it well over twenty years ago and nothing else has come along since. So do we forego what I think is a good design? Granted there are some violations perhaps of some policies, but not strictly of the TOD distance. And do we let it be, provide some jobs?

We had a lot of support for the community for this project tonight. And for that reason, I think and what seeing that it could be a catalyst for it, I tend to I would tend to oppose staff's recommendation and the motion that's on the table right now, but we'll see how the vote goes. With that, I think as it is, we have a motion and we have a second. So, clerk, why don't we take a vote? I am sorry?

May I clarify a statement?

Sure. Yes. Yes.

Comment I just wanna make sure, and I know it might be a little it might be a little hard to see, but just to clarify, the existing right of way line will be moved back the the, behind the pedestrian plaza. That will not be removed. It's the entire project is purposely being set back in order to accommodate the bus transit lane, and I understood a comment from staff saying that as if all of that will be ripped out in the future. That's not accurate. I also want to just clarify that the zoning code section that dictates the measurement of the distance between the site and the light rail station is seventeen point one zero four point one three zero, which specifically measures the distance based on the shortest accessible shortest publicly accessible right of way.

So, for those reasons, that particular measurement is important because that is where the general plan policy about the city encouraging more transit oriented development comes from. That's the origination of that comment, and that's why the distance is really important. And again, I just want to clarify, that pedestrian plaza is a permanent feature.

Thank you. I'm sorry, okay. Commissioner Ortiz.

Thank you for allowing me, because I would like a clarification on that. That's really helpful, because so I just when you say it'll be moved back, what will go away in the picture that I'm looking at with the closest to Florham Road landscape strip, the very wide sidewalk, and then more landscape, and then that leaning. In order to do the BRT, what will go away? My interpretation, even with I think what you've shared, is that everything will go away except for where the leaning bench is.

Yeah my name is Nick Wacker I'm with our civil engineering firm with core states. We did the civil engineering and architectural plans for this application. And I just want to clarify again we pushed. We're dedicating right away to the city. So that those improvements for BRT the bike lane the ultimate.

Right away with. Is all going to be accommodated. Off our site and so everything you see on-site. Including the wider landscape planter, special paving, our decorative wall there, our faux wall, that's all permanent structures. We've already accommodated the right of way that should be necessary based on our coordination with how it works and our measurements to ensure that all those future improvements for BRT, the bike lane, the sidewalk, it'll be a detached sidewalk that QuickWack constructs and buffers, adds additional buffer from the right of way. Those are all permanent improvements.

So, me just be a little more specific. And I don't know if staff can bring up the picture that I'm looking at.

43.

43, thank you. Page 43, if we could bring up that image. Staff report? Correct. It was a staff report. Yeah.

This same doctor.

I this I'm But so are you saying all of that and that pretty picture will stay and your dedication of the right of way commences at that outer cement.

Commissioner Siste?

Yes, that one.

Is the one.

You're saying none of this will be altered when the BRT goes in? It will all be in front of

Correct. Yep. The landscape, the sidewalk, the landscape behind the sidewalk, the leaning benches, the bike rack, the faux wall, the decorative paving, all of that is permanent. It stays. And not to be impacted by BRT based on our coordination with public works. We set back the site enough with our right away dedication to

be able So

can staff clarify that their statement was consistent with that? Or is it do you have a different interpretation?

The dedication is a requirement. As far as location specific to this staying or going, it was my understanding that this would not be staying at the time of development. But that could I misunderstood that part. But the dedication for space for bike lane and future BRT would be a requirement of this or any other project at the

same So I think the statement of the representative is accurate and there may have been some misunderstand others on our staff could perhaps clarify.

No, I don't you know, it's hard with this image because according to the applicant's team, guess they're insinuating that what we're seeing there would include the BRT lane. And I don't have we don't have with public works comments, we just have the dedication condition, but we don't have an image.

So it could just be pretty pictures, and it could be.

No, I You know, I'm not going go against their engineer here, but I'm just saying I can't either confirm or verify that. Yeah, on that one. Okay.

It's just helpful if we get a real clear statement. But thank you for

Yeah, let me just say we're not interested in constructing something for it to be removed later. We would be working with staff engineering to ensure that this is set back far enough to be a permanent improvement.

Okay.

Our understanding is that the dedication we've done would accommodate those improvements in the future.

Okay. And this may or may not be to scale? It could be a more condensed version of this?

No, it's to scale.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'd like to follow-up on the commissioner's. My understanding is what you're saying. This, if I don't have a pointer, this piece over here be the curb and gutter?

Yeah. That's the frame of reference, curb and gutter, and then the asphalt would be the right away.

So that would all The

traveled right away.

Back to the quick way would remain?

Correct from the curb back, yep.

Thank you Commissioner Reschke.

Look while the applicant is up at page 24 again, I just wanna clarify because it it looks to me like there is an addition of the bus lane being made just in front of this site. There'll be, like, an extra lane. So what I'm seeing is from starting from the median at the bottom center where it's a six foot medium median, there's two travel lanes north of that, and those travel lanes are existing. And then it looks like that bus lane is being added already even though it's only gonna be for this short distance. And then the the ultimate right of way line is at back of walk, which is is typical as I understand it.

And so it looks like we're adding a lane, not really a very short lane at this point. And so none of that stuff will be taken away.

That's correct. That site plan is to show that we are accommodating those improvements. It's a very short distance. So whether PubWorks wants us to do that generalization now or have it developed in the future and be more cohesive. But that exhibit there is to show that we are accommodating those improvements and that everything back of curb like we showed on that rendering would be a permanent improvement that QuickWack is making.

So is that bus lane that's being added, is that going to be available for cars to drive in at this time?

I don't know that it'll be channelized. We'd have to work to determine that until the

rest What does channelized mean?

Sorry, striped.

Oh, Strict for

bus lane, yeah. It's about accommodating the right of way for those future improvements and setting our site far enough back so that we don't have a conflict in the future.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Are there any other Commissioner comments or questions or With that, then we'll go back to we have a motion. I'm sorry. Oh, sorry. Keep Commissioner Lamas.

Thank you, Chair. And I appreciate just trying to find some clarity here. And I wanna ask staff as well because I'm looking at Google Maps, and Google Maps does show the two travel lanes and a third lane. So I don't so Google Maps is showing that there's already three lanes there that and that so I don't know where an additional lane is gonna be added. And if it that additional lane is supposed to be just maybe dedicating that third lane to bus, but there is a third lane there, or if that bus lane was going to be further up into the property. Can staff provide some clarity here?

Well, what I was going to say is I'm having Danny look at the public works condition as far as dedicating the IOD. But an example, it would be odd to me that they would actually have the bus lane there for the BRT. An example I would give is Bruceville Road where also we require IOD for future, it was going to be light rail. Now actually we are going to do BRT on Bruceville. But you don't see the lane already there. Usually, that space is not put there because to some of the points that were made, we don't know when that's going to happen. So, typically, that existing bus lane. I don't believe we have a bus lane markings on the floor. I haven't seen it.

Thank you for that. And I think you're right. It doesn't look like it's a bus lane. It's just a third lane already on the street that's So there, but it's marked for

I don't know if Denny's but if Public Works was asking for an IOD, then that's telling me that they don't have that, you know, that amount yet and that's what they're asking for, that dedication.

Okay. So then it may require further area Right. To be

apparently what I'm hearing from the applicant is regardless, I guess they're saying that they will go into that and they can correct me if I wrong, but they would go into their property if necessary to give you the pretty pictures as we calling it.

Thank you.

You, Commissioner. Commissioner Ribaugh?

If I could have a follow-up question, Mr. Staub. This is a requirement of public works?

Yeah, the IOD, the dedications of the Did you confirm that, Dan?

Yeah. So if you look at attachment 13, so that would be PDF page 56 of the report, there is public works condition number three to dedicate sufficient right of way and construct foreign road consistent with the adopted street section that accommodates a future bus rapid transit lane. So yes, it's a requirement for this or any project at the site to dedicate space to ensure that the required improvements, bus lane, bike lane can be constructed.

Why wasn't the project conditioned to improve the whole frontage? It's one parcel, it's a lease, they're not subdividing it. Why is it only the small part in front of Quikwak and not the entire parcel frontage?

When you say the entire parcel on Thorne or you are speaking of Franklin too? Thorne. Actually it wouldn't be Franklin because it doesn't touch that. I don't know the exact answer. I do know that Public works has a ratio if the improvements would exceed a certain amount compared to the project value, then the nexus isn't there for that to happen. So, that might have been the case here.

I'm not sure.

Okay. I'm sorry. Can I ask one more follow-up question? In this general area near, how many parcels of fourteen, fifteen acres are there in this area that are along these busy streets that are potentially developed?

Along Florin, I can't think of any of that amount. You know, we had the fairly large parcel on Florin that stayed vacant for over eighty years and was finally developed with this at the KIND project. But I can't say off the top if it exceeds this or matches that. But I would say we don't have that many that are of this size.

And then on Franklin, the next one would be what, like Campbell Soup, that area up there, that would be the next big one that someday may or may not develop. So this is a pretty large parcel then?

It's definitely a large parcel. Correct.

Okay. Thank you. Just to kind of add to Commissioner Nyva's questions, I'd like to ask, is this the either staff or applicant can answer. The Quick Quack parcel, is it parcelized or is it part of the a portion of the larger parcels?

The 14 acre is just one parcel.

So this is a part of the 14 acre?

So the development is yes, correct. It's a development of that large parcel.

Okay. Thank you. Any other comments or questions of Yeah. One

I muted myself. On one on the site plan that says leased area, that's how I garnered Again,

Commissioner Thompson.

Just a clarification. So if there is conditional to do a project like this, does that apply to just the project that's being proposed, or does it apply to the whole parcel?

I believe you're asking if conditional use of permit would apply to any project at this particular site or just this type of proposed use. Is that what you're asking?

Not a conditional use, use, is it?

Is this a conditional use?

Yeah, this is

a Okay. So then the question is, right now we're looking at a component of this full parcel, and we're talking about conditional use for that. If the conditional use is approved, does that use then translate to the entire parcel, or does it stay specific to what's being proposed?

It would be for the whole parcel.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other commissioner comments or questions? Seeing none, I'm sorry. Commissioner Tao? Oh, it's council. Council. Ma'am.

Sorry. Marcus, I wanna make sure I understand this question. So, yeah, commission's being asked to approve a conditional use permit and site plan and design design review. So, I might not understand your question, commissioner, but, like, the the footprint of the quick quash could not expand. It will be limited to that portion of the parcel that it's on now.

I think Did Okay. So it's and a hypothetical, if the parcel then the rest of the parcel is developed, is there already a pre authorization to do what this is approved for because it is all part of the whole parcel?

Right. So any development of it, it's an expansion, they want to expand this, let's just say expand the car wash, they would have to modify the conditional use permit. If they want to do another type of development on there, depending on what the zoning is, there would be some type of a discretionary more than like a discretionary action that would need to be taken. But I guess what I was stating though is that literally that parcel is someone said, what's the use of that parcel? It would be that use is considered that whole parcel. That's what I was just meaning by that. I think We wouldn't say that's a portion of the parcel.

As a follow-up, it would be if the remainder of the parcel is dedicated to housing, what would that would that have to go through a discretionary because now it is outside of what that parcel is known as?

I'm trying to think I'm thinking on that question. So they went to develop housing on that parcel

Yes.

They wouldn't have to parcelize it. They could put housing on there.

And it wouldn't have to go through any discretionary? No. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. So following up on that then, is this particular portion of the parcel, guess it's not a parcel as we're talking about, how is it defined or described in our approval?

The approval just had the parcel number and it would have this use on there. We wouldn't say a portion of the parcel. Would just be someone said what's the use of that parcel. And if this were approved, we'd say the use there is the car wash.

The approval is for the entire 14 acre parcel as it's put before us right now.

Technically, yes. Once again, that doesn't mean that they could just go ahead and just develop it with a car wash going further. They would have to modify that. It's sort So, of just kind of literal and figurative, I guess, what I'm trying to state.

I would add that the approval is associated with the site plan and the site plan dictates the location of the car wash. There's two entitlements proposed. One is a conditional use permit, one site plan and design review. They go hand in hand. So bounds of the car wash as shown on the site plan would dictate that's what's also being approved here.

But the site plan exhibit is what everything would be tied to? Yeah. All right, thank you for that clarification. Commissioner Lee.

Thank you, Chair. Question for staff. On page 55 the staff report, I see a preliminary site layout and I was had a question on that. So are there plans or future plans for the app to looks like a gas station into drive thru restaurants or what's the story on this?

So this was a conceptual plan referred to in the application for this project it is not part of this project the scope of this project is the car wash but as background information staff did provided us attachment to the report.

Got it.

So, potentially, this is what it could end up looking like although it's not the applicant hasn't like submitted an application or anything or.

There there is this is not part of an application currently.

Okay, thank you. Yeah, I just I just saw that and you know, obviously, something like this were to go through, mean, that would take out a big chunk of the parcel for what, you know, could be housing. So, I just wanted to bring that up. Thank you my time. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner, I would have expected this to have been parcellized separately, but whatever. My fifty years of retail site planning and development. But I guess as long as the exhibit site plan is tied to the approval that hopefully is enough. Is that your take?

Yes, you're approving the site plan.

Okay, thank you. And with that, Commissioner Reschke or Thompson Reschke?

So this is,

I guess,

further clarification on that, but so it sounds like right now the oh, thank you. The site is available by Wright for Housing if there was a project that wanted to do that. So once this car wash is built, if the same owner, you know, as soon as they're done building it, wants to build housing on the rest of the site, do they need to split the lot or build a CMU wall or do anything does it complicate making future housing by having this approved?

Well, I would mention that it's not known to be the most compatible use with housing. There would need to be a CMU wall. They could, in theory, provide housing for the remainder of the site. But it's, again, not known

as They would never have to like create a property line or split the lot. They would just build it the proper fire distance away from the car wash.

Right. They wouldn't yeah, they would not have to split the lot or separate the lot. One complication I think I would note, though, would be the circulation. They probably would not be able to use floor and road for the housing component. And so then just then they're just left with just Franklin as far as access. So I was going say it's going to be a complication that could be.

I would think perhaps also the financing of a totally different type of project like housing may require some kind of a more formal separation, I would think. All right. Any other commissioner comments? Seeing none, we have a motion and a second on the floor. The motion, I believe, was Commissioner Nyboe. Could you restate your motion just so we're all approval of the staff report? Sorry Again. To catch you off guard.

Yeah, to move staff's recommendation of denial.

Okay, thank you. With that, that is the motion. Clerk, can we take a roll?

And for the record, Commissioner Lee second that motion. Okay. Commissioner Lee. Aye. Commissioner Tao.

Aye.

Commissioner Lamas.

Aye.

Commissioner Nybo. Aye. Vice Chair Kaden. Aye. Commissioner Hernandez. Absent. Missy S. Reid. Absent. Commissioner Young. Absent. Commissioner Ortiz. Aye. Commissioner Blunt.

Aye.

Commissioner Ruschke. Aye. Commissioner Thompson.

Aye.

And Chair Chase? No. The motion passes.

Thank you all. We will now move on to the director's report.

Thank you, chair. Just one item for the director's report this evening. On Tuesday of this week, February 24, the city council adopted the Planning and Design Commission's 2025 annual report. So, it's in the can for this year. Thank you.

Thank you, Stacia. Next item, Commissioner comments, ideas and questions. Seeing none, public comments, matters not on the agenda. Are there any public comments?

Thank you, Chair. I have no public comments on this item.

Thank you. With that, we're adjourned.