OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Stockton Planning Commission Meeting Summary – May 27, 2021

Planning CommissionThursday, May 27, 2021
BodyStockton, California
SessionPlanning Commission
DateThursday, May 27, 2021
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:10

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the planning commission meeting of May 27th, 2021.

0:17

At this time, I would like to ask the city clerk to please take roll.

0:22

Chair Mallet present.

0:24

Vice Chair Sangetti.

0:26

Present.

0:26

Commissioner Garcia.

0:28

Present.

0:29

Commissioner Mountain?

0:30

Here.

0:31

Commissioner Risby.

0:33

Here.

0:35

Here.

0:35

Commissioner Jones?

0:37

Here.

0:37

Commissioner Via Pudua.

0:39

Present.

0:40

We have a quorum.

0:41

Thank you.

0:42

Now I would like to ask Commissioner Villa Putua to please lead us in the flag salute.

0:57

One nation.

1:07

Okay.

1:08

So agenda number three, the consent item, and we have no items under consent, so we'll move on to agenda item four public comment.

1:19

This section of the agenda is reserved for public comment on anything within the jurisdiction of the commission.

1:25

If you would like to speak on a specific item, you may do so here or at a later time when that item is called.

1:34

Do we have anyone?

1:36

Um, also everyone is set for three minutes on public comment.

1:42

Um, do we have any comments?

1:44

Let me check with staff downstairs.

1:46

Staff, do we have any public comments?

1:48

Commissioners, we do not have any public comments.

1:51

Okay, so we'll move on to agenda item number five, public hearings.

1:56

Agenda item 5.1 is an initial study addendum to the 2040 general plan environmental impact report.

2:04

Pre-zone land development permit and design review requests for a proposed hotel development on East Hammer Lane, APN 130030, 06, and 07.

2:23

I will open the public hearing and ask for any commissioner disclosures.

2:30

Madam Chair, I just want to just say that I've done a lot of work in this area and I'm very familiar with this land and have worked for the people that own the property to the south of here, but I do have no involvement with the people that are proposing this project.

2:46

Okay, thank you.

2:49

Okay, so no other disclosures, and I would like staff to present.

2:59

Thank you, Chair Mallet and members of the Commission.

3:02

Item 5.1 for planning is for planning application P190851, which is an initial study addendum to the general plan EIR pre-zone land development permit and design review request for proposed hotel development on East Hammer Lane.

3:21

The project is located on the south side of East Hammer Lane, just west of 99 and east of Maranatha Drive, where the recently approved annexation for the Carmax project is located.

3:32

Also, directly west of the site is the annexation project for the Hammer Marketplace, which you will see in an upcoming planning commission agenda very soon.

3:44

The site is currently not within the city of Stockton city limits, but with your recommendation of approval, we'll proceed to the city council for consideration for incorporation into the city, and then to the local agency formation commission, which is also known as LAFCO for San Joaquin County.

4:11

The existing structure to the immediate right in this picture will be demolished with the project approvals, and the residence in the very far left in the back is not a part of this project and will remain at this time.

4:36

And in a little pocket above Hammer Lane, there is a residential component.

5:01

The process for this project involves many steps.

5:04

Prior to the city council meeting, the development review committee will review the annexation request and the city services plan and make a recommendation to the city council.

5:14

And tonight you will be making a recommendation to the city council for approval of the addendum to the general plan EIR and pre-zoning of the site to commercial general, as well as making an approval of the land development permit and the design review action for the project, which will be pending annexation into the city.

5:36

So prior to the city council meeting, the development review committee will review the annexation request and the city services plan and make a recommendation to the city council.

5:46

The city council will then make a recommendation to approve or deny the addendum to the general plan EIR.

5:53

They will approve or deny the pre-zone request to the commercial general zoning designation, and then they will approve or deny the annexation request and the city services plan.

6:03

And then once the city council approves all four actions, the community development director, which is Will, will file an annexation application with the location with LAFCO, excuse me, which will include a justification for this proposal.

6:20

So we have quite a few steps to go through still.

6:32

The project includes the development of a dual branded hotel on a 3.7-acre site.

6:38

The hotel itself will be four stories and approximately 81,000 square foot in size.

6:44

The hotel will have 141 suites.

6:53

And the remaining 60 seats, 60 suites will be allocated to town place suites, which is primarily for long-term stays.

7:03

The hotel will feature a lobby, registration area, lounge, restaurant and bar, meeting room, fitness center, gift shop, outdoor pool area, and additional rooms to support the hotel itself.

7:15

And the site will have approximately 200 parking stalls and include approximately 16,000 square feet of landscaped area.

7:23

The design review approval is required for new construction of the hotel, and a lund and a land development permit is required because the municipal code requires that the on-sale of alcoholic beverages obtain a land development permit, and the alcoholic sale of beverages will be inside the hotel in their restaurant and bar.

7:47

The following graphic shows the proposed site plan, which includes perimeter trees, parking area, hotel building, and pool location.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use████████████12%
Funeral Home Operations████████████12%
Environmental Protection████████████12%
Engineering And Infrastructure███████████11%
Procedural██████████10%
Public Comment█████████9%
Air Quality█████████9%
Public Works███████7%
Public Engagement██████6%
Summary of Proceedings

Stockton Planning Commission Meeting Summary – May 27, 2021

The Stockton Planning Commission met on May 27, 2021, at 5:30 PM in the Council Chamber to consider two public hearing items: a hotel development on East Hammer Lane and a crematorium use permit for a funeral home. The meeting adjourned at 7:22 PM.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Item 5.2 (Crematorium): Three speakers opposed the project, citing health concerns from emissions (mercury, hexavalent chromium), proximity to residences (within 100–300 feet) and schools (Pittman Elementary), and environmental justice issues in a low-income, predominantly minority neighborhood. Two written comments echoed these concerns. No public comments were made on Item 5.1.

Discussion Items

  • 5.1 Hotel Development on East Hammer Lane: Staff presented a proposal for a dual-branded 141-suite hotel (81,000 sq ft) on a 3.7-acre site, requiring annexation, pre-zoning to Commercial General, a land development permit, and design review. The project relied on an addendum to the 2040 General Plan EIR. Commissioner Sanguinetti asked the applicant to confirm understanding of new conditions from Municipal Utilities (sewer, storm, water infrastructure). After discussion, the commission supported the project, with Commissioner Rizvi noting the need for hotels on that corridor. The commission recommended approval to the City Council.
  • 5.2 Crematorium at Frisbie-Warren & Carroll Funeral Home: Staff recommended approval based on noise, health risk, and historic assessments. However, commissioners expressed concerns about lacking expert answers on emissions, scrubbers, chimney height (3 feet above roof), and opposition from the public. Commissioner Mountain noted the site is 300 feet from residences, while cannabis dispensaries require 600 feet. Commission Garcia, Jones, Sanguinetti, and Rizvi echoed doubts. Motions to deny were made based on findings 2 (neighborhood integrity), 5 (hazard to public health), and 6 (incompatibility with surrounding uses).

Key Outcomes

  • Item 5.1 (Hotel): Approved 7-0. Three resolutions passed recommending City Council approval of the EIR addendum, pre-zoning to Commercial General, and the Land Development Permit/Design Review. Conditions of approval included new MUD infrastructure requirements and a future area of benefit (AOB) non-objection condition.
  • Item 5.2 (Crematorium): Denied 7-0. A motion to deny the Use Permit and Design Review passed, with findings that the project would endanger public health (finding 5), harm neighborhood character (finding 2), and be incompatible with existing land uses (finding 6). Staff directed to prepare a denial resolution for a future consent calendar.
  • Administrative: The June 10, 2021 meeting was cancelled due to a City Council budget study session.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the planning commission meeting of May 27th, 2021. At this time, I would like to ask the city clerk to please take roll. Chair Mallet present. Vice Chair Sangetti. Present. Commissioner Garcia. Present. Commissioner Mountain? Here. Commissioner Risby. Here. Here. Commissioner Jones? Here. Commissioner Via Pudua. Present. We have a quorum. Thank you. Now I would like to ask Commissioner Villa Putua to please lead us in the flag salute. One nation. Okay. So agenda number three, the consent item, and we have no items under consent, so we'll move on to agenda item four public comment. This section of the agenda is reserved for public comment on anything within the jurisdiction of the commission. If you would like to speak on a specific item, you may do so here or at a later time when that item is called. Do we have anyone? Um, also everyone is set for three minutes on public comment. Um, do we have any comments? Let me check with staff downstairs. Staff, do we have any public comments? Commissioners, we do not have any public comments. Okay, so we'll move on to agenda item number five, public hearings. Agenda item 5.1 is an initial study addendum to the 2040 general plan environmental impact report. Pre-zone land development permit and design review requests for a proposed hotel development on East Hammer Lane, APN 130030, 06, and 07. I will open the public hearing and ask for any commissioner disclosures. Madam Chair, I just want to just say that I've done a lot of work in this area and I'm very familiar with this land and have worked for the people that own the property to the south of here, but I do have no involvement with the people that are proposing this project. Okay, thank you. Okay, so no other disclosures, and I would like staff to present. Thank you, Chair Mallet and members of the Commission. Item 5.1 for planning is for planning application P190851, which is an initial study addendum to the general plan EIR pre-zone land development permit and design review request for proposed hotel development on East Hammer Lane. The project is located on the south side of East Hammer Lane, just west of 99 and east of Maranatha Drive, where the recently approved annexation for the Carmax project is located. Also, directly west of the site is the annexation project for the Hammer Marketplace, which you will see in an upcoming planning commission agenda very soon. The site is currently not within the city of Stockton city limits, but with your recommendation of approval, we'll proceed to the city council for consideration for incorporation into the city, and then to the local agency formation commission, which is also known as LAFCO for San Joaquin County. The existing structure to the immediate right in this picture will be demolished with the project approvals, and the residence in the very far left in the back is not a part of this project and will remain at this time. And in a little pocket above Hammer Lane, there is a residential component. The process for this project involves many steps. Prior to the city council meeting, the development review committee will review the annexation request and the city services plan and make a recommendation to the city council. And tonight you will be making a recommendation to the city council for approval of the addendum to the general plan EIR and pre-zoning of the site to commercial general, as well as making an approval of the land development permit and the design review action for the project, which will be pending annexation into the city. So prior to the city council meeting, the development review committee will review the annexation request and the city services plan and make a recommendation to the city council. The city council will then make a recommendation to approve or deny the addendum to the general plan EIR. They will approve or deny the pre-zone request to the commercial general zoning designation, and then they will approve or deny the annexation request and the city services plan.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com