Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Commissioner Atwell, we can see you. Can you hear us? Okay, can you unmute so we can test your audio, please?

Yeah, can you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you. Okay. Commissioner Atwal, just a reminder, you can mute and unmute yourself.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

All right, good evening. It is Wednesday, June 10th, 2026, 7 p.m. Welcome to the Planning Commission. I'd like to call this meeting to order. Are there any disclosure of participation by teleconference pursuant to government code section 54953.8.3?

Chair, I believe Commissioner Atwal has a request to participate via teleconference.

Yeah. Hi, Chair. I have the request that I affirm and attest that I cannot attend the meeting in person because I'm experiencing a family medical emergency pursuant to government code section 54953.8.3, and I request a remote participation.

Do we need a vote on that?

Good evening, Commissioners. Janelle Green, Assistant City Attorney. Under the new provisions of SB 707, there's no need to vote or approve that item. The commissioner must merely announce that he is going to participate remotely, and it counts against his five allowed absences per year pursuant to SB 707.

All right. Thank you for that. I appreciate it. Roll call and declaration of conflicts.

Commissioner Atwell? Yes, present. Commissioner Chavez? Yes.

Present. No conflicts.

Thank you. Commissioner Shrout. Present. No conflicts. Vice Chair Boachie Boateng.

And Chair Penning.

Present. No conflicts.

Thank you. Chair Penning, just before we get started, Commissioner Atwal, if you can state if you have any conflicts before we get going on the agenda.

No conflict.

Thank you.

Perfect. Thank you. If you all will please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

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

All right. Thank you very much. Can I get an initial director's report?

Yes, thank you, Chair. There's no Director's Report this evening. All right, thank you.

There is, actually. I'll take that one. So, again, Daniella Green, Assistant City Attorney for the City of Tracy. We just want to note that Item 6A is going to need to be approved as amended. When we... There was a... An issue when we went to publish tonight's agenda, we're in the process of switching to new software. All of the agenda materials and the correct agenda have been noticed publicly available on the city's website and outside more than 72 hours in advance of tonight's meeting. So there's been plenty of public notice and we've complied completely with the Brown Act. There's a couple different versions floating out on the internet. We've corrected all of them out of an abundance of caution because there have been different versions. There is a supplemental in the back of the room tonight that does have the complete correct agenda. Again, that has been publicly available on the city's website more than 72 hours in advance of the meeting, compliant with the Brown Act. But out of an abundance of caution, we do ask that you approve item 6A as amended tonight.

All right. Thank you for that information. Okay, so the city will continue to allow for remote participation by members of the public at tonight's meeting by using the following options. Online, by logging into Zoom using the link provided, under public comment, raise your hand to speak by clicking on the hand icon on the participants panel to the right of your screen. This procedure will be used to receive all comments received from Zoom during items from the audience and all new business items. Are there any presentations?

No presentations.

No presentations. The consent calendar, 4A, minutes. Have we all had a chance to review, take a look at, amend, if not, entertain a motion?

I motion to approve the minutes from last month.

And I second. We have a motion that's been seconded. Can I get a roll call vote, please?

Commissioner Atwell? Yes. Chair Penning?

Yes.

Commissioner Chavez?

Yes.

Commissioner Shrout?

Yes.

And Vice Chair Boachie Boateng? Still absent. Thank you.

All right. Thank you for that. Items from the audience. If you do decide to come up and speak, please sign in before speaking right up here on the podium. And we invite members of the public to use Zoom to comment under items from the audience. Now, this particular one is for items that are not on the agenda online by logging into Zoom using the link provided. Are there any public comments received by email for items that are not on the agenda? No emails received. Are there any public comments received via Zoom for items that are not on the agenda? No.

No comments via Zoom.

No comments via Zoom. Looking out to the audience, by show of hands, would anyone like to speak on anything for items that are not on the agenda? We do not have any show of hands. The public comment period for items from the audience has now closed. Any comments that are received after the close of the public comment period will not be included in the record. All right, moving on to public hearing, item 6A. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and upon its conclusion adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council conduct a public hearing and upon its conclusion take the following actions. One, adopt a resolution certifying an environmental impact report and adopting a mitigation monitoring and reporting program, MMRP, Finding a fact and a statement of overriding considerations for the housing element implementation project, including rezoning, specific plan amendment, and general plan amendment, the project. Two, adopt a resolution approving a general plan amendment TO UPDATE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR HOUSING ELEMENT OPPORTUNITY SITES AND UPDATE THE LAND USE, SAFETY, CIRCULATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENTS, APPLICATION NUMBER GPA 24-002. AND THREE, WAIVE THE FIRST READING BY SUBSTITUTION OF THE TITLE AND INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE HOUSING ELEMENT OPPORTUNITY SITES AND AMENDING THE HOUSING ELEMENT OPPORTUNITY SITES WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL AREAS specific plan I-205 corridor specific plan and Tracy Hill specific plan to be consistent with the general plan land use and designations and the applicable zoning regulations application number R24-003 SPA26-0003. Staff report. May I have the presentation please?

Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Kenny Lippage, Community and Economic Development. So tonight's item before you focuses on the recommendation to City Council for implementing the city's adopted housing element through what you described as a series of rezones, general plan amendments, specific plan amendments, and certifying an associated EIR. These actions are necessary to maintain housing element compliance and ensure the city has sufficient residential capacity to meet its regional housing needs allocation, also known as RENA. I'll begin with a brief overview of the project and why these actions are required. First, I'm going to start off with our four primary actions tonight, first being the certifying of the environmental impact report for the housing element implementation and rezone project. Second, the rezone of the housing element opportunity sites to high-density residential and mixed use. These zones will provide the residential capacity assumed in the housing element. And then also third general plan amendment, that's to update the land use destinations to match the proposed zoning with residential high and commercial. And then also we're going to be updating several general elements within the general plan, which include land use, safety, circulation, and creating of a new environmental justice element. And lastly, we're going to be ensuring that applicable specific plans do not conflict with housing element implementation by amending the industrial area specific plan, I-205 quarter specific plan, and Tracy Hills specific plan to make sure that those are not conflicting with the housing element implementation. So before discussing the proposed changes, it's helpful to review how we got to this point. So to summarize, in July of 2025, the City Council adopted the 2023-2031 housing element. In August 2025, the California Department of Housing and Community Development, also known as HCD, issued a tentative compliance letter IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ONE OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT'S KEY COMMITMENTS WAS THE COMPLETION OF THIS REZONE PROGRAM FOR THE IDENTIFIED OPPORTUNITY SITES. THE HOUSING ELEMENT ASSUMES THESE SITES WILL PROVIDE SUFFICIENT CAPACITY TO ACCOMMODATE THE CITY'S OBLIGATION. TONIGHT THIS MATTERS BECAUSE YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL FOR THE COMPLETION OF THESE REZONES IS THE ONE FINAL IMPLEMENTATION STEP, ONE OF THE FINAL IMPLEMENTATION STEPS NEEDED BEFORE HCD CAN CONTERMINE THE HOUSING the housing element is in substantial compliance with state law. Next we are going over the rezones. So the project proposes rezoning of 188 parcels, the majority of which were identified in the adopted housing element inventory. It's important to clarify that this action and the rezones to high-density residential and mixed-use MU1, these actions do not approve any housing projects. It simply establishes zoning that allows future residential development consistent with the housing element assumptions. The next maps show where these opportunity sites are located throughout the city. These maps illustrate the distribution of parcels as we previously discussed with the rezones. Opportunity sites are seen as dispersed throughout the community rather than in one concentrated area. This is seen in the grids on the screen, both grid one, two, three, and four. Many of these sites are currently vacant, underutilized, or suitable for redevelopment. TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY BETWEEN CITY PLANNING DOCUMENTS, CORRESPONDING GENERAL PLANS ARE ALSO PROPOSED. FOR THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AMENDMENTS, THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS ALIGN WITH LAND USE DESIGNATIONS WITH THE PROPOSED REZONINGS, IN THIS CASE RESIDENTIAL HIGH AND COMMERCIAL. SO RESIDENTIAL HIGH AND COMMERCIAL DESIGNATIONS CORRESPOND TO THE PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE MIXED USE ZONING. We wanted to make sure that this was the consistency between the general plan and zoning is required under the California planning law. These changes ensure all planning documents are aligned. And in addition to the land use consistency updates, we have several general plan elements that are also being amended. So just to talk about each one briefly. So the land use element is going to be updated to reflect housing element implementation in the proposed site rezonings. The circulation element is being updated to reflect Senate Bill 743. CEQA transportation analysis now focuses on vehicle miles traveled, or VMT, rather than roadway level service. And it also updates, incorporates a citywide VMT analysis framework for future project review. For the safety element, it updates, the update addresses evolving state requirements relating to flood, wildfire, emergency evacuation and climate resilience. And lastly, for the environmental justice element, this is a new element that's required under SB 1000, and it focuses on equitable access to public services, environmental health, and reducing disproportionate impacts in disadvantaged communities. The project also included amendments to several specific plans that we'll talk about. These amendments ensure that the specific plans do not inadvertently prevent housing element implementation. So some of these opportunity sites are located within the adopted specific plan areas. And these certain specific plan provisions may conflict with the residential assumptions used in the housing element. So the amendments are supposed to clarify that where conflicts do exist, the general plan zoning regulation and municipal code will govern. This matters because without these amendments, existing specific plan standards could reduce the housing capacity relied upon in the housing element. Next, we'll discuss the environmental review that went in for completing for this project. So CEQA, what is environmental impact report? So CEQA requires evaluation of environmental impacts associated with implementing the project. So some clarifications, an EIR is an informational document. It does not advocate for or against a project. Its purpose is to disclose impacts, identify mitigation, and inform decision makers. The IRR evaluates the potential environmental impacts, includes mitigation measures where feasible, and provides opportunity for agency and public participation. The graphic to the left shows like a high-level pathway to certification hearing and documents the review periods at each step. The environmental review process has occurred over approximately two years, and we'll get into that in our review timeline on the next slide. The city followed all required CEQA procedures. This included the notice of preparation issued in June of 2024, the public scoping meeting that was held in July of 2024, the draft environmental impact report that was released in January of 2026. AND THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD THAT WAS EXTENDED THROUGH MARCH 2026 AND THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT THAT WAS REPRAYERED IN MAY OF 2026. AND THEN ALSO OBVIOUSLY TONIGHT WE HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING FOR JUNE 10TH. In addition, for topics that are studied in the draft, the 2020 draft environmental impact report for this project, those include air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utility and service systems, and cumulative impacts. These technical studies support the conclusion. These technical studies supporting these conclusions are included in the EIR and its appendices. So the following analysis and mitigation. Following this analysis and mitigation, one impact remains significant and unavoidable, and that is transportation is identified as the project's only significant and unavoidable impact. So the important point is that even with all feasible mitigation measures incorporated, the project's transportation impacts under CEQA cannot be reduced below the significant threshold. So when we talk about findings of fact and the statement of overriding consideration, this is required when approving a project with unavoidable impacts. It acknowledges the impact and it confirms all feasible mitigation has been adopted. And it also determines that the project benefits outweigh the remaining impacts. So the primary benefit is the implementation of the city's adopted housing element and the maintenance of the compliance with the state's housing law while providing capacity for future housing needs. And then just to talk about the final EIR. So the final EIR includes draft EIR, public comments, response to comments, corrections and clarifications, and then that final mitigation monitoring and report program that is referred to as the MMRP. Last but not certainly least, staff recommends that Planning Commission recommend the City Council take the following actions. Recommendation, the first recommendation being certifying the EIR, adopting the mitigation monitoring report, reporting and mitigation monitoring and reporting program, MMRP, adopting findings and statements of overriding consideration. The recommendation to approve the general plan amendments. Recommendation 3, introduce the ordinance approving the rezones and specific plan amendments for City Council to take action on later on. And that concludes the presentation. Staff is available as well as our CEQA consultant if you have any questions and are available to answer any questions regarding the project.

Thank you. Thank you Mr. Lipich, appreciate it. Prior to going to public comments, are there any, excuse me, any clarifying questions from the Commission?

I just have one. So the transportation is seen as a problem. When something like that is brought up, where they know it's going to be an issue, is there something that addresses that? Or is that just, it's the kind of thing of doing business?

Yeah, so this EIR was not like a project level environmental impact report. The distinction is that it's a program EIR. And when we talk about what the EI are covered and what we're talking, and the rezones. I think that the, I'm losing my train of thought over here. It's okay.

So, yeah, so just to kind of add on to what Kenny is beginning to describe would be that, and our SQL consultant can add further if needed if you really want to delve into it. But at a high level, just so you understand, when we say there's significant unavoidable impacts related to transportation, we're not talking about the typical traffic-related impacts that you might be imagining. Just so you're aware, over the course of the last few years, there's been a big shift in how CEQA evaluates traffic impacts. And now there's been a shift away from what originally was always level of service or LOS. And that's the kind of traffic that you experience on the street as a driver of a vehicle. What the shift now is to is vehicle miles traveled. It relates to the land uses throughout the city and the traffic patterns of people, whether it's to... shopping, to home, to work, all those different destinations that people need to travel to, there's an assessment done on what's the average typical vehicle miles traveled that are going to be generated by a particular project. And so there's thresholds established now that determine what makes it significant. And the big shift, just so you're aware, is it's more about the environment, impacts on the environment, rather than inconveniences as someone trying to drive to work in the morning.

Okay. Thank you. Mr. Chavez? Commissioner Albaugh.

Yes, I have the question. So as city staff mentioned that there are different agenda items or the descriptions around the different platforms. So what kind of edits were made and how many versions are there different?

So Commissioner Atwal, I can try to explain. So under the Brown Act, we're required to notice the meeting at least 72 hours in advance. Staff noticed I think we were at about 96 hours in advance of the meeting because we published last Thursday. So it may be even more than 96. Forgive me, I went to law school, not math school. Prior to 72 hours in advance of the meeting, The right agenda was published on the city's website on the planning page. All the agenda that was published on the planning page more than 72 hours in advance of the meeting is the correct version of the agenda. The other versions of the agenda were updated to reflect the correct agenda that was published on the planning page. One version had all the correct attachments. The incorrect agenda, it referenced the city of Long Beach. Obviously, the city of Tracy is not the city of Long Beach. They had languages on there that were not required to publish under pursuant to translate into pursuant to SB 707. The other one had some, the first version that went out had some attachments that had blank pages. When we went to put it into our new agenda software, we ended up with blank pages and things kind of kicked over in the wrong direction. area because we have to be also compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act and publish everything in size 12 font. In doing that, we ended up with some blank pages. Again, everything that's been out on the public, that's available to the public more than 72 hours in advance of the agenda has been updated and corrected. We're only asking to approve the item as amended out of an abundance of caution to make sure that it covers any confusion and it is the right agenda packet, which we've also complied with and put in the back of the room here tonight.

So just to clarify, so only at the website this glitch happened. Other than that, all other avenues had the correct agenda item.

I believe the correct agenda was also at the wherever else we're putting agendas. I know we're required to, you know, post and have available. But yes, I mean, that's the only one. But again, that was also corrected more than 72 hours in advance of the meeting. And the correct one was posted more than 72 hours in advance of the meeting.

Okay. Thank you very much.

I just have one question. What actually triggered this particular agenda item? Is it the housing element?

Yes. So as part the housing element was adopted July 1, 2025, and part of the housing element was that we had that there was going to be a rezone program. So tonight before you as part of those rezones, it's to implement what we already went through City Council adoption, the housing element. Now we're just implementing what we previously said in our housing element that we were going to do. And so the action before tonight is to help bring us into conformance with what we already saw go before City Council in July.

So this particular housing element goes through 2031. So is it a safe assumption that this will come again sometime close to that?

Something similar?

Yeah. Yes, that's correct. All right. I don't think we have any other questions. I would like to now open up the public hearing. And once again, please sign in before speaking if you do decide to come up to the podium. First off, are there any public comments received by email for item 6A?

No emails received.

Are there any public comments received via Zoom for item 6A?

No comments via Zoom.

looking out in the audience by a show of hands would anyone like to comment on item 6a we have three show of hands feel free like I said come on up here write your name down and what's our time limit on the three five I think it's four four you'll have four minutes but once again just please sign your name and four minutes four minutes thank you there's someone's name and head of mine

Okay. My name is Fred Miller. This is more, I'm a commercial broker out of Modesto with REMAX Executive for 46 years. More of a clarification, my clients bought in excess of a $2 million commercial site on MacArthur. It's not on the list. I just want to be sure that we're not on the list for a zoning change. We did come to the city prior to our purchase during escrow, and we were INFORMED THE ZONING WAS CONSISTENT WITH THEIR USE, WHICH IS A GROCERY STORE, ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING. AND THAT'S OUR INTENT. WE MET WITH THE CITY. IT'S NOT ON THE LIST BY DESIGN. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IT WON'T BE ON ANY FUTURE LISTS. I CAN GIVE YOU THE APN NUMBER. ACTUALLY, WE HAVE TWO APN NUMBERS. WE'VE GOT TWO CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES TOTALING ABOUT THREE ACRES. McArthur and Diablo corner. And those APN numbers are 235, 140, 090, and 100. So it looks like we're consistent with our intended use. We just want to verify after a significant investment and plans that we can move forward with our commercial building. I'll put my address here as well.

Yes, just to respond to that comment. Yes, that's correct. So the site that's being referred to in this comment is a site that was part of our housing element opportunities.

Not to interrupt too much. Remember, this is public comment period, not a public question and answer or engaging with staff at this point. The chair can take note of those APNs. And then at the end of public comment, we can comment on whether or not they have been included or excluded.

They're not on the list, which is precisely what we hoped would be. So thank you.

Thank you. Yeah, that if you're still here at the end, I'll take those APN numbers and we'll work it out. Thank you.

How you doing? Greg Pernick, PNC Auto Wreckers. Our facility is in your zone one, I believe it is. We did this 25 years ago with the rezoning stuff. And I just want to get clarification. We've been there since, well, we've owned it since 1990. It's been there since 1947. And the last time we did this zoning, and I can only speak for the Byron and Berg area because that's where that whole zoning went. that we stay the same as what we are until the time we sell. And that's what I need clarification on.

Okay. And once again, after this, we'll get you the clarification for sure. Thank you.

Hello, my name is John Gallagher. I own a piece of property on the Byron area. And so I have some questions, being this is something that's imposed on us, not something we asked for. I have agriculture kind of set up over there. I've got horses and sometimes some cattle and pigs and just rotating stuff. But it's been a farm for ever. And so now you're changing it to high density residential, which seems like it's going to limit future opportunities for us. Will we still be able to put a single family home on there? I noticed there was a minimum. There's also a maximum of units, but there's also a minimum. So that seems like that would go ahead and take away some of our opportunities. If I wanted to build one house or maybe two, three units. It seems like I'd have to, at least from my reading of it, you'd have to put at least 20 units per acre. So that's a big change. And I don't see many apartments being built. So most of the development is Tracy Hills. So that's going to kind of limit our are opportunities with our properties. And I have one of the larger pieces. And I see this as lowering my property value because I have less opportunities. So every time I build something, I get a supplemental tax. Is this going to lower my taxes? Is this going to raise my taxes? That's a big question I have. How is this going to affect us in the future? I realize this is being imposed by the state, so there's really, you know, you guys don't have any kind of saying and it's got to be implemented or else penalties kick in. So those were my big questions. Do I have to have, if I develop anything, does it have to be at that 20 units an acre? Or can it be lower? Can I still build single-family houses? There's single-family houses going on the lot directly next to me. So in the future, I would have to put up apartments. So I think that's all I have. It's just questions. You know, I understand it. If it makes my property worth more, I'm all for it. But if it lowers my property value, I'm not. So...

Thank you for your time. All right. Thank you, Mr. Gallagher. And again, if there are any questions, we can get to them afterwards. Mr. Lubitsky, you can help with that as well. Okay. Just once again, are there any other show of hands, public comments? Doesn't appear to be. All right. So the public hearing for this item is now closed. Any comments that were received after the close of the public comment period will not be included in the record. We'll bring it back to commission for discussion and or entertain a motion. Commissioner Atwal?

Yes, Chair. Thank you. So the question for the staff. So the comments were valid from different stakeholders. So I just now want the staff to respond to each and every comment. What is the mechanism if somebody listening to this meeting or a remote, they have similar kinds of questions, how can they approach and what is the media for them to reach out and get those answers?

So for the questions that were asked by John in the Byron area road, I'm actually, for the point on the 20 units, I think Daniela, you were going to touch base on that? You want to?

Yeah. So just to interrupt, so I don't request to answer those comments. So I don't I don't request to get those answers of the specific comments in this meeting. What I'm trying to do is for those comments, as well as whoever is listening from the city, if they have similar questions, what is the route for them to get them answered?

They can contact anyone, myself as a project planner. They can reach me by email. They can come down to City Hall and talk with us. We're available for any questions. Typically through the process when someone wants to develop something on their property, they would come down to the city and ask us and figure out what the zoning is, what the development standards are, what they can do on their property. This would be the same process. So we're available. I myself as the project planner for this would be available for any kind of inquiries by in person, phone, and by email.

So one follow up question in case a resident emails you with those questions. So what is the timeline? Is there a certain timeline they have to be reverted back?

Yeah, our accountability is we try to get back to everyone within 24 hours. We don't like to leave things over a day period. So if that means just touching base with them, letting them know that we'll get back to them, that's our responsibility. lowest accountability is that we would at least let them know that we're going to reach out to them and give them a specified time period.

Thank you very much. Appreciate that.

All right, entertain a motion.

Chair, I move to recommend that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that City Council conduct a public hearing and upon its conclusion take the following actions. Adopt a resolution certifying an environmental impact report and adopting a mitigation monitoring and reporting program, MMRP, findings of fact, and a statement of overriding considerations for the housing element implementation project, including rezoning specific plan amendment and general plan amendment. The project... 2. Adopt a resolution approving a general plan amendment to update land use designations for housing element opportunity sites and update the land use, safety, circulation, and environmental justice elements. Application number GPA24-0002 and 3. waive the first reading by substitution of the title and introduce an ordinance rezoning the housing element opportunity sites and amending the housing element opportunity sites within the industrial areas specific plan, I-205 corridor specific plan, and Tracy Hill specific plan to be consistent with the general plan land use designations and the applicable zoning regulations. Application numbers R24-0003

spa26-0003 a second all right we have a motion it's been seconded can we get a roll call vote please commissioner atwell so first of all i want to thank the staff for the detailed presentation and answering all the questions and thanks to all the comments that were from the residents And whoever is listening, they all have the opportunity to get their questions answered from their representatives. So with that, a yes. Thank you.

Vice Chair Boakye-Boateng? Chair Penning?

Yes.

Commissioner Shrout?

Yes.

Commissioner Chavez?

Yes.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Moving on to Item 6B. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and upon its conclusion adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council conduct a public hearing and upon its conclusion take the following actions. Waive the first reading by substitution of the title and introduce an ordinance amending existing articles Article 2 definitions and Article 26 off-street parking requirements. of Chapter 10.08, Zoning Regulations of Title 10, Planning and Zoning of the Tracy Municipal Code and amending the Cords Ranch Specific Plan, the I-205 Corridor Specific Plan, and the Residential Area Specific Plan to add a minimum parking requirement for the shopping centers of one space per 350 square feet of gross floor area exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, also known as CEQA, pursuant to CEQA guidelines, section 15061B3. Staff report, please.

Thank you, and thank you for putting the PowerPoint up. My name is Brianna Alamia, and I'm with the Planning Division, CED Department. And tonight, I'm here to talk about the shopping center parking amendments. So staff is proposing amendments to two of our existing codes and three of our specific plans. We're proposing to add a new definition of shopping centers into Article 2 definitions and revising existing Article 26 off-street parking requirements. We're also proposing to revise the existing specific plans, the Cordis Ranch specific plan, the I-205 corridor specific plan, and the residential area specific plan. So staff is proposing an amendment to add a parking requirement of one parking space per 350 square feet of gross floor area. Currently in our code, it's required to have one parking space per 250 square feet. So this will be a less strict requirement for shopping centers specifically. We're proposing this in zones that allow commercial uses, areas within the Cordis Ranch specific plan, areas in the I-205 corridor specific plan, and areas in the residential area specific plan. So the reason we're proposing this tonight is for two reasons. One being to implement the sustainability action plan, Measure T2, which City Council adopted, which directed staff to reduce parking requirements in the city. and secondly to support the city council's 2025-2027 strategic priorities one of them being the local economy to enhance the city's reputation as business friendly So this is a new definition we're proposing for shopping centers. It will be a group of three or more consumer service and retail trade establishments, including any other commercial uses allowed in the zone on a single or contiguous parcels developed with shared parking and vehicle pedestrian access. These amendments are exempt from CEQA per Section 15061 . And staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that City Council take the following actions. Passing the ordinance amendments and the specific plan amendments. And that concludes the presentation. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Appreciate that. And once again, prior to going to the public, are there any clarifying questions from any of our commissioners up here? We have Commissioner Atwal.

So are these regulations, they are implemented on someone who has an existing infrastructure or they will be for the future?

Any future applications coming in. We don't require current existing uses to change to update to that. If we have a new application coming in or a new tenant coming in, then they would follow the new standards.

so just to follow up in case an existing tenant applies with respect to this law again will they be considered or no so i'll like help explain so um the the new regulation would apply to

all shopping centers. It would apply to existing shopping centers and future proposed shopping centers. So in an example of an existing shopping center, the way it would apply would be that if a new tenant is being proposed for the site, up until this point, what we would have to do is make a determination on whether there's sufficient parking at the shopping center to allow for the new use, because not all uses actually have the same parking requirement. Retail uses are at one per 250, one parking space required per every 250 square feet of gross floor area. Office, as well as also at the one per 250. Restaurants are parked at a higher parking requirement. I believe it's like one parking space per 40 square feet of dining area, which results in a much higher parking requirement. And so in scenarios like that, especially with a restaurant as an example, when a new restaurant's trying to move into a shopping center, we have to assess the entire parking area and make sure there's a sufficient number of spaces on the site. What this will do is now create a new definition for the shopping center, which will have a single parking requirement for the entire shopping center rather than us assessing each individual uses continuously. So it would just be parked at the requirement of one space for 350 square feet of gross floor area. And moving forward then, any of the uses permitted within the zone can come and go, and we don't have to worry about the parking. If they're permitted on the site, they'll come and go under the shopping center definition, make it a lot easier for businesses to understand what they're allowed to do, and also for staff and the public to understand the requirements. In the example of a future proposed brand new shopping center, it would be similar. It would just be, we'd be simply looking at the gross floor area of the entire shopping center and making sure that the parking area meets the one per 350 square foot requirement.

Thank you. So if a tenant gets changed into an existing infrastructure, the new rule will imply on those?

Yeah, the rules would become in place on all existing shopping centers. And so that's correct. Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

Yep.

All right. Thank you. There are no further clarifying questions. I would like to now open up the public hearing. And once again, please sign in if you do decide to come up here. Are there any public comments received by email for item 6B? No emails received. No emails. Are there any public comments received via Zoom for item 6B?

No comments via Zoom.

Looking at the audience, show of hands for item 6B. Doesn't appear to be. The public hearing for this item is now closed. Any comments that were received after the close of the public comment period will not be included in the record. We'll bring it back to commission for discussion and or entertain a motion.

I would like to suggest a motion to move to recommend that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that City Council conduct a public hearing and upon its conclusion take the following actions. Wave the first reading by substitution of the title and introduce an ordinance amending existing articles. Article 2 definitions and Article 26 off-street parking permits off Chapter 10.08, zoning regulations of Title 10, planning and zoning of the Tracy Municipal Code and amending the Cordes Ranch specific plan, the I-205 corridor specific plan, and the residential area specific plan. to add a minimum parking requirement for shopping centers of one space per 350 square feet of gross floor area exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15061 . I'll second.

We have a motion. It's been seconded. Roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Atwell?

Yes.

Commissioner Chavez?

Yes.

Commissioner Boachie-Boateng? Chair Penning.

Yes.

Commissioner Shrout.

Yes.

Thank you.

All right. Now we will move on to the regular agenda. It's that time of year. We need to, by motion, elect the new Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair for fiscal year 2026 to 2027. We'll bring it up to commission.

Chair Penning, I'd just like to note for the record, and Scott not to step on your toes, staff did reach out. We noticed that we knew ahead of time that Vice Chair Bois Chai Boateng was going to be absent from tonight's meeting. We did reach out to him to see if he would be willing to accept either the chair or vice chair position. He did confirm to us via email that he would be willing to accept either appointment tonight. Okay.

Thank you for that information. That being said, I would like to nominate myself for chair.

Sounds good to me.

Looking for a second? Second. All right. We have a motion for chair. We have a second. Can I get a roll call vote, please?

I'm sorry. That second was Shrout, correct? Correct. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Commissioner Atwell.

Yes.

Commissioner Chavez. Yes. Vice Chair Boiteng. Commissioner Shrout.

Yes.

And Chair Penning.

Yes. Moving on to Vice Chair, similar situation.

So I nominate myself as Vice Chair.

I would like to nominate Commissioner Shrout as Vice Chair.

I will second that.

Roll call vote.

Commissioner Atwal?

Yes.

Commissioner Shrout?

Yes.

Vice Chair Boachie-Boateng? Chair Penning?

Yes.

And Commissioner Chavez?

Yes.

Thank you, congratulations.

Thank you. There we go. Okay, once again, excuse me, I have a little allergies, I apologize. Once again, items from the audience. We invite members of the audience to use Zoom to comment under items from the audience. And once again, this is for items that are not on the agenda and online by logging into Zoom using the link provided. Are there any public comments via Zoom for items that are not on the agenda?

No comments via Zoom.

Are there any emails for items that are not on the agenda? No emails received. And once again, looking out in the audience, show of hands. No show of hands. The public comment period for items from the audience for items that are not on the agenda has now closed. Director's report. Thank you, Chair. There's no Director's report this evening.

Any final thoughts from the Commission? NEW SPEAKER P. WERE WE ABLE TO ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS WHEN I LEFT?

NEW SPEAKER P. YES, BUT WE WILL BE FOLLOWING UP WITH A PHONE CALL TO JOHN AND TO BRAIN. NEW SPEAKER P. OKAY.

PERFECT. THANKS. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO CHECK ON NEW SPEAKER P. YEAH, WE'LL GET WITH THAT AFTER YOU, FOR SURE. NEW SPEAKER P. THAT WAS IT.

NEW SPEAKER P. LOOKING FOR A MOTION.

One more thing before. Thank you for the nomination and the vice chair. That's unexpected, but thank you.

Congratulations. I'd like to make a motion to adjourn. I second that motion. We have a motion that's been seconded. Roll call, please.

Commissioner Atwell.

Congratulations to Chair and Vice Chair and a yes for the agenda item.

Commissioner Shrout.

Yes.

Vice Chair Boateng. Commissioner Chavez.

Yes.

Chair Penning.

Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Good night.

No way.

You're stuck with us.