Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

And if the clerk will please call the roll.

Yes. Commissioner Deborah Polly? Present. Commissioner Hoon?

Here.

Vice chair Molden? Here. Commissioner Raymond? Here. Commissioner Stoss? Here. Commissioner Stevenson?

Here.

And chair for Schitt?

Here. And would the clerk be so kind as to read the, video recording notice?

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

Alrighty. And, Rihanna, I think you're gonna do the honors tonight?

I sure am. Will you all please join me in pledge?

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

Alrighty. And then, Arlene, I believe you have, an introduction for us.

Yes. Thank you, chair. Good evening, everyone. I'm here to introduce like I said, we have a new planner that just started with, the department a couple weeks ago, and so I'm gonna call up Eileen Lee, and she can give a few remarks if she'd like to. You can ask her questions if you'd like to, but I just wanna introduce her, and you'll be seeing her for some of the items that she'll be bringing in front of, commission for a public hearing.

So go ahead, Eileen. Hello. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Eileen Lee, assistant planner in the community development department. I am just, excited to join the city of Rancho Cordova, so thank you for having me. Let me know if you have any questions. Otherwise, I appreciate your time. Welcome,

Aileen. It's good to see you. Welcome.

So I know that's gonna be confusing, Arlene Eileen. My sister's name is Eileen, so I I'll get used to it.

Don't worry. I'll screw it up somehow.

Welcome. Thank you.

Alrighty. I'm gonna try to read this on my own tonight, Kelly. Let's see if I you know, I'd I'd after all, I did graduate the third grade. So members of the public wishing to address the planning commission for any matter not on the agenda may do so at this time by completing and submitting a speaker card to the planning clerk. For items on the agenda, speakers will be called upon by the chair at

the point on the agenda when the item will be heard. Speakers are encouraged to keep their comments to three minutes or less and to state name and community of residents. Under provisions of the California government code, the planning commission is prohibited from discussing or taking immediate action on any item not on

the agenda unless it can be demonstrated to be of an emergency nature or the need to take immediate action arose after the posting of the agenda. So, Arlene, do Arlene, here I go. Did Kelly? Did you know it sure didn't. Do we have

I have no speaker cards on our general public comment item.

Okay. So I'm now gonna close the public comment period, And we move to the consent calendar. Consent calendar items consist of matters deemed routine and noncontroversial by staff. Unless a member of the planning commission wishes to pull an item for individual consideration, all items will be approved by one motion. Are there any planning commissioners wishing to pull an item from the consent calendar? Great. Okay. Do I hear a motion?

I

make a motion to approve, consent count. Correct?

Yes. Correct.

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

Kelly? Yes. Commissioner

As a reminder, only those that were present for that meeting should vote on the minutes.

So commissioner Deborah Polly?

Abstain.

Commissioner Huehn?

Aye.

Vice chair Molden? Abstain. Commissioner Raymond? Aye. Commissioner Stoss? Aye. Commissioner Stevenson?

Aye.

And chair for Schitt?

Aye.

Motion passes with a five o vote.

So I'm I'm just trying to think if I don't wanna jump ahead. But so no public hearing consent items. Correct?

Correct. We have no consent public hearing items.

K. Do I need to close that? No. Okay. So we're moving on to public hearing items 7.1. And at this point, I am gonna myself, and I'll see you guys after you finish your business.

Alright. Thank you. Kelly, will you read item the item for us?

Yes. Item 7.1, Fight Circle digital billboard sign, zoning text amendment, conditional use permit, minor design review, and operating agreement, mitigated negative declaration prepared pursuant to article six of the California Environmental Quality Act, project number PLNDDash1124Dash0113 located at 3127 Fight Circle.

Thank you. And, Nick, do you have a staff report for us?

Okay. Good evening, vice chair and commissioners. Nick Sosa with the Planning Department. Tonight's presentation is for the proposed Fight Circle digital freeway sign. So some background on the project.

The applicant, Cordova Community Council, is was previously approved for two digital signs at their mine shaft property located at US Highway 50. Since their approval in 2023, the c v the CCC has constructed one of the two approved signs and no longer wishes to move forward on the billboard located on the western portion of their property. Since the applicant is not moving forward with their western sign, the they are now proposing to erect a new sign location at the western entrance of the city along Highway 15 near Bradshaw Road. So as part of the current application, the applicant is requesting approval for the following entitlements, a zoning text amendment to the city's municipal code, a conditional use permit for the operation of the sign, a minor design review for the modification of the project site and review of development standards, and an operating agreement, which includes deviations to the required standards and which is ultimately decided upon by the city council as the approval authority. So the proposed project is located on a 2.2 acre parcel at 3127 Fyte Circle.

The parcel is owned office industrial mixed use within the city's Folsom Boulevard specific plan, and the site is also located within our Folsom Boulevard planning area as designated by the city's general plan. The site is surrounded by commercial office and in light industrial buildings to the north, east, and west, and also by US Highway 50 to the South. Across US Highway Fifty are residential homes, which are approximately 300 feet away from the project site. Shown here are street view images of the project site. The left is on is the view from Highway 50, and on the right is a street view from the entrance to the parcel at Fight Circle.

So according to the applicant, as a nonprofit organization, the Cordova Community Council has identified the following project objectives, to develop a revenue source for the commune Cordova Community Council to continue to serve the community and also to provide the city of Rancho Cordova and community groups with the medium for communicating to area residents. Also, according to the applicant, the development and long term lease of the digital billboard sign would provide the CCC with long term financial stability to continue its mission, within the community. So the image here to the right shows, three areas of the overlay that are located between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue, South of Highway 50. The city currently has these listed within the RCMC section twenty three seven four three dot one fifty, most of which are located on the eastern part of the city along US Highway 50. And the overlay is currently the only area in which digital freeway signs can be installed and provide standards and requirements for their installation and operation.

So as part of this application, the applicant is proposing a zoning text amendment to add an additional overlay area to the municipal code to accommodate their requested location. So the newly proposed area would be bound by Highway 50 to the South, Business Park Drive, and Fight Circle to the North, and commercial property and to the West, and mobile home park to the East. The yellow star there is the approximate location of where the project site would be. So this new area to the overlay would be the only requested change to the section, and no changes to the listed development standards or requirements are proposed as part of that zoning text amendment. So as previously mentioned, section 23 dot seven four three dot one five zero, the zoning code, does require a CUP for any new digital billboard sign within the overlay.

Also, due to the modifications of the site and required applicable standards, a minor design review is also required to ensure that the existing property continues to maintain its requirements as well as the, proposed billboard sign is meeting its applicable development standards. So listed here are some key development standards listed from the zoning code. The first one is that the project is limited to a maximum of two display areas or faces on the sign. The maximum height of the sign is 60 feet in height. The maximum sign area allowed is 672 square feet.

And the sign structure as well as the pole design are to be simple and streamlined and not add stylistic or architectural detailing that further calls attention to the sign. And also that the freeway sign shall not operate at brightness levels of more than point three foot candles above the current existing ambient light in the area. Oh, and there are additional standards listed in section 23 dot seven four three, that further standardize the operation of the sign, such as, timing for messages and, no animation, things like that. So for the proposed site plan and sign elevations, shown here is the site plan for the project site. The sign is proposed at the southeast corner of the property parking lot, approximately 85 feet from the Caltrans right away, shown there in the image.

Also shown there on the right are drawings of the proposed sign. It's a little hard to read in the image, but the height of the sign is proposed at 60 feet, which is within the maximum. And this assigned display area is shown as a 60 by 20 sign display area, that'll be on both spaces. Shown here is a photo rendering of the proposed sign. This is showing the view going eastbound on Highway 50.

You can see it right there on the left side. And shown here is a photo rendering of the proposed sign with the view going westbound on Highway 50. Again, it's shown there on the right. So part of this application also includes a draft operating agreement for the project. This agreement outlines the requirements of installation, ownership, maintenance, standards, use rights, and other operating procedures for the digital freeway sign.

Section 23 dot seven four three dot one five zero, subsection c, also allows the applicant to deviate from required development standards through this operating agreement on a case by case basis. So operating agreements are only approvable by the city council if it's determined that the agreement achieves a community benefit equivalent to those that would be achieved through strict adherence of the code. So planning commission can comment on the deviations that are proposed in the operating agreement, but city council would be the operating agreement approval authority for the project. So within that, operating agreement, there are two deviation requests listed. So the applicant is requesting deviations from these two requirements, the maximum allowed sign area and the required static billboard removal.

Currently, the maximum allowed sign area is 672 square feet within the zoning code. The applicant is requesting to increase that allowance to a maximum of 1,200 square feet. Additionally, the code does require that every one for every one digital freeway sign installed, that the applicant must remove at least four legally existing billboard structures within the city. The applicant is requesting a deviation from this requirement as part of that operating agreement and instead is proposing a cancellation of their previously approved west sign at their mine shaft property. The applicant's reasoning for the increase in signage areas due to the fact that the project site is separated by a drainage channel and sits approximately 85 feet away from the Caltrans right away, which is farther than other digital and static billboard signs located along Highway 50 that are currently existing in the city.

Also, the proposed square footage and design that they're proposing with this application would be consistent with the applicant's east sign on their Mineshaft property, and this sign would be constructed in a similar manner to their original approval. So shown here is examples of the billboard signs along Highway 50 on the left with within the city limits, many of which are located less distance away from the right of way than their proposed site location, which, again, it's hard to read on that right side, but it is showing 85 feet from the project site to the Caltrans right away. So as part of this project, in accordance with CEQUA, a draft initial study mitigated negative declaration was prepared and circulated for the required thirty day review period from 06/27/2025 to 07/28/2025. So areas identified in that MND, that required mitigation measures to avoid less than significant effects on the environment were air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, and tribal cultural resources. So during the the public review period, we did receive two email comments.

One was from Sacramento area sewer district, and the other was from a local ranch court over Redsley. As a result of these comments, there were no substantial revisions made to the draft MND, that required any kind of recirculation of the document, and responses to the emails that were received have been included as part of the commission package. So, mitigation measures to address those less than significant impacts that were listed on the previous slide include emission controls and reduction during construction, bird surveys prior to ground disturbance as there are trees on-site, a tree inventory and protection during the construction, Appropriate measures in the event any archaeological resources are exposed during construction, and a mitigation measure was also added by the United Auburn Indian community in the event that any in unanticipated discoveries were to occur on the site. There were no impacts related to substantial light or glare that were identified in the m and d, which did include a photometric study that demonstrated that the amount of light generated would be within the allowable illuminance standards for digital billboard signs. So with that, staff is recommending that the planning commission adopt the resolution recommending that city council certify the initial study and mitigate a neg deck that was prepared and circulated as well as adopt the mitigation monitoring program and reporting program, and also to adopt the ordinance for the digital freeway sign overlay zoning text amendment as well as the resolution for the fight circle billboard sign conditional use permit and minor design review.

So with that, that concludes my presentation, and the staff is here for any questions you may have as well as the applicant.

Thank you so much, Nick.

Mhmm.

Clerk, is there any public comment?

Yes. We received two email public comments this afternoon, one by Charles Beck and one by James Garcia. Those were distributed to the planning commission as well as the public. There's a copy in the back of the room, and they are posted on the city's website. My first speaker card is for James Garcia. Following mister Garcia will be Helen Wayland Bashaw.

Hello. Hi. I'm James Garcia, resident of Stone Creek. You you might have seen my public comment when this was first proposed during the medicated negative period. The city has tried to state that everything is, up on the up and up. It does not appear that way. This is now the second time this organization has put an application to change our standards. Our standards were put there for a reason. This time, it's actually gonna be harming us even further. It is creating a monopoly for one business to actually have and operate a sign.

Due to our standards being 2,500 feet between each, digital billboard, we have this new overlay that's gonna be 3,300 feet long. It's gonna be within 2,200 feet of the westernmost boundary and 1,100 feet from the easternmost boundary. That puts monopoly so no other company can actually operate a digital billboard. If we're gonna actually do this the right way, we should have done this back when they first were approved in 2023, create the whole overlay over the whole entire city's boundaries, not just piecemeal it whenever a special interest group wants to come and raise money. We're already funding this organization with our community enhancement funds.

There's no need to continue to operate anything else. If we're gonna give them that, we need to stop giving them that money if they're gonna be operating this here. You are creating that monopoly. But the reason for opening up and having the size higher is false too because their existing billboard that they just got put in at the mineshaft is about a 175 feet away from the freeway. That went over Folsom Boulevard as well as railroad tracks. This one's nowhere near that. If you also look at the Beck's billboard or excuse Not the Beck's. The one at Naturewood, it's about 60 feet. This one's 85. They don't have it that large.

The one at the Folsom Auto Mall is about 70 feet roughly. I know it's not within our city round, but it is within what the California Highway Patrol and Caltrans will actually operate. So size range from it does not make sense to justify going up 78% above our standards. Why are we doing this type of a case? So those are the big ones. The light pollution, have you ever driven by? You see them about a half mile away. You will start seeing that sign half mile away. Yes. You can't read everything until you get closer, but there are residential homes that are right across the freeway that have two stories.

They're gonna be looking out that out their window. Right now, they're looking out at a one story industrial park. No signs higher than that building. You're gonna go 60 feet tall. That causes an eyesore. That causes life, everything else. And, again, if you looked at, mister Beck's, it is it violates that California Outdoor Advertising Act. It is creating a special interest zone only, and it is small. Thank you.

Next is Helen Whelan Bashaw, and after that is Amy Lursith.

Helen Whelan Bashaw from the Tiffany area. I agree with everything James said. It appears when the mine shaft sign was approved, it was a special interest group that is near and dear to the city that we made exception. When Linda Budge stated that because of the setback, they should be allowed to make the sign bigger. You don't make an opinion like that.

The ordinance clearly stated what the measurements are. For us to go when a special interest group comes to the city, one that we fund through, as James said, our, extra taxes that we gather from sales taxes, you're showing preferential treatment. I agree with James. This sign goes up. All money funding that organization should cease to exist.

Let them pay for all the little projects because that billboard will bring in money. If I was living across the freeway from that, and and I would be appalled because I'm seeing a digital billboard, a monster digital billboard. I was really impressed with, Charles Beck comments. This document is setting the city up for a lawsuit. When are we gonna get out of special interests?

We bend the rules for until somebody comes behind them and wants to sue the city. Dremity is a good example of it. Dealing with the Cassis Estates, a good example of it. We were bending the rules for special interest groups, mainly builders. And this special interest group has happens to be somebody directly affiliated with, the chairman and, directly affiliated with the city. They've given a bunch of, I'm gonna say freebies to this organization. And now they wanna bend over and give them another billboard. Special interest. This is a lawsuit in the making. Thank you.

Amy?

Good evening. I'm Amy Lurseth speaking on behalf of Clear Channel. I support the community members' statements here. The the idea that the setback is is so deep requiring and nearly twice as large a sign as the zoning allows for, I think, is false. I think that's a copy and paste from perhaps the first mine shaft mine shaft I'm sorry. My kids play Minecraft. It's really hard for me to remember that's Minecraft. Minecraft sign. I think it's a copy and paste. You know, as, James mentioned, it's that first sign is beyond power lines, beyond the light rail, beyond Folsom Boulevard.

It is further off the road. This one's not. It I mean, it's 85 feet. It's not substantially far off the road. So approving a sign that's twice as large, it doesn't seem like a proper justification.

I also agree that the forming of this or adding this small section of a special district is akin to spot zoning and is is a is a dangerous move. It seems like we are creating a zone for this sign and this sign alone because no other sign can be located within it, either within the current Rancho Cordova code or within the Caltrans code either. The other thing is is no takedowns are required for this sign. So, typically, like, the staff mentioned, you've gotta take down a four to one ratio for this sign. And I think, I saw a justification for that that it was because there's a scarcity of signs in Rancho Cordova.

That's the case. But it feels like self dealing because we all know that the Cordova Council doesn't own any signs to take down, so it feels like a special favor is being made for a related entity, and that those kinds of, permissions weren't given to other companies that have put up signs here. Clear Channel, our company, I know that Outfront, a friendly competitor of ours, we have put up signs. We have had to take down signs in order to put up those signs, and now it feels like special permission's being given to friends of the council. Thank you for your consideration.

Vice chair, I have no additional speaker cards at this time.

Okay. Thank you. The public comment period is now closed, and we'll open up for planning commission comments and questions. Who wants to start? I don't want to.

We don't we don't have to start with one side. Anyone anyone can start.

I've got a lot of things to say.

You kick it off. We know you do.

Nothing new there. Right? There's a lot of good points made here tonight, mister Garcia and the rest. The increase in size definitely a concern, and the the light pollution to the the residential area across the freeway, that is a concern. The takedown of four billboards when four billboards don't even exist, that's kind of a tough rule to enforce, so I understand that part.

So the one problem I have is the increase from 650 squares to 1,200. That's doubling the size. And, honestly, I think that's gonna become a traffic distraction. Keeping it smaller maybe that 1,200 square foot should have been done at mine shaft because that thing is set so far back. Can't hardly see it.

But I I do have an issue with the the the increase in size. I understand the takedown of four existing when four existing don't exist. So I think oh, probably a design review issue, but this is going up in a parking lot. I'm sure there's gonna be some protections around the pole to keep cars from running into it. So you, public comment was well received.

I I get what you're saying. But as far as calling the Cordova Community Council a special interest group, I think that's a a bit of a stretch. They do a lot of good things for the city. They're a good partner, but we shouldn't bend the rules for them. I'm wondering, Nick, do we have an overlay of the zoning area on the the western side of the city for this sort of thing. I saw the overlay for the eastern part of the city from Sunrise to Hazel. I didn't see the actual overlay for the other half of the city. Do we happen to have that?

So at the moment, we just have the overlays in the eastern half over along the Minecraft property. Part of that zoning text amendment would be to create that new overlay area as part of this application. So they would be adding an additional area.

I understand you can't put another billboard within 1,500 feet or so. Covers a pretty wide area, so that that that map would be very interesting to see.

We have the applicant here,

and so I wanted to see if we wanna give you a chance to you've heard some of the do you want to wait to hear more concerns, or do you want to share now? You'll remember all the things?

Question. Yeah. So, Nick, I know we're in the middle of our general plan update. You know, I agree. I don't like spot zoning changes, things like that. Would this be part of our general plan update? Are we going to address these situations for our whole city? Do you know that?

So the general plan is more generalistic land use elements, land use zoning. Even the Folsom Boulevard specific plan doesn't specify in terms of signage. Overall, along Folsom Boulevard, it's the intent of that area is for redevelopment and encouraging new construction. But the general plan likely won't specify that detail.

That detail? When first thought, I can I can clarify a little bit? So it would through the general plan process, it could it could become an action item, but we wouldn't necessarily do since it is a zoning standard issue, it wouldn't be addressed directly in a general plan as we're processing it right now. But we can I mean, because that's

a really big button? Know for me and some other commissioners, we want to, you know, revitalize this area. And so I do think we we do wanna make a comment on that.

It would

become a subsequent action that would come later on after the general plan is completed.

Correct. Correct. So that's one of the questions. And then when you guys get up here and speak, I do wanna talk about the size. I mean, I'm sure 99% of us drive that every day. So kind of addressing that size variances is something I'd like to hear about from the applicant.

And I just had a question, and I actually asked this of staff, but they actually redirected me to the applicant. I'm just going to read it off a bit. Why was the four two one removal requirement created, and what are the trade offs in granting this exemption?

I think the the applicant can answer that when they come into their questions. Yeah.

K. I noted down couple of questions, but Don asked the same thing, the size. Is it doubling its size? That's one concern. Other one is, is there any parking reduction on the business area going to happen? Because we have some standards to allow the parking for businesses based around their square feet area. So is there any impact on the parking spots?

Yes. There there may be some minor changes to the parking spaces, a minor reduction, but the site would still be in compliance with their required standards. Mhmm.

Yeah. They have to put the guard around that structure. Yeah. So it might impact more. I don't know how much, but we have to see that. Those are the couple of things I have.

Not much for me. I'm kind of just listening and playing both sides, but I'd just like to see what the applicant would offer.

Yeah. Nick, I have a question. In the rendering, was the size of that sign, was it under the six seventy two square footage or the 1200 when you showed in the slide deck?

The street view from Highway 50? Uh-huh. That would be as proposed at the 1200.

1200? Okay. Thank you. I'm interested in hearing a little bit about why the applicant decided to move the what was the rationale behind that? To me, it seems like a one to one since you're initially planned for one area. Now we're just moving it. So I don't see necessarily the need for taking down four signs to put one up, because my understanding is it was already planned for one space, and it's now just going in a different area. So curious about that. And then addressing the size as well. So I think we're ready to hear from you.

Good evening, chair Mullen, members of the commission. Brian Cooley. I'm representing the Cordova Community Council. Also here in attendance is Dave Nibel, Tiffany Wilson with RSE Engineering, our development team, and then also Shelly Blanchard, the executive director of the Cordova Community Council, Kurt Haven, one of the Cordova Community Council board members, is also here this this evening to answer any questions. Let me just start off saying a couple things.

The Cordova Community Council is the applicant for this sign. As Nick pointed out in the staff presentation, in 2023, the city council did approve two digital signs of the MindShark property. We view this request this evening as really a relocation of that second sign that was already approved legally through the process, irrespective of the comment from the representative from Clear Channel, that was legally done above board. And so it really didn't make sense to have the two signs on the close proximity in the mine shaft property, if you're very familiar with that. They were very close together.

The property is about a mile in length, and so it really made better sense to balance that out by having to sign the western part of the city where we have it proposed here. I wanted to say too is there's, you know, the statement of this has been in the rules for a special interest group. So Cordova Community Council has got a sixty year tradition of existence here in the community Ranch Cordova. They were one of the founding members and, the initiators of the cityhood effort here in 2022. Actually, I was one of the co chairs along with Kurt Haven for the incorporation campaign that made Ranch Cordova City.

And, you know, my point of bringing that up is 100% of the profits and proceeds other than administrative costs are directly redistributed back in the car Cordova community as a whole. I'm sure several of you gone to the recent fourth of July celebration here last month. Obviously, the holiday Christmas lighting every year, various other events throughout the year, the programming, a lot of youth events, a lot of leadership, training, and supporting small businesses directly back into the city of Rancho Cordova. If this were a private application to an outside company where profits just literally leave the city, it's a bit of a different, proposal than in this for a special interest group or bending the rules to do that. The operating agreement does allow for these deviations.

As pointed out earlier, there are not four signs to take down to meet that standard within your your your code. In return, the community benefit portion of what the current Cordova Community Council does in terms of its reinvestment back in Rancho Cordova is a way to ameliorate that provision of having to take down the four signs. And so that agreement is really the vehicle to allow you to do that. And the only deviation we're requesting is the the square footage on the sign. I'm a have Dave talk about that here in a second about the size of the sign.

The height for the sign, I would do wanna point out, is still within your your code in terms of the height of signs you see throughout Rancho Cordova. Trying to think of a couple other questions that it can, but that I could address. The city of Rancho Corvo in 2022 before the action in '23 did a similar, code amendment to allow for the two signs of the mine shaft. And so the notion that this is somehow prohibiting future signs in the future is erroneous because the city could choose to amend it as well again and expand that area. So it really doesn't necessarily slam the north of future signs.

The city is in control of that function. And so, I just wanted to address that issue that came up. There was issues about the size of the sign. I'm gonna have Dave Nibo address that a little bit on the technical side. He sort done a lot of sign applications throughout the greater Sacramento area. So, David, if you wanna address the square footage a little bit.

Hi there. David Nibo, and I'm a I'm helping the Cordova community council with the development of the billboard. So I'm in the billboard industry. Nick, can I bother you for some a photo simulation? So one of the ones. And and there there there's two big primary things as that that I see on that I see on this one. The first is you you can kinda see on that photo there in the behind, there's there's that large it it's a crane. And so there's a crane. And what I did was I went out there and I hung a banner from a crane, and it's 20 feet tall. And we went up and down.

We found a height of what it would be able to fit in. And so this is actually an extremely accurate photo simulation because I took a 20 foot actual banner and then did a photo simulation around that. It's going to be that size. I think you can see it's not ridiculously large, at least in the photo simulation. When we start talking about, well, this sign, this sign, that sign, this sign, this is the only sign in Rancho Cordova other than the mineshaft property that's not on Caltrans right away.

All the other ones, Naturewood, you know, I heard that it's some odd feet. It's literally a foot off Caltrans right away. The Clear Channel sign is literally feet away from the Caltrans right away. And if you go to the other one, there's another 20 by 60 billboard in the city. Here here's the other view of it.

It's literally feet from Caltrans right away. We're talking a 100 plus feet away, and then the Caltrans right away is even very wide between the the drive lane and the right away. So it is a considerable distance away from if you can't if it's too small, cars can't see it, well, it really has no effective value to it. And that's why for it to become economically viable, we did have to come in and ask for a variance for it to be larger. It it wasn't

Can I stop you there really quick, though? If you look at this sign, it's bigger than the street sign, the directional sign for, you know, Zinfandel, Sunrise, all of that. Is there a comparison that do you know how big that street sign is in comparison to the billboard?

That one is probably 12. Yeah. Yeah. That that is a that's in the center of the of the median, and that would be, I don't know, probably 12 by 18. So it it would it's it's closer. So, I mean, if I could get a freeway get a billboard in the middle of freeway, I would I'd do it. Do it. It'd be smaller. Yeah. Yeah.

So, anyways, so my point is is that we we are going to be the second furthest sign away from a freeway, not just in the city of Rancho Cordova because the other one is the mine shaft. And I think if you've driven by there, it is off the freeway considerable distance. But this is going to be, I don't know, maybe one of the furthest away in all the Sacramento region. It it is a it it is a fair amount. Now the other thing that has come up that I would like to deal with just one second because it we're trying to we we are mitigating it, and it's to the expense of the sign.

When we talk about on the opposite side of the freeway, the neighbors. There's no doubt. Nobody wants to impact a neighbor. What we're doing with that is we put louvers on the sign. We're gonna put louvers on the sign. And so you're only going to be able to see it when you're straight on. And you get off to the side, all the lighting is gonna be shut off. And it's kinda like if you're looking at you know, like, you never see, like, a security thing on this on a on a on a laptop, and you look off to the side, you can't see anything. It's gonna be effectively that. So the houses across the street, when they look out, they're not it's gonna be dark.

They won't see it. If you go further down, they will, but they're gonna be further. I'm not saying that the houses will. I'm just saying that it's only going to be from an approach. Billboard companies in general don't like to do it. And since I have friendly competitors here, we don't like to put those louvers on because it shortens the view, and it has less of a time that you can see it. But we did want that was the mitigation that we could do for that particular interest. Were there any other questions I can answer regarding the operation of

the billboard? I have a technical question.

Absolutely.

So when we go from 672 squares to 1,200 squares, the the wind forces on that are increased exponentially.

Yeah.

And I saw the the diagram of the footing depth and all that. Yeah. Does the increase in, face area impact the construction of and the depth of the foundation and things of that nature?

You know, you gotta love Rancho Cordova. It's like there's so many smart people here. Yes. It does. I don't exactly know how because we have geotech reports, and we went through this particular property has got we had refusal at seven feet with the boring, and so we had to do radar penetration to be able to actually figure out what what is down there. I believe we're going down 35 feet. K. And, yeah, that's with the geotech and and the structural engineer. It it is designed for the wind.

I just worry about when we have, in the wintertime, we get those really strong windstorms coming through Yeah. Darn near hurricane force. And when it hits that sail, it it's gonna wanna go.

And yeah. It is designed for that. It is. Yeah. It is a problem in the Midwest, though, when they get those big the tornadoes. Yeah. Yeah. They'll they'll they'll they'll corkscrew in, but we don't have that problem here. We we at least none of the new ones.

Definitely a a concern that that I have about this. The louvers was good. Is that similar to what they do on street lights, stoplights, the Yep. Because you you look at those from the side, you can't see what color is on. Exactly. You get in front of it, you could see it. So something similar to that?

Very similar to that.

Alright.

Yeah. Thank you. And and the the property is overparked right now. And so we are taking out one spot, but there's more spots than they need. And and if you go out there, they're more not not more spots than required. There's way more spots than they need. It's never full.

Not to get picky. You're gonna take two spots.

Yeah. Yeah. Essentially, yes. Are there

I just have one more question. I'm sorry. It's another

Not

at all.

It's another technical question. But the lumens that that's creating versus I just wanna address the city's concern. The lumens that's coming off that sign versus the other lights, I mean, is that in compliance with what we have for the other lights in the city? Just I'd like to address the public comment on that.

So the illumination would be they're allowed to be point three foot candles greater than the ambient light. So with the photometric study that was completed in the MND, they would be within the allowable range.

Right. So I just wanna be on record that we've addressed that. I mean Mhmm. Three candles is not that much. Yeah. Okay. Thanks.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Was there any other question on the signed removal requirement, or do you feel like you're comfortable with that?

Okay.

What else? Any other questions? Comments?

Like, comment, basically. I don't see I mean, they still double the size. The initial standard ranch quarter has six seventy two square feet, but making it to 1,200 with such in probably 90 feet distance from the freeway. I don't see the reason, the increase of the size, but it's up to their design.

I I gotta agree with you. The doubling of size is probably a bit much, and and maybe we should consider somewhere in the middle. I understand. The the one at the mine shaft, it I was there the day of the river cutting. It's really cool. But then when I drive down the freeway, I can hardly see it. I have to actually know that it's there and specifically look at it. That's why the 1,200 foot sign should be at the mine shaft. And and Is it? Oh, it is 1,200 squares? Oh, okay.

Okay. Yeah. You just made the point for the larger sign.

I just I get apparently, I did.

The only other comment I have I wanna make is and I'm very sensitive to this the statement that this is a special interest group, this is a group that benefits our community in so many ways. If we're going to make an example or vote for something, I want to vote for somebody that gives back to the community more than a private entity. I think they do amazing things. And so when I take that into consideration, I just I think we need to honor the comment that it's special interest, but we also need to recognize what they do for the city, which is a a lot. So that's all I wanna say about that. That's my last comment, I swear.

Yeah. No. I appreciate that and echo those comments as well. I actually see it as a benefit if they're able to generate income and that we're not using tax dollars to support the the amazing work that they're doing, that that's a positive thing. As far as the zoning, I mean, I don't think any of us wants to see nothing but digital billboards all along this freeway as you go through Rancho. So I also don't have a problem there, and no problem with the size now that we understand what that looks like and the reasoning behind it. So if there are no other comments, does anyone want to make a motion? Can request Thank you. We the public comment is closed. Thank you, though.

Yep. We'll close the public hearing at this point. And does anyone wanna make a motion?

I'll make the motion to adopt the city's recommendation to, approve the project.

I think you gotta read it all out. Right? Paul McCall

The motion is to certify the initial study mitigated negative declaration that was prepared and circulated pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, sequel, and adopt the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and adopt the ordinance for the digital freeway sign overlay zoning text amendment for section twenty three point seven four three point one five zero and adopt the resolution for the fight circle billboard digital billboard sign zoning, text amendment, conditional use, and minor design review.

Now that commissioner Stevenson did all the hard work to Oh, I'll second. Second.

Thank you, Elliot.

Alright. So we have a motion to approve by commissioner Stevenson and a second by commissioner Hoon. Clerk, will you call the roll?

Can I get a clarification on the motion that it is a recommendation to the city council to do those three actions?

Yes.

Okay. Commissioner Deborah Polly?

No.

Commissioner Hoon?

Aye.

Vice chair Molden? Yes. Commissioner Raymond? Aye. Commissioner Stoss? Aye. Commissioner Stevenson?

Aye.

Motion passes with a six one vote or five one vote. Sorry.

Thank you.

Oh, yeah. Oh,

okay. There we go. I apologize. My microphone wasn't on. So we're moving on to, eight point one under regular calendar items, planning commission training, California Environmental Quality Act, and environmental review.

Kelly, you have announcement for us?

I will announce it again. I

guess I should. I just did it for you, didn't I? Sorry.

Point one planning commission training, California Environmental Quality Act, CEQUA, and environmental review.

Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. I'm Lindsey Morrill, senior environmental planner with the planning division. And tonight, I am presenting a CEQUA and environmental review training. I know that, most of you have already been through a training or two regarding the CEQUA process, so I will give a brief review of that and then focus a little more on the environmental document review portion and what's applicable to, you as decision makers.

So the purpose of CEQA is to disclose potential environmental impacts of a project to the public and to reduce environmental impacts as much as possible. Essentially, it's used to inform US decision makers and members of the public and to get the public involved throughout the process, to avoid significant environmental damage, and all of those things collectively, hopefully, promote sustainable development. An important part of the process is, public involvement, and there's opportunities for public involvement throughout the entire process. The public is notified of projects through public notices public noticing. CEQA has specific requirements for what goes in notices and where and how long they should be posted.

And in general, the city's practice is to send mailers to residents around where a project is located. We post on the city website. We post on-site here at city hall and in the local newspaper. For larger projects that require an EIR, there is early in the process, there's a scoping period. During the scoping period, the lead agency would prepare a notice of preparation that informs the public an EIR is being prepared and gives them thirty days to, send in comments, and then we are required to address those comments in the EIR for potential issues.

Environmental documents also have a public review period. So, smaller smaller ones like the initial study, MND that you saw tonight, that has a thirty day public comment period, and EIR has a forty five day public comment period. And that is for to give the public a chance to review the document and comment on the analysis. For comments that are related to the environmental analysis, we are required to respond and, include, any necessary corrections or any new issues that are brought up or any new alternatives. Respond to those in the actual environmental document.

And often what happens is, we'll we'll receive all kinds of comments, you know, in general opposition or support of a project, and we're not really required to respond to those. But it's also city practice just, to provide responses. Oh, and lastly, there's public meetings for, all types of projects. So there's a scoping meeting in the beginning. There's, public meetings during the, review period, of an EIR.

So what with we'll have an upcoming EIR, during the sometime in the middle of the forty five day review period, we'll we'll have a public workshop or hearing, here at City Hall usually or in a neighborhood location, where the public can come in person, and they can ask questions about the project and provide, comments on-site or via comment cards. And then, the last probably chance for a public, involvement is that the public hearing at the end of the project, like tonight. The CEQA exemptions. The most common environmental type of analysis you'll see is a CEQA exemption, in your staff report. So the first thing we do is we we review a project and its information to see if it's exempt from the provisions of CEQA, either through a statutory exemption, a categorical exemption, or a common sense exemption.

Statutory exemptions are not very common. You might not see those. It's something that is allowed despite its environmental impacts. Like an example would be an emergency project. A common sense exemption is, something where it's just very clear that there there would be no environmental impacts, but it doesn't fit in anything else.

This is not very common either, but, one recently was used to, transfer a transfer a deed. That would be an example. And then the ones you'll see the most are categorical exemptions. So we use these a lot for, most small projects that we work on, or something that is infill development or something that has already been analyzed and is part of a larger specific plan would usually fit in a categorical exemption. So you'll probably see those the most.

So if a project is not exempt from CEQA, we typically complete an initial study, or it's also kinda called a CEQA appendix g checklist, which is it's it's in the back of the CEQUA guidelines book, and it goes through each each resource area that is, studied under CEQUA, and it has a list of questions for the analyst to evaluate. So this is an example from the aesthetics, or visual resources chapter. So it's kind of an example of how you would start looking at the impacts of a project. So if you look at a, the impact would be, does the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? And if there are no designated scenic vistas around the project, you could pretty easily select no impact.

And then so these are just little checklists of what to analyze for each resource area. So if there's if there are potential impacts, but they could, be mitigated to a less than significant level, a mitigate a mitigated negative declaration or MND is typically prepared, like the project you saw tonight. And then if a project has potential impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, or has significant and unavoidable impacts, then an an an EIR is prepared. This is the highest level of environmental review and is the most legally defensible. And sometimes, EIRs are prepared, even if they're not necessarily required, and a project project might have no significant unavoidable impacts.

It might still, be a good idea to prepare at EIR if a project is, particularly controversial or in a sensitive area, things like that. Okay. Now let's talk a little bit more about environmental review and and how to get to the important parts of these beefy documents. So these are the resource topics that are covered by CEQUA. So CEQUA looks at aesthetics and visual resources, agriculture and forestry, which isn't too much of an issue in the city, air quality, biological and cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials that comes up sometimes in infill projects and, like, maybe out by the Aerojet site Hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources also actually comes up in the city with all the, you know, Rio Del Oro mining types of properties.

Noise, population housing, public services, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities, and wildfire. So for each of those topics, the analyst is going through that list of checklist questions to, analyze specific impacts. So when you get an environmental document to review, like the Fight Circle MND or, the, the I think the most recent EIR we had was the Mills Crossing EIR. You can think of it like a big summary or almost an encyclopedia of all the potential impacts in all of those resource areas. And it's it's like that so that any member of the public or any decision maker can go to what they're interested in.

So if someone is concerned about noise, they can skip everything in that report and just go to the noise, or if someone's concerned about air quality or biological resources, they can hone in on whatever they need to hone in on. So it's not designed to read the whole thing word for word. So an EAR contains all of these things. It contains the table of contents. It's required to contain an executive summary and an executive summary table.

It has a project description, alternatives, cumulative impacts, and growth inducing impacts. Those are, those are not required for smaller documents like the ISMND. And then for each of those resource topics, like biological or cultural resources and traffic and energy, each has its own chapter. And it goes through the regulatory setting, the environmental setting, thresholds of significance. There's a discussion of impacts for each impact and mitigation measures.

So when you're reviewing an EIR or looking for what to review in an EIR, for example, the regulatory setting contains every local, state, federal regulation that could pertain to that topic, and it can be pretty lengthy. So you don't need to read all of that word for word, but it's a good place to go look for if you have a question or want to see where threshold came from or something like that. The environmental setting it usually talks about the on-site conditions and what's going on. So that's where you can start getting some more applicable stuff. And then there, the discussion of impacts and the mitigation measures.

So that's why those are highlighted. Those are the most exciting parts. So for CEQA thresholds, to determine whether an impact is significant, we compare the project's effects to the CEQA thresholds. And each of those resource areas has its own set of thresholds. And I'll go over a few examples in the next few slides.

And for the most part, the CEQA threshold are found in Appendix G, but also local agencies can make them more specific or more, yeah, make them more specific, basically. So this is an example of a CEQA threshold from an air quality chapter. So the the general threshold that we're evaluating a project impacts against are would the project's construction or operation emissions exceed what is allowed by the local air district? So our local air district is the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, and they have set their own CEQA thresholds that we need to abide by. So they have limits for construction and limits for operation for different types of pollutants.

So that's what this table shows. It just shows that, there for example, there's no, CEQA threshold for, reactive organic gases during construction. But there is a limit of you can only emit 80 pounds per day of PM10 or particulate matter 10. And during project operations, when the project is operating and everything is running, It has separate thresholds for NOx, ROG, and particulate matter. So the analyst who's working on the EIR would they're doing the project modeling, and they're using information for construction of the project and operation.

So for construction, they look at things like how many pieces of equipment we'll be running and for how long, how long is the construction period, and they put that into models. And it outputs how much the construction emissions per day and per year would be. And then the analyst is able to compare that directly to the CEQA threshold and tell if there's an impact or not or if mitigation is required. Here's an example for biological resources. These are kinda ones that tend to pop up in the city.

But, so with the project impact sensitive species or habitat, so this is kind of, this is a table pulled out of one of our, city EIRs. So the, the biologist who is working on this section, they kind of review this information by they'll do surveys, database pulls, and they coordinate with agencies to find out what potential species and what potential habitat is on the site and evaluate whether there's high potential or no potential. And that is what they would base like, there's high potential they would require mitigation or not, or maybe it wouldn't be required. And so some other simple ones. For cultural resources, would the project disturb known or historical resources on-site?

And we can determine things like that by existing mapping that already has known sites. For noise, would the project exceed the local noise ordinance during construction or operation similar to air quality? We figure that out by modeling. Oops. There's that's a typo.

But for traffic, where the project results in a substantial increase in BMT. So each resource area has, specific thresholds that we look at to evaluate impacts. So for mitigation measures, CEQA requires, significant impacts be mitigated to the extent feasible. And it's our job to make sure that, feasible mitigation measures reduce, the environmental impacts to lessen significant, levels. And we are we also recommend we, the or you as the planning commission, we recommend adoption of mitigation measures as as part of your action.

So, CEQA has a few different terms for mitigation. There's different types, but it all falls under the umbrella of mitigation. But, avoidance is generally the best way to prevent impacts. So for example, routing a roadway or a project around sensitive habitat or, you know, wetlands or something would be an example of avoidance. Minimization would reduce the impacts of a project.

So for example, limiting the construction periods to certain hours to reduce noise impacts on residents could be an example of minimization. Rectify would be something like requiring mitigation to revegetate a site after construction is complete. And, compensation is generally the last resort kind of thing. So that's when you would there's no other mitigation available, and we need to do things like pay an in lieu fee or, purchase greenhouse gas credits. Avoidance and minimization measures are included to reduce or avoid impacts that are not considered significant.

So most of the mitigation measures you saw, tonight in the Fight Circle project are these types of mitigation measures. And then these are just some other types of mitigation that I've seen on a lot of our projects in the city. So typical mitigation measures you'll come across are things like preventative things like preconstruction training and surveys and monitoring. And let's see. Oh, I had hazardous materials remediation on there.

That was an example from the Mills Crossing EIR, which I think we have in the next slide. We'll talk about that in a couple of slides. The mitigation monitoring and reporting program is basically all the mitigation measures that were in the environmental document pulled and put into a table, and then it kinda travels with the rest of the project. So this, this is a sec a sec secondary thing that you're, adopting and approving during these actions. But this is what it looks like.

So it'll just state the impact. It'll have the full text of the mitigation measure, and then it tracks who's responsible for implement implementing the measure. It has the timing requirements, and, these are tracked, like, throughout the the next stages of the project, like the grading and, improvement plans and construction. So a final environmental document, It includes the public draft that was circulated. It includes the, public comments that were received and responses that were made, and it includes any changes made to the draft EIR if there were any.

And I think I mentioned this earlier, but an EIR is required to contain an executive summary and executive summary table that summarizes all this information for you. This is this is an example from Mills Crossing. This okay. So this this one had a significant potentially significant impact related to hazardous materials, from the the dry cleaning site. So the table is required to state the level of significance before mitigation, so this impact was identified as potentially significant.

And then with mitigation measure has one, which is to implement a site cleanup plan, then it shows the it evaluates the level of significance after mitigation. So this is a good way to review the important parts of the EIR just right in the beginning, and then you can jump to that chapter. So the role of decision makers in the CEQA process in general, reviewing environmental documents, evaluating whether the analysis adequately addresses and mitigates environmental impacts. We make make findings of fact for significant impacts. If there is a project that has a significant impact that cannot be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation, we would call it a significant and unavoidable impact.

And then you would also be adopting a statement of overriding considerations, which states, why we're choosing to approve a project that has significant effects, holding public hearings, considering public input, and adopting that MMRP or mitigation monitoring reporting program for projects that have mitigation. I don't know if that went fast or slow, but I just wanted to say, thank you. And I'm here if you have any questions. And I just wanted to say that if there are any topics of interest for a particular resource area or any questions about any specific parts of CEQUA or NEPA or the habitat conservation plan or anything like that, I'd be very happy to, provide any future trainings. And also, feel free to reach out to me if if you have a packet with an environmental document and you have any questions or wanna talk through any of the impacts or mitigation measures or conclusions.

You can reach out to me directly, and I'd be happy to do that.

I have one question for you, Lindsay. Twenty, twenty five years ago, I took a whole series of classes on, Sequith. I don't remember wildfire being in there at that time. Was that added since then?

Yes. Wildfire has been I don't know exactly what year, but, see, I've been I've been as I was a CEQUA practitioner for the last twenty years, and I wanna say within the last ten years, I was added. Yeah. It it wasn't there in the beginning when I started.

Okay. That's what I thought. I just wasn't sure if I was remembering it right or not.

That's yeah. The other thing is CEQA changes all the time. There's constant updates, and yeah. So it's good to have someone to check or at least be able to research things for you.

Okay. With that, if that concludes your report, does the, clerk have any public, comment cards?

I have no speaker cards on this item.

Alright. So with that, I'm gonna close the public comment period. So with that, commissioners, comments, ideas, questions, who wants to start?

I'll start. I am the only comment I really have is well, just a thank you to Lindsay because I actually sent her a series of questions because I needed some clarification. And I really appreciate that you kind of threaded it through in your presentation as well, specifically around the the oh, needing a full EIR versus the mitigated negative declaration. So I just have a much better understanding. So I really appreciate the time that you took to explain it, but also in the presentation. I I felt I feel much better about my understanding, so thank you. Well, that was helpful. Thanks.

Well, great job to the staff. Great reports and, great training. Lisa, that was very nice. Thank you. Went to the elected officials banquet. That was pretty nice. And we're not there yet. Oh,

well We

now know.

Well, great training.

Commissioner Simonton.

You're welcome.

Thank you. That was the perfect length. Okay. That's perfect. You did great. Thank you.

That was an outstanding presentation. Thank you for that. And, you know, we we have a a big responsibility to be good stewards of our earth, our land, and the land that we live on. This is a great tool to help us evaluate the the impacts of what we do to the land. So I I appreciate the training, and I look forward to hearing more about it.

K. Thank you,

Yeah. Thanks for this slide presentation. Probably, as Don mentioned, we are building more homes, so we might need little more training on that because while approving the land in that area, some conservative lands are there, so we need to save them.

We do have a yeah. There will be a few big I big EIRs over the next few years during your term, though. We'll get to go through together. The general plan update EIR.

Okay. With that, I'm gonna move on to then just general comments from the, commission. And, Elliot, you get to start. Thank you. It's nice to be

here this evening. Like I was saying, we went to the elected officials' banquet. That was pretty nice, pretty cool. Friend of mine owns the car dealership, so I got to hang out with him for a little bit. And, everything's good in District 2. Thank you for having me.

Are we gonna say our districts now?

I

don't have any comments. We it's nice to have two meetings. It means things are moving in the city, so that's good. Yeah. So thanks to the staff for a really good report tonight.

I just yeah. I don't have really anything much to report except that I just wanna send a special shout out to Nick and Lindsey for always just being very thorough and Arlene. Like, I feel like you guys, in terms of information and communication, it's really helpful, especially as I've ramped on in the last six months. And there's been a huge learning curve, and I just I really appreciate the time, patience, and I feel like sometimes I'm asking some really dumb questions. And I do really appreciate it because I try to spend which I always try to carve out an hour, but it seems like I end up spending way more time really trying to go through all the documents and understanding.

But I appreciate your patience. And it makes it a lot easier when I'm up here going through my stuff, and I'm like, oh, I understand this better. So a special shout out to you both. Thank you.

I'll just highlight two things. Tuesday was Women's Equality Day, which celebrates women obtaining the right to vote. So in case you missed that and did not get a chance to celebrate, you can celebrate all week. And then along those lines, I want to make sure everyone's aware that if you have influence over a young woman between the ages of eight and 18, capital or California at Capital Air Show has a women girls at aviation program that's free and happening September 20 at Mather Airport. And if you would want information on how to sign your youth or someone up for that, let me know.

It's amazing programming, and not enough people know about the incredible programs that they have out there for youth. So I wanted to share that happening next month.

As always, great thanks to our staff. You guys do a great job. Tonight's presentation was fantastic. And, Arlene, you are a master communicator. I I never feel like I I never get FOMO with you around, so I appreciate that. And all's well in District 1 except for one thing that's been bothering me. I walk along the American River almost every day, and there's a Cordova Creek where it enters into the American River. We've kinda blocked it up, and I understand why. But that pond is growing. It's already taken over the trail, we're having to walk over the control burn now and make our own trail through the sand. And I'm wondering how big is that pond gonna get. I

have the answer for you.

We'll talk later. But thank you, Steph.

Yeah. Last meeting, I missed it because of some cold and fever issue going on. And, also, last meeting, the other time, dinner, dinner, I missed it too. But I'm back, so looking forward. Thank you.

Better than ever.

Alrighty. Well, I got a couple of things. First, to answer your question, I didn't believe this. People have said this for a number of years, and I just didn't believe it, that there are beavers in Cordova Creek and that we have several beaver dams, and they periodically go and break those up to allow the flow of water. I recently had the opportunity to be down there during an operation, find out that we really do have beavers, which I do not understand because they are not indigenous to this area.

But so I am I assume, and maybe wrongfully, that somebody introduced them there, but it's kinda curious that we actually have real beaver dams here in Rancho Cordova. One thing for staff, I did it I never noticed this until I was in the conference room watching item 7.1 that I had recused myself from is that we still have the vice chair's last name incorrect on the monitors. And so I'm I know you wouldn't bring it up. I know you wouldn't bring it up, so I'm gonna bring it up so that

I still owe them paperwork. It's a whole process.

And then, finally, I had the pleasure of putting up with a 150 screaming junior high and high school kids Saturday and Sunday. Is the Heartstoppers haunted house is, you know, in full production now, getting ready for that operation. We have a lot of new kids in the program this year, a lot of young kids. It's really great. It's, really wonderful to have all those kids out there driving you crazy as they will, but still, it's a really great program.

And I'll give you updates when the hunt is actually ready to open up. With that, I'm gonna be going back to the UP this weekend for another family wedding and spending a week up there in the cold North, hometown. My home tribe is up there. So looking forward to that. And, again, Arlene, Kelly, Lindsay, Nick, thank you.

We have a really great staff. It makes the job that we do very easy when you have a staff doing the quality of work that we just take for granted. But I do thank you for that. And with that, Arlene, I'm gonna let you close us out with your report. Sure.

Nothing major. Just just a notice that we are canceling the September 24 meeting. There's some requests from city council and city manager. There might be some conflicts that week, so we are gonna be canceling that. We didn't have any items that were pending for September 24. We are still having the September 10 meeting just to for clarification. So and that was all I had. Sure.

Alrighty. And with that, I'm gonna close this meeting of the Rancho Cordova Planning Commission.