audience relevant to this motion.

Good

Good evening. I will call to order the Elk Grove Planning Commission

Regulating of Thursday, January 16, 2025 at 6 p.m.

Let me start with the land acknowledgement.

We honor respect and acknowledge Elk Grove's first inhabitants,

the Plains Maywalk, who lived as sovereign caretakers of this land

and these waterways and Steinway memorial. We commemorate and advocate for

the descendants, the Wilton Rancheria tribe,

the only federally recognized tribe in Sacramento County,

who endured because of the bravery, the resiliency and determination

of their ancestors, tribal members and leaders.

At this point, we please silence your electronic devices,

cell phones, etc.

And I will ask the clerk to read our customary greeting.

The Elk Grove Planning Commission welcomes, appreciates,

and encourages participation in the meetings.

The commission reserves the right to reasonably limited

total time for public comment on any particular notice to

gen-diet of as at mating necessary.

If you wish to address the commission,

during the meeting, please complete a speaker card and

give it to the clerk prior to consideration of the agenda item.

With that, will the clerk please call the roll?

Planning commissioners, Oscar O'Conn,

Dr. Paul.

Present.

We're in the scene, present, Vice-Chair Wond from Andes.

Present.

And Chair Simonsinger.

Present.

I would now like to ask my chair,

Fernandez, to lead us in the pledge of allegiance.

And for her, 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.

At this time, would you please join me in a moment of silence?

Thank you.

Do I have a motion to approve the agenda?

It's so moved.

Seconded.

It's been moved and seconded.

All those in favour?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Getting none.

The agenda is approved as presented.

Members of the audience may comment on any item not on the agenda that is of interest

to the public and within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission.

The Planning Commission cannot take action on non-agentised items raised under

public comment until the matter has been specifically included on an agenda as an action item.

So at this point, I will open the general public comment opportunity.

And we do not appear to have anybody signed up for, to speak.

So I will close the public comment opportunity and move on to agenda item number four,

which is the consent calendar.

Do I have a motion to approve the consent calendar items, which include the regular meeting minutes of November 21st,

2024 and the regular meeting minutes on December 5, 2024?

Chair, I move to approve the minutes of November 21st, 2024 and December 5, 2024.

Second.

I second.

All those in favour?

Aye.

The motion carries unanimously.

Thank you.

With that, we will move to our public hearing items.

Will the clerk please call the first hearing item?

Item by point one is Verizon Walkpack.

Good evening, Chair Sinha, members of the Elk Grove City Planning Commission,

Antonio O'Blog here, Planning Manager.

Here to present to you tonight the Verizon Walkpack Wireless Facility.

This project is a conditional use permit request to construct a new 70-foot tall wireless telecommunications tower and associated equipment.

Associated equipment will be located in an approximately 1500 square foot least area.

We will be enclosed by a combination of an eight foot solid wall and eight foot vinyl coated chain link fence.

With this conditional use permit, the applicant is requesting an exception to the 50 foot height limit that applies to wireless telecommunications tower in the subject zone.

You can see the project location on the map before you.

This is located within the district 56 Park and Civic Centre complex.

The east area bounded by the red square next to the parking lot.

This east area is sandwiched in between an existing parking lot and the solar farm.

The border to the north is a Sacramento County water facility, so it's not a commercial or residential use adjacent to that.

The general plan designation for the site is Parks and Open Space.

And the subject parcel within district 56 has both Open Space and Parks and Recreation Zone.

As far as the coverage objective that Verizon is seeking to address, they're seeking to improve cellular coverage for Verizon customers within three quarters to a mile radius of the proposed tower site.

That is approximated by the area bounded by Elk Grove Boulevard, Big Horn Boulevard, Civic Centre Drive and Lots Parkway.

You can see the icon of the tower in the proposed location.

It's surrounded by an area of red, which denotes poor coverage areas.

There are the existing cellular towers. As we review cellular facilities, we have to go through a review to determine whether they can co-locate on existing facilities or not.

From this map, you can see the project site noted by Red Star in the right center of the graphic.

And as you can see by the yellow highlighted towers, there are no towers within a mile radius of the subject site and that coincides with the poor coverage within the service area.

As far as the tower plans themselves, the tower is proposed to be 70 feet in height.

The height limit for towers in this zone is 55 feet. They are proposing 16 antennas in four sectors.

As you see in the smaller graphic, there are also eight radio units that are associated with that telecommunications function of the facility.

The requested 70 foot height is for serves two functions. One, as noted, there are no locations within a mile of this proposed antenna.

So it does need to be at a higher height to extend coverage as much as possible across that poor cellular area.

And furthermore, the extended height does allow for future co-locations on this antenna.

You can see the photo simulations on the screen before you. The existing condition is on the left.

The proposed condition is on the right. You can see the tower sticking up behind that aforementioned Sacramento County water facility.

The applicant has accepted a condition that the tower and associated attached equipment be painted and non-reflective black.

As you can see in the foreground of this picture and some of the background, the overhead light standards and overhead utilities, polls within Laguna Ridge and in District 56 are painted black.

So this will further help that tower blend in with the existing infrastructure in the area.

If you recall the prior map, which is depicted here in the smaller graphic in the upper left, that's the existing coverage, the resulting coverage.

As you can see in the larger map does go quite a way to cover that red poor coverage area.

The existing poor coverage area is an area that for the past few years, we have gotten a lot of citizen complaints and concerns on the lack of cell coverage in this area.

And this tower along with a recently completed tower just to the west of Bruceville road will go a long way to alleviating that coverage gap and improving cell service within this area of the city.

And as far as environmental analysis, staff has determined that no further environmental review is required pursuant to state, sequel guidelines section 15 303.

This applies to new construction or conversion of small structures, including antennas such as the one proposed with this application this evening.

And this evening staff is recommending that the planning commission adopt a resolution finding the project exempt from California environmental quality act pursuant to section 1503 for new construction or conversion of small structures and approving the conditional use permit with the height exception for the Verizon wolf pack wireless facility based on the findings and subject to conditions of approval included in the draft resolution.

I'm happy to answer any questions. Should you have any and the applicant for the project is in attendance tonight also questions for staff.

I guess I'm not at this point. So what I will do at this point is I'll declare the public hearing open and invite the applicant to speak.

Good evening, good evening everyone. My name is Matthew Moore. I'm an authorized agent of Verizon wireless and the project applicant for our wolf pack project here tonight.

I don't have anything to add to staff staff's presentation. It's pretty straightforward project, but I'm very happy to answer any questions that I can for you.

Questions full.

I'm just a name.

An array of particular number of in tenor.

Not at all. The orientation or anything. Verizon just kind of chooses the names based on things that they see in the area. It's a random doesn't have anything to do with the site specifically.

I think it's a very good time in Verizon typically names their projects after nearby streets or monuments. There is a wolf pack lane that connects because the list of high school to pinkerton high school.

So that is where the wolf pack designation comes from.

Thank you for that in networking a wolf pack is a tightly bound cluster. But neither here nor there was just curious.

Thank you.

Just a quick question here. If all approvals go according to schedule, when does construction on the tower starts and when does when you expected to be operational.

So if we're approved here this evening, we'll start preparing our materials for building permits in middle.

I don't know exactly what that timeline will look like with the city. But I would say we'd be into building within 45 to 60 days.

So that's approved. We'll look to begin construction very shortly after that 30 to 60 days and get this thing online.

And once it is constructed, I mean getting it online should not take very long.

No, they just got to once everything's there. They just have to turn it on.

Thank you.

Any other questions at this point?

If not, thank you. If there's anything else comes up, we will ask you to address it.

Thank you very much.

All of my questions were answered in the staff briefing today. So I don't have anything further.

This one.

Anybody else? If not.

Chair Senga, I move to adopt a resolution finding the project exempt from SIKWA pursuant to state SIKWA guidelines section 15303 and improving the conditional use permit for the Verizon Wolfpack wireless facility project PLNG 24-035.

Based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval included in the draft resolution.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor, Sikna, if I'm saying aye.

Aye.

Just hearing none, the motion is approved. Thank you.

And with that, we will move to the next agenda item.

Item 5.2 is done. It's a general plan amendment to rezone and a map.

Good evening, Chair Senga, planning commissioners, Sarah Kirch-Gessner, project planner for the Dutish General Plan Amendment rezone and map project.

The project consists of a general plan amendment, both text and map, a rezone and a tentative subdivision map and subdivision design review.

The project also includes a tree permit for the removal of three trees of local importance and a germination of consistency with the general plan for the abandonment of existing right of way.

The project site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of West Stockton Boulevard and Dunnish Road. The site is currently undeveloped.

It is bounded by West Stockton Boulevard to the east and Dunnish Road to the north surrounding existing uses include single family residences to the north across Dunnish Road.

The LaGuna Gateway shopping center to the south and east across West Stockton Boulevard state route 99 further to the east as well as large lot single family residents in the Elk Grove Laguna Creek to the west.

The applicant is requesting a general plan amendment to modify the land use designation of the site from regional commercial to medium density residential and parks and open space.

The proposal is to rezone the site consistent with that general plan land use designation from shopping center to RD 10, which is residential 8.1 to dwelling units per acre and open space.

The project is consistent with general plan policies specifically general plan policy LU 2-3 and LU 2-4 as it proposes medium density residential development within an infill area identified in a general plan and it is compatible with the surrounding area and increases housing diversity.

The proposal includes a general plan amendment text to modify table 8-4 related to noise, which will be discussed later in this presentation.

The Rose Tendidus subdivision map would subdivide the project site into 111 single family residential lots and to landscape lots, including a pedestrian peseo.

The proposed density is 9 dwelling units per acre and the map is consistent with the general plan Elk Grove municipal code and design guidelines with the proposed general plan amendment and reason.

Access to the project site is provided from two minor residential streets off of Dunnish Road. The south side of Dunnish Road is proposed to be constructed with a separated sidewalk with the proposed residential lots fronting on to Dunnish Road.

Pedestrian connectivity is provided to Dunnish Road at the end of court three through the landscape corridor as well as a peseo, which is located at the southeastern corner of the site.

Extending from the sidewalk from the project site to Dunnish Road providing connectivity.

The project site also includes an off site improvement extending sidewalk from the project site along the south side of Dunnish Road to the west, which would provide connectivity to Gutridge Park to the northwest.

The project site is adjacent to existing transportation and non transportation noise sources. This includes the existing home depot loading area as well as highway 99.

The project site is a noise study was completed for the project to verify compliance with general plan policies and standards and noise monitoring data indicated that there was considerable variability in the measured hourly average of noise, which is defined as L.E.Q.

During the survey period hourly L.E.Q. is ranged from 46 decibels to a high of 66 decibels along the southwestern boundary adjacent to home depot.

This general plan table eight dash four, which identifies the maximum noise level for new projects affected by non transportation noise sources such as home depot loading area.

The daytime standard is 55 decibels and the nighttime standard is 45 decibels. Footnote D, which is shown in bold here as currently written gives the city flexibility for imposing noise standards based upon the determination of existing ambient noise levels.

Additionally, the applicant is proposing to amend that footnote D to allow for additional flexibility and applying increased noise levels to new developments, including projects like this to account for the potential occasional exceedance of the city's noise standard threshold due to existing conditions near a project site.

This would be flexible for the city and beneficial for in fill development projects in the future.

The projects.

On site conditions and considerations include the infrequency location and timing of the exceedances construction measures proposed as part of the project as well as disclosure statements recorded against the property according to the noise consultant, the absolute worst case conditions should not be used for the

evaluation of compliance with the local jurisdictions noise standards, rather compliance with noise standards is based on the typical noise generation.

The noise consultant conservatively utilized the hourly average of 60 decibels as the sound level maximum for the evaluation of this home home depot loading area and proposed a construction of a 12 foot sound wall along the affected portion of the project boundary, which would reduce noise levels by 50%.

The city's noise standards could occasionally be exceeded within the backyard spaces of the nearest residences, however, these exceedances would be minor and frequent and would occur during periods when backyard usage is typically at a minimum.

The mitigation measures include sound walls from six to 12 feet, sound rated windows, disclosure statements recorded against the properties for light lots nine through 17 and air conditioning to be provided so that windows can be kept closed with implementation of these mitigation measures described above the project is consistent with the revised general plan noise standard as proposed.

The project includes a tree permit for the removal of three value, the three value, the recommended for removal for public safety reasons as the trees were identified with structural health problems pursuant to the project's armist report.

The project also includes the abandonment of eight feet of right away on the south side of Dunnish Road that is no longer needed.

Dunnish Road was previously dedicated for a 50 foot right away and the current standard is for a 42 foot of right away and the proposed abandon is consistent with the general plan policy, M O B 7 dash three as well as the city's improvement standards.

The initial study mitigated negative declaration was prepared for the project which determined that the project would not result in significant environmental impacts that could not be mitigated mitigation measures were incorporated into the project to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

The city received four comments during the public review period and one letter after the close of the period the comment letters do not alter the conclusions of the mitigated negative declaration.

Staff recommends that the planning commission adopt a resolution recommending that the city council adopt the initial study mitigated negative declaration in an MMRP prepared for the project and approve the general plan amendment text and map rezone tentative subdivision map subdivision design review.

The plan is to design review tree permit and determination of consistency with the general plan for the project.

Thank you. This concludes my presentation. The applicant team is also available to answer any questions as well as rod stints in the environmental consultant here.

I have one quick question Sarah. When we're talking about the exceedances and we're using the term and frequent is there any sense of what that means.

It's identified in the staff report I off the top of my head I recall that it's.

I'm not sure what it means to be a

person in the report.

I think that when we're talking Tapioca.

Thank you.

94% of the time it would be less than 60 decibels.

Okay.

So it's trying to think in my mind whether we're talking a week once a week or once every other week or so.

Out of the noise metadre measuring monitoring.

There were 87 hours of monitoring and the 66 decibels only occurred one hour.

Okay.

the noise consultant is also here tonight to answer questions specifically about the noise if needed.

Any other questions at this point?

Okay. Thank you, Senator. What we'll do is we'll have Alan White the applicant to speak at this point.

And then we may have other questions.

Thank you.

Good evening, Chair Sinha and commissioners. Appreciate the opportunity to present our project to you this evening.

Sarah, thank you very much for the great staff report.

Staff has worked long and hard on this project along with our team.

We want to thank staff for getting us to this point.

We're very excited to be here.

As mentioned, our team is here to answer any questions that the commission might have.

So I'll keep it short and sweet and leave it at that.

But again, we're here to answer any questions that may come up during the hearing process.

Okay.

With that, I will open the public comment opportunity.

I believe we have one speaker signed up.

As I invite the speaker to come forward, please just a reminder that to in keeping with our policies and the past each speaker has allowed three minutes.

This is my first time so I apologize if I'm a little impartial.

We live right in the park meadow or I think it's park park meadow development.

And I just wanted to say that it's a great neighborhood.

We don't have any sort of male break ins because there's really only two ways in and two ways out.

It tends to be more of a more kind of more of a senior citizen type neighborhood.

We've had some issues with refraff in the park.

And I just disagree only because it's a really small plot of land.

In fact, there's a original homeowner that's that backs up to the back of it.

And I just don't understand why we have to develop every orifice in every little kind of corner of Elk Grove.

The neighborhood is really nice. It's stayed nice. We haven't had any issues and I'm very concerned about that many tenants causing some sort of refraff or more issues in the park.

Now, is it the only thing I don't understand is it residential homes? Are we talking like apartments?

We will get the answer to that.

I'm concerned about the impact because it's a very small area.

And I just don't know why we have to develop every little corner of Elk Grove.

Part of our parks and our regular nature landscape.

We're losing it every year.

So it's such a small spot. I really feel like there shouldn't be any development there.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If I may ask staff the question at this point.

These are our D 10. I mean, these are residential homes.

Yes, these are single family.

Single family residential homes, not an apartment.

And these are these will be purchased by individuals as their as their residents.

That's correct.

The sort of he to put it that way, but sort of like starter homes because our detents tend to be on smaller acreages.

Follow.

Am I right there?

Yes, it's small lot.

Single family residential development.

So this should be, I mean, people who are like the rest of us.

I mean, okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

As there are no other publics.

Is there any other public speakers?

Sandy, anybody else?

I'm the besides.

I don't have anybody else.

Okay.

With that, I will close the public comment on period and declare the public hearing closed.

And at this point, let me see what questions the commission has for either staff or for the developer.

All of my questions were answered in the staff briefing.

Thank you.

No questions.

I'm pretty familiar with the area.

My daughter lives in that same area.

And I had the opportunity to speak to the to the applicant and staff answer my question.

So I'm good with it.

Thank you.

What's your opponent?

Sorry, Sarah.

I meant to ask this when you were finishing your presentation.

In the general plan amendment, it mentions the approving authority.

The approving authority to be the planning commission only or could the development director be the approving authority for the noise level increase or decrease?

It would be either the zoning administrator, planning commission, city council or development,

student community, development director, as appropriate, depending on who the approving authority is.

On the application for the development.

Okay.

Thank you.

And the abandonment of the eight feet.

That is where the trees that are scheduled for removal or proposed to be removed in our incorporated.

Is that correct?

So they're in that eight feet.

Abandonment zone.

I'm just pulling up the exhibit for you.

I believe two of the trees are within that area and one of the trees is within the middle of the side.

That one is.

And however, it is specifically due to the health of the trees as recommended by the arborists.

Thank you.

So, I mean, to me, the important question was I mean that they says, Rd 10 housing, which I know we don't have a lot of what we need additional housing.

I'm not going to have a lot of that.

Besides Rd 5.

So I am all for supportive because it is important to get housing at the entry level for folks.

So I don't have any further questions.

Any other thoughts by the commissioners?

If not, do I have a motion?

Commissioner Singer, I moved that the planning commission adopt a resolution recommending that the city council adopt the initial study slash mitigated negative.

Declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program and approve the general plan amendment, rezone, tentative subdivision map, subdivision design review and tree permit for the dis.

DUNCES GPA rezone and map project PLN G 22-047 based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval included in the proposed resolution.

Do I have a second?

A second.

The motion has been moved and seconded. All those in favour?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Hearing none, the motion is approved as presented. Thank you.

Okay, but we will move on to a regular agenda items of which they are none. So with that, we move to the director's report.

Thank you.

Good evening commissioners and happy new year. Happy to see you all again.

So looking through the list that's before you on the day is this evening, we have no items for your February six meetings. So that meeting will be cancelled.

Normally at that meeting, you would undertake the reorganization of the commission and identify a new chair and vice chair.

And then we have a meeting that will be in the next meeting.

We will be meeting in February.

So we have a meeting that will be in the next meeting.

We will be meeting that will automatically fall to your second meeting or normally the second meeting in February.

So we have a couple of matters for you next month.

Other matters to be aware of around the city.

Recently the zoning administrator approved condition amendments for flatland brewing.

The second meeting that will be in the next meeting is the new commission amendment that you saw previously, which was approved back in December.

We have another cell tower for you.

Tenatively scheduled for the 20th February.

Another location.

And then zoning administrator item.

Tendatively from March for a new photovoltaic array at booster car wash.

There are other matters that are coming up that will have for you in the future.

We are the item you saw previously with the floodplain changes, both municipal code and the general plan that will go next week to the council.

And then we anticipate or planning on for February 12 to take back the further discussion of the amendments for the old town SPA for bars, breweries and wineries.

Bill, questions if you have questions for Jordan.

No.

Okay.

With that, thank you for your report.

And we will move on to planning commission matters.

Commissioner.

We received an email tonight about the new roles that are going to be integrated on the EV stations.

And I would like to thank staff for working so hard on it so quickly.

It's something that we've been, as you know, we've been trying to get the applicants to be a little bit more responsible on.

The station is working.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

And you got, if I may proceed, you got an email earlier from Chelsea about informal procedural guidelines.

As you know, we all come from different backgrounds.

Some of us like me come from academia where we are sort of fixated on Robert's rules.

Others come from industry, other governmental agencies, et cetera.

So she has put together informal procedural guidelines for the planning commission, which have been circulated to you all.

She did tell me there will be a quiz because it's a relatively short document.

So you do read it and know it because I think this will be important in how sort of a basic motion is made.

How they are mended because we all do things sort of slightly differently based on how we grew up and what we faced earlier in the past.

So this will help everybody be on the same wavelength and it will help new commissioners that come alongside.

Do want to thank Chelsea and Christopher and everybody else who's a part of this.

Thank you for that.

It will make everybody's life much easier, hopefully.

But the quiz will be there.

It is a multiple choice question.

She told me what the next meeting be prepared.

I did have a question on that.

I was assigned originally by George.

Isn't that was circulated before?

Did we see that before?

I know.

I know it was signed by George and I just remember getting something.

I also, in addition to my.

Advice, I also provided a copy of the formal resolution that was approved by the planning commission that sets the formal rules of procedure.

So I just, there's no major changes from what we've gotten before.

Absolutely no changes.

I didn't see any.

So I just want to make sure.

Okay.

Thank you.

Maybe this was just me who's fixated on Robert's rules and I know the city does not follow Robert's rules, but I do.

Or at least I have in the past and I'm changing my.

No, but I think it's important because you come from different backgrounds and some of us have not had any exposure to basic parliamentary procedure of any kind.

So these guidelines do help.

So at least they make sure that we're all on the same wavelength.

So that is that any other planning commission matters.

Signed those two.

If not, they're being norther agenda items.

The meeting is adjourned at 635.

So you all can take.

One more next meeting often.

And then we really.

All right.

All right.

All right.

Okay.

You're ready for your meeting.