Thank you.

Thank you.

I will now call to order the Elk Grove Planning Commission regular meeting this Juneteenth, Thursday, June 19th of 2025 at 6 p.m.

I'll begin with our land acknowledgement.

We honor, respect, and acknowledge Elk Grove's first inhabitants, the Plains Miwok, who lived as sovereign caretakers of this land and these waterways since time immemorial.

We commemorate and advocate for their descendants, the Wilton Rancheria Tribe, the only federally recognized tribe in Sacramento County who endure because of the bravery, resiliency, and determination of their ancestors, tribal members, and leaders.

Please take this opportunity to silence your electronic devices.

Thank you.

And Sandy, would you like to read the customary greeting?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Sandy, will you please call the roll?

Commissioners Sandra Poole?

Present.

Virinder Singh?

Present.

Suman Singh?

Present.

Vice Chair Oscar O'Connor. Present. And Chair Juan Fernandez. Present. I would like to invite retired Planning Commissioner George Murphy to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you. May you please join us in a moment of silence.

Thank you. I'll now ask for an approval of the agenda.

Mr. Chair, I move the agenda be approved as presented.

Second.

Moved and seconded. All in favor? Aye.

Any opposed? Pass.

We now come to the opportunity for public comment. 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 any non-agendized items raised under public comment until the matter has been specifically included on an agenda as an action item.

I will now open the public comment opportunity and ask Sandy, do we have any public comment?

We do. Mr. Murphy.

Mr. Murphy?

It's out of sorts on the calendar. I'm sorry.

No worries.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening. Good to see you guys and gals again.

Thank you.

I recently gave each of you a copy of a synopsis, a compilation of vision and policy statements from the – taken from the general plan related to the rural area.

I've given to you again in case you misplaced them.

The – that does not include any of the Title 23 requirements that have been adopted for the rural area, the land use element.

These policies are related to an upcoming controversial project, summer villas, which is now in the planning process and will be coming to you sometime within the rest of this year or early next year.

But approval of this project will have an effect on these policies and also have an effect, potential effect on, and unknown effects on people's lives and or their livelihoods.

However, I'm not here to talk about that project tonight.

I'm here to remind you of the more than 20 years the city has supported the rural area.

During my 17 years on the Planning Commission, I've sat with many former and two current council members and many Planning Commissioners in work sessions where we formed policies, we vetted them, we argued them, and we presented them to the city.

They were finally adopted by the Planning Commission and brought into the general plan by the city council.

But these policies, they're not just words.

They're an attempt to provide a picture of the rural area.

It's a portrayal using planning language.

But you actually have to live it to appreciate what these words mean to people in the rural area.

Citizens working cooperatively with staff spent many hours in workshops vetting the language and finally getting it to the Planning Commission City Council for approval.

You have been or will be hearing from the two organizations advocating for the rural area.

Each of you have expressed to me, either before or when your appointments, your support of the rural area.

Supporting the rural area means many things, and that support begins by honoring the boundaries of the rural area as established in the general plan.

As you research and read through the vision and policy statements I provided, let your hearts, your conscience, your very words to me, and the words enshrined in the general plan guide you in your decision making.

Demonstrate your support, not just by your words, but by your deeds.

Demonstrate your support, so by your words,klink orاثing in the general plan.

Demonstrate your support, not just by your어�zu would you find me, part of the givon nation and the image was endued in the many Diosdjis.

Del Rouvet, both of all the benefits for all of the families, but by your words, in the words, at our Gracias와 함께's law firm.

Demonstrate your support, go out to your qualifications and have the qualification of the祥ial Oswald, which is tout he!

Always good to see you, George.

Are there any other speakers for the public comment?

All right, I will close the general public comment, and I will move to the consent calendar items.

item 4.1 regular meeting minutes of may the 15th 2025 do i have a motion to approve

chair fernandez i move approval of the minutes of may 15th as presented

second moved and seconded by my vice chair all in favor aye any opposed hearing none

we will approve the minutes of the may 15th meeting and move to our public hearing items

sandy do you want to call item 5.1 item 5.1 is around verizon halfway wireless facility

project number plng 24052

good evening antonio good evening good evening chair fernandez members of the elch grove city

planning commission antonio blog here present to you item 5.1 which is the verizon halfway

wireless facility i am presenting tonight on behalf of uh kieran killingsworth who was the

project planner for this project

thank you

uh this project consists of a conditional use permit to install a new wireless communication

facility on top of an existing 110 foot tall pg e transmission tower to accomplish that

uh the applicant will have to install a 12 foot extension to that tower in order to install nine

panel antennas and six remote radio units on that tower uh to operate that equipment they will have

to install a 300 square foot lease area on a concrete pad uh within an eight foot tall fence um for all their

ground mounted equipment to run the the panel antennas as far as the project's location uh the project is located at

at 8692 beta road um this is a single 16 acre acre parcel uh there is an existing single family

residence on the property along with um multiple accessory structures uh there is a pg e transmission tower on the property

um since it is a 16 acre property that transmission tower is about 500 feet west of beta road uh the zoning for the project site is agricultural residential ar5

um one acre or one unit for every five acres and it is in the rural residential general plan area

as far as the site plan as i mentioned the the power pylon that the antennas will be going on is deep within the site

to provide access to that they will be uh doing an all-weather gravel driveway

um you can see that marked in gray um leading from bader road um to both their equipment lease area and to that power tower

um this is a closer detail of um both the the tower you can see at the top of the screen

uh the antennas will be on top of that uh and the um ground lease area well that where they'll have all their equipment

uh as i mentioned uh a 12 foot extension will be placed on top of the 110 foot um transmission tower that

allow the the mounting of those cellular antennas um

this type of installation of antennas on top of transmission towers isn't unusual um throughout the

city um even in the rural area there are uh power transmission towers that do have cellular antennas

if you look at any of these power transmission corridors throughout the city it won't be uh unusual to find

similar installations throughout elk grove

the applicant has provided a photo simulation of how this these entered antennas will will look again this

is from beta road which is about 500 feet away from the uh installation uh antenna installation site

the two maps before you show the um proposed coverage uh that these panel antennas would provide

as you see on the uh left the existing coverage there is a large gap in coverage which um

um is typical for some of the carriers in that rural area um and the proposed coverage with this facility

you can see on the right um it does fill in a large gap of that cellular service coverage

as you may have seen during the review of this project and even leading up to planning commission we

did have concerns related to um various birds within the vicinity of the project uh during project we

review we actually um did coordinate with the city's biologist uh a field survey was conducted by ascent

environmental in february 2025 um ascent environmental's biologist did not find any current or old evidence

of nesting on the tower uh furthermore a wetland delineation report um was submitted by tri-leaf corporation

um may of this year um and they did not find any wetlands on the site um in coordinating with uh staff's

biologist and the applicant uh the applicant is agreeing uh to construct during a period which would

be the non-breeding period for um any birds so just add a abundance of caution to avoid any uh of those nesting

birds uh the project um if approved it will be constructed during the months from september

through december uh to avoid any um nesting birds

as far as the environmental analysis for this project it is exempt from sequa personal to state

sequa guidelines section 15303 which relates to the new construction or conversion of small structures

this allows exemption for the construction and location of limited numbers of new small facilities

uh including water mains sewage facilities electrical gas and other utility extensions

uh this wireless telecommunications facility is considered a utility extension therefore it's exempt

under the california sequa guidelines

with that staff does recommend that the planning commission adopt a resolution finding the project

exempt from sequa personal to state sequa guidelines section 15303

and approve the conditional use permit based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval

included in the draft resolution that concludes my presentation i'd be happy to answer any questions

should you have any thank you antonio um i do have a couple of questions but i'll defer to my colleagues if

they have well first as a comment thank you for the construction the fact that the construction will be done in the non-breeding period so that is nice to know that we had an excellent meeting with staff but i have a couple of

simple questions here how do you put these antennas on top of a high voltage transmission tower we do have the applicant here that can explain that process but from what i understand a lot of that has to do

with helicopters and actually dropping those structures on top of the tower um of course they do have workers that

get dropped on the tower in parallel but a lot of the work does happen involving helicopters and dropping the equipment on the tower

and a follow-up question other than the pad there is going to be no disturbance of trees or vegetation or anything there will be no tree removal and as i mentioned the the driveway the access driveway will be a

all-weather gravel driveway versus like a concrete or asphalt um so it would be more typical of the type of driveway you'd find in the rural area

so therefore there should be limited if any uh interference with uh habitats for correct there will be no

true removals with this project thank you just real quickly antonio can you go back to the picture of the actual um tower sure

yeah so one thing that stood out to me and i know maybe this has just been here a long time but lately the towers

that we've been approving are um kind of camouflaged to look like trees or so that it blends in more with

the landscaping is there is this was this before that time or because looking at this picture it really

does stand out so that so this is i don't have the existing condition in here but the existing condition

shows everything except these three little dots on top of the tower so that power pylon is actually already

there right right so um and it's actually you know staff's preference that they one of our preferences

for siting of cell towers is that they go on existing structures like this instead of a new tower where

they do do new towers we do have to camouflage it as you said like like a tree but if it's an existing

structure especially and a structure that has an industrial look like a power pylon um then they're simply

just adding an extension to the top there's really no way to camouflage it except to make it look like

additional equipment on on that power pile right and i understand that this is just adding on to

something that was there but i was just curious um okay thank you so yeah and as i mentioned this is

the rural area and coverage you do need taller towers in the rural area to provide that coverage

so even if they did a what we call a monopine a tree pole it would have had to been maybe not

this height but a taller tower to provide that same coverage thank you

so my two questions um there are lights for aviation avoidance on the towers correct on the pie on the

existing pylons i don't i i can't um confirm that okay um are so presumably any lights would now be

uh 20 feet higher up um but there wouldn't be any if i could these towers don't require faa

illumination oh okay they don't all right so so there would be no lights added to no in order for them

if for a tower like this to require illumination it would need to be in the federal air regulation part 77

zone which is the direct approach path of an airport this is not that otherwise they have to be of a higher

value like the communication towers that are down off of um like in thornton but down the road off i5

those are of a height that they would then need to be illuminated these are not right right so they

don't need uh illumination for vfr um navigation all right so that was the first question so no new

lights would be added to this um and then the second question is we've had a uh tradition of of enabling a

second provider or another provider to be able to use a cell service or a cell tower when we build one

is there room for accommodation for a second provider or is this uh verizon exclusive in my experience

when an extension is placed on top of a power pylon it's it really can only accommodate one carrier

i haven't seen a power pylon extension um i'm not saying there there aren't any but most of the ones we

do have in a city in the city are single carrier um i know there's a similar installation like this

probably about 2 000 feet away i think i mentioned it but it's i believe it's t-mobile so um that signal

between t-mobile and the proposed verizon they wouldn't be handing off between these two um

so yeah my experience for these type of applications it's kind of a single carrier

to you okay okay all right okay those were my questions thank you antonio um if there are no

further questions for staff i will declare the public comments open and ask sandy if there are any

speakers it looks like george is i'm sorry oh thank you um i will invite the applicant sorry

it is part of public comment but the applicant first my apologies um good evening good evening

everyone it's good to see you all again my name is matthew moore i'm an authorized agent of verizon

wireless and the project applicant for our co-location project this evening um i don't have anything

additional to add to antonio's presentation he covered pretty much everything um but just to add some more

detail um there is no tower lighting on this one as stated it's not in an air in an airport approach

zone and anything that's under 200 feet tall doesn't trigger an faa review um as antonio mentioned there

are very similar installations to this and this exact same power transmission line there's one adjacent

that doesn't have any but there's one right on the corner of bader and sheldon where there's antennas

right on top of it and then the other one further down and that line has them as well

and in terms of ground disturbance we're as antonio said we're not removing any trees any shrubbery

there may be some you know grass along the parcel boundary there but nothing significant nothing

that would impact um you know any species or anything like that on the parcel

other than that i don't have anything to add but i'm happy to answer any questions you might have

no questions thank you matthew one quick question i mean just more for my uh education than anything

else so antonio saying you drop these things down by helicopter or you bring them down it's situation

specific they can do it that way um but if if they can they would prefer to you know kind of get a crane in

there and kind of drop it on top that way but the situation specific i have seen them use the

helicopters before um and in terms of multiple carriers on the pg e tower the main issue is

structural loading you can only add so much equipment to the tower and so it's not impossible but in any

another carry would be severely limited in what they could try to add to the tower right and presumably

there are more of these transmission pylons that they could potentially co-locate on if if necessary

for for their service yep any other questions okay thank you thank you okay and now i will ask if there

are any public speakers registered on this item none no okay so hearing none i will close the public comment

and we will move to deliberation do we have any questions or comments amongst ourselves or do we

have a motion okay well then i will move to adopt a resolution finding the project exempt from sequa

pursuant to state sequa guidelines section 15303 and approving the conditional use permit for the verizon

halfway wireless facility project plng 24-052 based on the findings and subject of to the conditions

of approval contained in the draft resolution do we have a second second seconded by dr sumon all in favor

all right

all right

moving on to item 5.2 sandy do you want to tell us what this item is please 5.2 is the village pad

5 amendment bank of america it's project plng 25005

good evening mr chair vice chair and members of the planning commission joseph dagerman associate

planner and community development presenting item 5.2 this evening

this project consists of a conditional use permit amendment and design review amendment to the

previously approved village shopping center project which was plng 22066 for the construction of a one

story bank building totaling approximately 5 900 square feet with three atm drive-thru lanes the project

will shall comply with the city's climate action plan for non-residential development

the project site is located within the village shopping center that's on the south side of elk

growth boulevard between weimar drive and bighorn boulevard the shopping center um which i'll get

into the project history in a moment it consists of 10 parcels of approximately 15 acres in total

this project that we're focusing on this evening is on pad number five which is approximately 1.02 acres in size

zoning wise it is zoned shopping center and within the laguna ridge specific plan and with a general plan

designation of regional commercial so going back to the project history um on october 19 2023 the planning

commission approved the village shopping center the shopping center consisted of a major design review

for the major buildings which is majors one and two shops buildings which is shops a and b and pad

buildings which consist of six pad buildings for a total of approximately one uh 110,650 square feet

as also a conditional use permit was approved to allow for up to two drive through uh drive-throughs

located within 300 feet of residential development pad five was one of those um pads that were approved

as part of the cup um it was approved for a 5 500 square foot restaurant building with drive-through service

and then other entitlements included a tentative parcel map to subdivide the parcel into 10 acre uh 10 parcels

as well as a tree removal permit for the removal of 16 trees before you is the approved site plan for the rich for the village

shopping center um circled or outlined in red is the location of pad number five

um so tonight one of the entitlement requests is for a conditional use permit as i mentioned a conditional use permit was approved for pad five with a single

drive-through lane for a future restaurant uh with window and menu board they were within 300 feet of a residential zoning district

the amend this amendment proposes three drive-through atm service lanes

adverse impacts such as noise and excessive lighting are not anticipated as part of the project

adequate access queuing and stacking capabilities and are in excess of code requirements and since the project

is located more than 100 feet from the nearest residential zone no restrictions are applied on hours of operations

so before you is a is the approved site plan for pad number five it was approved for the 5 500 square foot restaurant building

with the drive-through wrapping around the building and then to the right is the

is the amended site plan for pad five for bank of america i'll get into more detail in the next slide for the site plan

um so the so the main the access to the to the shopping center and to the to um pad number five will be from the

shopping center shopping center entrances on elk grove boulevard uh bighorn boulevard and weimark drive the

to get to the to get to the atms uh you'll utilize one of the drive-through aisles in the shopping center

and then you'll select one of the drive-through uh the atm drive-through lanes uh once customers finish

their transactions they'll exit in a clockwise direction exit back into the shopping center in terms of the

landscaping and site plan uh the site plan and landscaping are consistent with the development

standards in our zoning code as well as the elk road design guidelines and laguna ridge design guidelines

here is the architectural for uh for the bank of america building so the uh village the village

shopping center was approved with a modern ranch architectural style in keeping with the laguna ridge

specific plan design guideline requirements this project includes a a variety of materials including

board and batten siding vertical panel siding uh standing roof metal uh sorry standard seam metal roofing

stone veneer stucco plaster glass storefronts and awnings colors will include a creamy white beige brown gray and

black uh the project provides articulation through the use of projections parapets and varying roof slopes

as well as uh colors and materials so this project as you see is would be consistent with the architectural

approved in the shopping center so to conclude the 2023 approvals anticipated up to two drive-throughs

the restaurant use that was approved no longer meets the needs of the developers operational needs

this amendment would not exceed the number of drive-throughs originally anticipated as part of the project

the architecture remains consistent with the overall shopping center and the site plan and landscape plan

are consistent with the zoning and design guidelines in terms of sequa no further environmental review is

required pursuant to section 15162 and 15183 so tonight uh staff is recommending approval of these of this

amendment for pad number five within the village shopping center uh subject to the findings and

conditions of the draft resolution this concludes my presentation staff and the applicant are available

answering your questions thank you awesome thank you joseph do we have any questions for joseph of the project

i do have one you mentioned in the original plan there were 16 trees to be removed yes that was part of the

uh the project entitlement the and are the 16 trees still to be removed with the bank of america

re uh design or no the um so the so the as you see the shopping center is under construction um those 16 trees

that were approved would uh would have already been mitigated as uh prior to the uh the earth work taking

place ah okay got it got it thank you for the clarification i don't have any other questions thank you

okay i will now invite i will now open the public comments and invite the applicant to speak if the

applicant is present

i couldn't see you behind the display good evening hello good evening thank you for this opportunity to

meet with you tonight good to see you all uh and just one point i'd like to just clarify for the bank of

america drive-through they have uh prepared the documents here for up to three lanes uh for the

atm drive-through initially going to just utilize two of those lanes the third lane of that package of

that cluster would be for future use so just the two atm drive-throughs at this time

that's all i had just for clarification any other questions be happy to answer them for you

thank you thank you thank you and now i will ask if there are any registered speakers for public comment

attendee none okay so i will now close the public comment with no registered speakers and the applicant

having the opportunity to speak and we will move to deliberation do my colleagues have any questions or

items of questions were answered during staff meeting i want to thank staff for that session

then i will ask for a motion mr chair i move that we adopt a resolution finding that no further

environmental review is required under state seql guidelines sections 15 162 and 15 183

and approving the conditional use permit amendment and design review amendment for village pad 5 amendment

bank of america project plng 25-005 based on the findings and subject to the conditions of

approval contained in the draft resolution mr chair i second

i have a motion and a second all in favor aye any opposed motion carries all right item 5.3

sandy do you want to announce this for us item 5.3 is village major uniform sign program it's project plng 24055

good evening commissioner sarah kirsch gessner planner the project is a major uniform sign program for the

village shopping center that you previously heard for the amendment the item 5.2 the major uniform sign

program does include deviations for the number of freestanding signs as well as the maximum area for wall

mounted signs and blade signs for one of the major tenants

the project site is located on the south side of elk road boulevard between weimark drive and bighorn

boulevard uniform sign programs are regulated within title 23 of the zoning code

they do provide for common sign regulations for multi-tenant projects we have both minor and major

sign programs and major sign programs allow for deviations from standard signage requirements

for this project the village major uniform sign program it would establish the sign standards and

guidelines for the village shopping center it would provide a uniform unified visual statement for all

of the signage within the shopping center as i mentioned it does include deviations to add one

additional freestanding sign as well as increased wall mounted signage for one tenant and it complies with

the requirements for major uniform sign programs here are the proposed locations for the type one sign the

freestanding sign locations they are proposing corner monumentation on both the corners of weimark

drive and elk road boulevard as well as bighorn boulevard and elk road boulevard one 20 foot tall

sign that is shown as sign a as well as d and b are monument signs at the driveways here is the 20 foot tall sign tenant sign it includes materials and finishes consistent and compatible with the approved village shopping center

village shopping center and the image to the right is the corner monumentation which states the village

for type 2 signage this is the wall mounted signage and it is proposed for the major buildings the shops

buildings as well as the pat buildings here are some examples of the signage within the center

and um there is a deviation for the wall mounted signage for the major tenant whole foods which would allow for an increase from 200 square feet for that tenant to 300 square feet for that tenant

the project is categorically exempt from sequa under state sequa guidelines section 15311 for accessory structures

and staff does recommend that the planning commission find the project exempt from sequa and approve the major uniform sign program

i'm available for questions as well as the rest of the staff and the applicant

thank you any questions for sarah

oh i had a great meeting any questions i had were answered thank you

you yeah i too got my questions answered but i did think of one as you were showing the monuments there

were two types the type one is a multi-tenant and that is on the there's one yes and then the type two

is the individual tenant that would be on the the building where the tenant was located did did i get that

correct so type one signage in the sign guidelines are the monument signs the freestanding signs so there are

a few different versions of the type one signs this example here that shows the 20 foot tall

multi-tenant sign and then there's corner monumentation and other driveway monumentation type

two signages are the the building mounted signages those also include the wall mounted sign as well as other

bracket and blade signs okay but type two are designated for an individual tenant whereas a type one is a multi-tenant

potentially yes even though there are some monument signs it could be for a single tenant in the type

one category that's correct yes okay got it and this would be to allow a increase in the whole foods

square footage signage and a the location of the type one multi-tenant sign is that correct so it would

increase the number of freestanding signs they are permitted under the sign standards one per driveway

so for this project there are six driveways they are requesting seven signs so an increase of one

additional freestanding sign as well as an addition to the that one tenant to increase from 200 square

feet to 300 square feet and then the bracket sign i believe it would increase by one foot i think it's

allowed four feet four square feet and they're asking for five square feet got it so they're asking for a

monument at each driveway location and each of the monument signs would be multi-tenant like this

example so there this 20 foot tall sign is sign a you can see here there's one of those the rest of

the signage is lower it's the the corner monumentation it's a low sign that wraps around the corners as well as

smaller signs at the driveways thank you thank you for the clarification i i i i i wanted to make sure it

it wasn't each of that tower multi-tenant type a at each of the locations and you clarified that for

me so thank you okay any additional questions all right so now we will move to public comment and

invite the applicant if the applicant is here to oh oh right it's the same facility yes same project

richard tierlink again with pappas investments and thank you sarah for that great information

uh the the quarter uh monument signs as identified as c on this plan will simply just read the village

shopping center so there are no individual tenant sign on those particular locations locations b on

either side of to the east and the west uh will also have a much smaller monument sign of not to exceed

nine feet and that will have up to i believe it's six individual placards for individual tenants or

retailers there whole foods lease uh had requested us to put them on each of those monument signs in

addition to the large pylon sign uh which is identified as a

any other questions on that thank you no questions thank you all right thank you to the applicant for

speaking are there any speakers registered in public comment okay then i will declare the public

comment closed for 5.2 the village i'm sorry village major uniform sign program and ask if there are

is a motion or discussion

chair i have moved to adopt a resolution finding the project exempt from sequel pursuant to state sequel

guidelines section 15311 and approving the village major uniform sign program

project plng 24-055 based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval contained in the draft

resolution moved and i will second all in favor all right any opposed

motion carries thank you

good evening again antonio item 5.4 sandy do you want to call the item five five point four is

treasure home specific plan amendment and substantial conformance it's project plng 25009

good evening again chair fernandez members of elk grove city planning commission uh antonio blog here to

present to you item 5.4 the treasure homes amendment project and along with substantial conformance

with this project the applicant is requesting a specific plan amendment to amend the specific

laguna ridge specific plan land use designations for the area within the approved treasure homes 2 subdivision

um and also a determination of substantial conformance for modifications to the approved tentative

subdivision map um important to note with these amendments there will be no change in the overall

number of residential lots within that treasure homes 2 subdivision

the project location is a 56.1 acre site it's on the north side of bill b road uh just east of

bruceville road um it's one of the last uh largely undeveloped portions um within the laguna ridge

specific plan it is mostly undeveloped however there is a detention basin at the southeast corner of the

site um and also a sewer lift station just adjacent to the site's southern boundary um currently the general

plan designation is low density residential along with parks and open space uh the laguna ridge specific

plan does have a few designations um related to the specific plan um ranging from within the residential

range it includes rd4 rd5 and rd7 along with parks and drainage um however um back in 2023 um a portion of

the site was rezoned um out of r4 and into the rd7 um so the current zoning is rd5 rd7 parks and recreation

and open space um and i'll kind of go through these designations as we go through the the presentation

tonight uh the focus of these amendments tonight will do a center on village three of the treasure

homes 2 subdivision you could see that highlighted on the screen before you this is the eastern portion

of that subdivision map as far as the specific plan amendment you can see the existing land use on the

left and the proposed land use on the right um the existing land use on the left has a large yellow area

that is rd4 um as i mentioned earlier there is as far as the zoning there is no longer an rd4 zoning

designation on the site um as the property was rezoned when the property was rezoned it was staff's oversight and

not um doing the parallel um specific plan amendment that went along with that so we're reconciling that

now um and moving the laguna raid specific plan from the rd4 that's shown on the left to the rd7 um

along with that and i'll get into this discussion when we talk about the map amendments but there is

kind of a shift uh at the south east corner between the parks and detention uses um based on updated

engineering um and analysis of the drainage requirements um it was found that the um stormwater

detention requirements um for this uh drainage shed had to be increased to accommodate the amount

of drainage that would flow through that basin um so the the actual amendments to the map are probably more

clearer in this exhibit um what you see is overall the the circulation pattern remains the same uh there is a

deletion of a cul-de-sac um and then a deletion of a cluster of lots however as i mentioned

um what happens because of the rezone um to allow smaller lots uh the number of lots uh within this

village of the subdivision stays the same at 61 however they are smaller um and as i mentioned um the

difference between um the lots in the southeast corner uh the um uh detention gets larger going from

approximately 3.7 acres in the current condition to the uh approximately 10.8 acres in the proposed condition

um i should note however that uh the previous park size of about 6.8 acres that was designed as what we

call a joint use detention basin where during the dry months it would be it could hold things like a soccer

field softball field but it is depressed so that during the the wet season um it could

retain water um since the time that map has been approved we kind of no longer do that type of

joint use detention basin so it's it's not a whole rebuil of that 6.8 acres because that was kind of a

joint use detention basin um in the original design the current design does retain 3.88 3.1 acres of parkland

based on staff's analysis um within laguna ridge and based on re-zones and other dedications for

parkland uh the parkland within laguna ridge um is still consistent with the laguna ridge specific

plan guidelines uh those guidelines do call for a higher ratio of parks within laguna ridge i believe

it's uh seven acres per thousand versus the city wide uh five acres per thousand and that parkland

ratio will still hold even with these requested amendments

um these map amendments do um require um substantial conformance be found this has been reviewed by our

city's engineers who are in agreement that the proposed modifications to the map are in substantial

conformance with the original approval again um the adjustments mainly have to do with the increased

detention basin size um the residential lots um get a little smaller however the overall lot number

stays the same at 61. as far as the environmental analysis staff determined no further environmental

review is necessary pursuant to sequel guidelines section 15162 and 15183 uh city council certified and eir for

the laguna ridge specific plan in 2004 this project remains consistent with that specific plan

in february 2019 and the eir was prepared and certified by the city council as part of the elk grove general

plan update um this project is consistent with those assumptions made uh during that eir update for along with the

general plan uh furthermore the adjusted treasure homes to tentative map will not result in any changes to

the total number of lots within the subdivision um and again the adjustments uh to accommodate the drainage uh

will not um will ensure that um drainage is being held throughout uh the lunar specific plan and um

uh properties will not be affected by stormwater uh that does conclude my uh presentation um but

uh ultimately staff does recommend that the planning commission adopt a resolution recommending that the

city council find no further environmental review is required pursuant to state sequel guidelines section

15162 and 15183 and approve the specific plan amendment and substantial conformance for the project based on

findings included in the draft resolution uh i'd be happy to answer any questions should there be any

all right thank you antonio are there any questions about the proposal no my questions were answered during the

briefing thank you very good mine were as well i asked antonio to show me a picture of a

of a retention basin and it appears like open space so um after all that and i spent uh a lot of time

with antonio going over this and the map he probably had enough of me but that's okay but that

raises the question on this one we are allowing this retention detention basin to be a part of the parks

in future this will not be permitted the original proposal had it as a joint detention park slash detention

basin the current um proposal separates those as we do today so there will be a park at grade level uh

uh plus or minus three acre park right and then a typical detention basin um that will it will it might

have a trail surrounding it but the actual detention basin will be um will be closed off for for access thank

you thank you okay no other questions thank you antonio i will open the public comment and ask

if the applicant is here to speak good evening

hello my name is julianne martin i'm with richland communities i actually just wanted to come up here

and say hello and thank you for your time we did also want to thank staff for all of their hard work

working hand in hand for a couple years now on the regional drainage facility as well as just helping

make our map find substantial conformance as well on the original approved map so just wanted to

introduce myself say hello and thank you and staff for all of their hard work and efforts on this

thank you thank you miss martin

i will continue with the public comment and ask if there are any speakers registered there are no speakers

there are no speakers then i will close the public comment and we will move to deliberation

chair fernandez i will make a motion or action i move that the planning commission adopt a resolution

recommending that the city council find no further environmental review is required pursuant to state

secret guidelines section 15162 and 15183 of and approve the specific plan amendment and the

substantial conformance for the treasure home specific plan amendment and substantial conformance project

based on the findings included in the draft resolution i have a motion a second and a second

perfect solution in the draft resolution and all in favor aye aye all right any opposed

5-0

okay and moving on to item 5.5 sandy our last public hearing 5.5 is elliot springs village three project

number PLNG 24051.

Antonio needs it.

Back again.

The chair there.

Good evening, Chair Fernandez, members of the Planning Commission.

Here, Antonio Blog here to present item 5.5, which is the Elliott Springs Village 3 project.

This project does have a lot of moving parts, so hopefully I'll be able to explain those

to you.

I know we had briefings, but it would benefit both the commission and the public for a refresher

on what the request is tonight.

The project does consist of an addendum to the previously certified Environmental Impact

Report, special planning area amendment to update the land use acreage totals for the

overall SPA and to accommodate changes within Elliott Springs Village 3, a development agreement

amendment to modify the terms and conditions of the Elliott Springs Development Agreement,

tentative subdivision map conditions of approval amendment, and also a new tentative subdivision

map for Elliott Springs Village 3, including subdivision design review.

The project is located at the corner of Bond Road and Waterman Road.

It is designated in the general plan as with rural residential, low density residential, and

community commercial.

The rural residential portion of the site is the large open space that's at the northern

end of the project area.

This does have a special zoning designation as it is in the Silverado Village SPA, which

is actually, we've now referred to it as the Elliott Village SPA.

The overall area is 230 acres.

As I mentioned, there's a large 74-acre open space pre-preserve at the north end of the community.

Construction of the community began in 2021 and continues today.

A number of single-family homes, a park, and drainage facilities have since been completed.

And on the map, on the screen before you, I've highlighted Village 3, as I'll be talking

about the various villages today within Elliott Springs.

Village 3 is where a lot of changes are happening.

And the rest of the residential subdivision, generally for today's presentation, will just generally

refer to both Villages 1 and 2.

As far as the SPA amendments themselves, there are some minor updates to acreage totals based

on the maps that have been recorded for Villages 1 and 2 of the tentative map.

The village core area will be configured and reduced from approximately 5.1 acres to 3 acres.

There will be a reconfiguration of the village core.

That reconfiguration would result in 21 additional patio home lots.

And that's a difference of 15 lots than what was anticipated in the original SPA.

There are some updates to the standards for pedestrian corridors within that village 3, that corridor,

or that village core.

We also clarify the setback standards within village 3.

And we also provide parking standards for the village 3 core, part of that reconfigured area.

So I'll kind of highlight some of these items.

In the SPA, just for clarification on the village 3 patio homes, village 3 within Elliott Springs is an age-restricted,

gated community.

Those patio homes are on smaller lots.

You can see the lot diagram on the screen to the right.

Those lots will be about 80 by 50, so it is a smaller lot.

What they do within this age-restricted community is they provide pedestrian paseos and corridors kind of at the rear of the lots

and throughout that village providing access both to neighbors' properties,

but ultimately to kind of their community core where the recreation and cub house opportunities will be.

So within the special planning area, the modifications to the village 3 core are shown on the screen.

The existing plan is shown on the left.

You can see a clubhouse facility and then a lodge facility.

The clubhouse is kind of the community recreation area,

and the lodge facility was intended to accommodate assisted independent living facilities similar to an eschaton,

if you're familiar with those facilities.

However, this was kind of approved under a different developer.

The current developer, that layout didn't necessarily coincide with their operational goals.

What they've done is kind of just conceptually laid out that village core,

mainly to focus on the community amenities portion of that with a community commercial building that will include the clubhouse

and an outdoor recreation area along with the parking that would accommodate those areas.

The actual change in the layout is probably more apparent when we look at the change to the tentative map.

I've highlighted that core area in yellow.

I've also put in some of their pedestrian corridors that lead to that in green.

But in the existing condition, you can see displayed two separate lots,

one for the clubhouse and one for that assisted living lodge.

That community core area has been consolidated into one lot in the proposed condition.

That will house the clubhouse and other community amenities.

And then the remainder of that core area has been remapped to provide additional patio homes.

As I mentioned, 21 more additional patio homes will be included in that village core.

So aside from amending the special planning area,

because we are amending the maps, conditions of approval, and that special planning area,

we also have to amend the development agreement.

The amendments to the development agreement will update the description of the project

based on the current development request.

Those items that I'm going through tonight in the current request

will be folded into the development agreement as part of the project description.

The amendments to the development agreement would also extend the term of the development agreement.

The overall term will last through 2035.

However, the tentative map for villages one and two,

those villages that are currently under residential construction,

that map will expire in November 2031.

But village three, which the APKIN is currently seeking approval for,

tentative map within the DA, we propose that that will expire in 2035.

So that gives it a similar 10-year life as the village one and two tentative map.

We are also adding a section which automatically terminates that development agreement

when residential lots are completed and conveyed to individual owners,

and that's a typical term within our development agreements that we currently do.

So we're adding that to this development agreement.

So we do have some mapping items that go along with this project tonight.

We do have a tentative subdivision map conditions amendment,

and this applies to villages one and two,

those villages that are already under construction.

The request is to remove conditions 13 and 40 related to Bond Road storm drainage

and modify condition 20 related to fencing along lot W.

For that Bond Road storm drainage condition, there are two conditions, 13 and 40,

and there are associated mitigation measures in the environmental document

that require this project to contribute financially to a Bond Road pipe upsizing project.

When this project was originally being reviewed,

there was a concurrent storm drain master plan update that was conducted by City Public Works Department.

At the time, that storm drain master plan update did conclude that the storm water drainage in Bond Road

would have to be upsized to accommodate the storm drainage from the drainage shed

that's highlighted in green on the map on your screen.

Because Elliott Springs, I've highlighted that in yellow,

because Elliott Springs did contribute to that drainage basin,

there were conditions and mitigations that required Elliott Springs

to provide financial contribution to that upsizing.

However, over the past year, year and a half,

our Public Works Department went through a modeling exercise

to look at that drainage shed again based on updated data,

including data from inclusive of the Elliott Springs development

and new storm water data.

So they calibrated that storm water model to see what the most current data,

how that would affect the Bond Road drainage system.

And what they found was that the recalibrated storm water model did demonstrate that the performance criteria for the storm water system

did meet the city's criteria for the 10-year and 100-year rainfall events.

That analysis was presented to the City Council earlier this year.

And based on that analysis, that Bond Road pipe upsizing project was taken out of the Capital Improvement Program.

Because it was taken out of the Capital Improvement Program,

the applicant is requesting to remove those conditions and mitigations related to that,

the financial contribution towards that system.

And regarding Lot W, after construction of a portion of Village 1,

it was discovered that Lot W, I've kind of highlighted that in the map of the aerial above,

Lot W is a pedestrian corridor.

The original condition required that to be built with block,

solid block walls on either side of that corridor.

However, in plan check oversight, it was constructed with a wooden fence.

As planning and development services, community development staff did coordinate with parks,

as we were both equally responsible for enforcing that condition,

we did coordinate with parks and looking at that condition

and any concerns with the wooden fence condition that currently exists.

Based on our review, we had no concerns with that staying wood.

We do have other pedestrian corridors within the city that do have wood fences.

Furthermore, the developer has coordinated with those adjacent property owners

to ensure that they will be responsible for the fence maintenance

and that they do not encroach into that pedestrian corridor

with their own landscaping or improvements.

The applicant is requesting a new Village 3 subdivision map.

This would supersede the Village 3 map that was approved with the original project.

Again, the main changes occur in the Village Core area to accommodate that clubhouse,

and this new Village 3 subdivision map does result in 21 additional age-restricted patio home lots.

I do want to bring to the Commission's attention that staff is requesting to add an additional condition

to Village 3.

This would be a request that the applicant, prior to the issuance of the final map for Village 3,

that the applicant complete a lot line adjustment along the eastern boundary.

That would shift the project's boundary with the adjacent parcel number,

with the adjacent parcel, which is the Chevron storage facility.

Requirement to adjust that lot line by approximately one foot.

And just want to note that this is kind of a belt and suspenders condition.

The applicant is nearly complete with that lot line adjustment.

This condition just ensures that it will be complete by the time they request that final map for Village 3.

So staff doesn't have any concerns that that will get done.

We just want to make sure, belts and suspenders, that it's covered with this condition tonight.

As far as environmental review, staff did coordinate with Ascent Environmental

to prepare an addendum to the original EIR, which was prepared for the Silverado Village project.

That addendum determined that the proposed project would not result in any conditions requiring

for preparation of a subsequent EIR.

Furthermore, no revisions to the mitigation measures are required.

Therefore, the addendum is the appropriate environmental document for this project.

Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution

recommending that the City Council adopt the addendum

to the Silverado Village Special Planning Area Environmental Impact Report

and also approve amendments to the Elliott Springs SPA,

amendments to the development agreement,

amendments to the Villages 1 and 2 tentative subdivision map,

and approval of the new Elliott Springs Village 3 tentative map,

based on findings contained in the draft resolution,

and also including the additional condition for the Village 3 tentative map,

as discussed on one of the previous slides.

So that concludes my presentation.

I'd be happy to answer any questions,

and I know the applicant is here to speak also.

Thank you.

Great. Thank you, Antonio.

I'll ask if my colleagues have any questions before I pose mine.

Did I hear you say correctly that the 74 acres to the north is a preserve

and will remain a preserve?

That it's a preserve.

It's already been dedicated to the city as a preserve

with a long-range management plan,

so it will remain open space in perpetuity.

Excellent.

I was not aware of that.

I was curious if there would be development on that,

whatever the north side of the inner entry road is.

So that will 74 acres forever.

The only thing on the other side of that entry road,

there is a park.

I forget how many acres,

but the park is kind of a carve-out of that open space.

The remainder of that 74 acres is open space in perpetuity.

It will remain open.

Fantastic.

And then did I hear you also say Village 3 will be a gated community?

It will be a gated, age-restricted community.

Okay.

All right.

Very good.

And presumably the gate will be an interior gate

that residents would turn off of Bond into the neighborhood?

Yes, the gate would be within.

It wouldn't be off of Bond.

The residents within Villages 1 and 2 can still access those lots.

The gate would be off of that main,

I think it's Elliott Springs Drive.

Okay.

All right.

Very good.

Okay.

Those are my questions.

Thank you, Antonio.

I will declare the public comment open

and invite the applicant to speak.

Good evening.

Good evening.

My name is Marty Eckert.

I'm with Elliott Holmes,

and I am joined by the project engineer,

Philip Roberts, with Wood Rogers.

I first want to thank all of you

for hearing this item tonight and having me here.

I'd also like to thank staff for getting us to this key milestone

in the entitlement process.

Antonio's presentation was very thorough,

so I won't add anything to kind of the meat of what you're considering tonight.

I'll simply say that we're really pleased with how the Elliott Springs project is coming together,

and we're very excited to begin with Unit 3.

Following on the completion of this entitlement process,

we already have in the design review application for the clubhouse

and the other HOA amenities that will form the shared amenities within Unit 3,

and we're looking forward to hopefully breaking ground either late this year or next.

So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions of the applicant?

None?

I had an opportunity to meet with the applicant earlier,

so I just want to thank him for answering all of my questions at that time.

Very good.

Cool that you already have the design review ready for submission.

Very excited to move forward.

Yeah.

Fantastic.

All right.

With no other questions, I'll thank you.

And Sandy, are there any public comment registrants?

We have no speakers.

No speakers.

All right.

I will close the public comment and move to deliberation.

Any questions or items to discuss?

I just want to say thank you to staff for a very thorough report

and for the briefing earlier this week.

Appreciate it.

That is what I was going to add.

I'd like to thank Antonio.

We actually sat one-on-one to go over 5.5

because this was a complicated project, to put it gently.

And that at the end of which, when I walked into that room,

I was, to put it simply, quite confused.

When I walked out, I actually knew what we were talking about.

So thank you, Antonio.

Yeah, there were a lot of moving parts to the amendments.

Okay.

Mr. Chair, I move that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution

recommending that the City Council adopt the addendum

to the Silverado Village Planning Area Environmental Impact Report

and approve amendments to the Elliott Springs Special Planning Area,

amendments to the Elliott Springs Development Agreement,

amendments to the Elliott Springs Villages 1 and 2,

tentative subdivision map conditions of approval,

and approval of the Elliott Springs Village 3 tentative map

based upon the findings contained in the draft resolution.

Commissioner Poole, does that include the additional condition

with respect to the boundary line adjustment for Village 3?

It absolutely does.

Thank you.

I have a motion.

Second.

I have a second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

And now we will move to our regular agenda items.

There is none.

So, Mr. CJ, may we have your director's report?

Thank you, and good evening, commissioners.

So a couple items.

First off, we have nothing planned for you for July 3rd.

So with the Chair's concurrence, we plan on canceling that item.

I concur.

All right.

Thank you for that.

So moving on down the list, City Council meeting of last week,

the City Council did hear or did complete the adoption

for the SEPA or Southeast Policy Area Amendments

and adoption of the LEA plans.

Actually, that was on 528, so we haven't met.

Actually, my apologies for reading that wrong.

LEA was adopted.

So those were both done at the 528 meeting

and will go into effect at the end of next week.

Last week's meeting, we had the Calvine Point Shop 6 Amendment.

This is the shopping center with the other coals up at Calvine

and Elk Grove Florin.

There's a pad building in there.

There was prior council approval for that project many years ago,

and so all the amendments go straight to council for that item.

Council did approve those changes,

and that pad building is starting to move forward

for, I believe, building permits soon.

Down later on the list for future council matters for next week

is the second reading of the zoning changes,

all that municipal code package that you looked at

at your second meeting in May.

Those have moved forward, and we'll go to second reading next week

with an effective date later in July.

I do want to point out concurrent with that and part of that effort,

and then in parallel, the city clerk's office had their agenda item

regarding the terms for all committees and commissions of the city.

That item for the municipal code amendments,

both in the municipal code stuff that Sarah was working on

as well as what the clerk took care of,

did complete their first reading last week.

Second reading will be next week.

We do not anticipate any issues at this time.

As part of that, the clerk's office did have the formal resolution

setting out the terms for all the positions.

So I will highlight for you for the commission,

initial terms review will occur in 2027 and 2029, respectively.

The clerk's has laid out a schedule for the existing seats

and how that review will occur.

So the first review in 2027 will occur with the seats currently occupied

by Commissioner Fernandez, Commissioner Poole, and Commissioner Singa.

The other two seats for Commissioners O'Connor and Sing will occur in 2029.

The clerk's office will have more details about that as those dates come up,

and certainly there are no term limits in anything the council has done,

so everyone is welcome to be reappointed by the city council at a later date.

Other agenda items coming up for you.

We're hopefully targeting the second meeting or what would be the only meeting in July.

We've got a Dutch Brothers over on the west side of town at Stone Lake Landing

and the Elk Grove Sports Center retail pad also in the West area.

And then we're working on the Old Town Pub Re-roof Project,

which is a type 1 design review but a certificate of appropriateness for the building

for a revision to the roof plan there.

And then I'm happy to announce that next week the draft climate action plan,

our next one, third iteration, called the Actually the Climate Compass,

will be released for public review along with the draft of the environmental impact report.

And next month, Carrie will be by to present an overview of that for you

so that when it comes forward for hearing later in the year,

you'll have a better understanding of it before we get to that.

I believe that covers everything, and happy to answer questions if you have them.

Any questions for our director?

Just thought about happy Juneteenth, everybody.

I made special care to announce it as Juneteenth before the June 19th reading.

And I learned about certificates of appropriateness this week in that area,

so exactly the same issue, a re-roofing of a historic building in the Old Town SPA.

So applicable.

All right.

If there are no other questions, I will declare the meeting adjourned

and wish you all a wonderful evening.

Thank you.

Why?