Alright good evening the November 5th 2026 meeting of the Planning Commission is called to order would everyone please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance
Will the secretary please conduct the roll call
That's our person for the record. The following commissioners are present for the meeting at the time of roll call
We have chair Tejada vice chair Mendoza commissioner rich commissioner solace
Commissioner tab julu and commissioner nigh
Commissioner zuber is absent this evening, but we do have a quorum
Thank you, Mr. Secretary the next item on the agenda is announcements. Mr. Secretary. Are there any announcements this evening?
I just have one quick announcement and it's that we don't have draft minutes already from the special meeting last Thursday due to the
Quick turnaround, but we will have those ready for the next regular meeting
It's uncertain at this time whether we'll have one in December yet, but we'll let you know easily now
Thank you moving on to the consent calendar
There is one item on the consent calendar this evening the draft minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of September
third, 2026. Would any commissioners like to pull the item from the consent calendar
for corrections? If not, may I have a motion to approve the consent calendar? Commissioner
Rich? I move to approve. Second by Commissioner Tapjulu. It has been moved by Commissioner
Rich and seconded by Commissioner Tapjulu that the consent calendar be approved. Please
vote on your screens. Don't see it on the screen but I can see it here on mine. It looks
like it's passed six yeses. Motion passes. City staff reports and announcements. The
next item on the agenda is staff reports and announcements. Mr. Secretary do we
have any staff reports or announcements this evening? We do not have any
additional reports or announcements this evening. The next item on the agenda is
public comments. The public is invited to make any comments related to agenda
items that are not listed under public hearings or other items of public
interest at this time. If you wish to speak during public comments please fill
out a speaker card and hand it to the administrative assistant and speakers
will be invited to speak. Public comments are limited at three minutes per person.
If you wish to comment on an item listed under the public hearings portion of the
agenda you will have an opportunity to do so when the item is heard. Please fill
out the speaker card and hand it to the administrative assistant. We are now
taking public comments this is the time when any person may address the
Commission on matters not listed on the agenda looks like we might have a few
comments for items not listed on the agenda so more general public comments
they're all agenda comments all agenda comments perfect thank you with no
general public comments on file we'll move on to presentations mr. secretary
are there any presentations this evening? There are none this evening.
Tonight's agenda has three public hearing items for consideration by the
Planning Commission. If you wish to speak before the Planning Commission,
please submit a speaker card and state your name and address for the record.
Meetings of the Planning Commission are recorded and televised, so please speak
clearly for the record. First hearing item, the hearing item is agenda item 7A
PLN 250037 consideration of a considered conditional use permit to allow the operation of a cannabis
dispenser dispensary within an approximately 5,092 square foot tenant space on the first
floor of an existing two story 16,339 square foot office building at 2777 Alvarado Street
APN 77B 201-8 zoning district IG, applicant, Engelbert, Sarkis, Blum,
San Leandro, Blum, Blum, San Leandro, property owner Chad and Jean J Chad and
Jean L, Pennebaker Trust. That was a mouthful but it's there. May we please
have the staff report. Mr. Chairman you took the words right out of my mouth.
Good evening, Chairman and Commissioners. As noted this item is a cannabis
dispensary. You'll probably remember we had some discussion about this last
week. Just to refresh, we did a little background and this is a take-off on
what we did last week. In 2013, council approved a cannabis dispensary ordinance.
San Leander was an early adopter of dispensaries. The original ordinance was
fairly restrictive at the time. In 2016 Council awarded a dispensary permit to
Bloom San Leandro. In 2024 the lease was terminated but Bloom still had an
operating permit at that time. The operating permit is issued by City
Council and it's not location dependent, it's the conditional use permit that's
location dependent. So in order to implement their operating permit they
need to get a conditional use permit and that's what they're here to do today. In
2025, Bloom applied for conditional use permit at 2777 Alvarado Street. So I
should note, we'll talk about this later, but Bloom has been purchased by another
entity, Premier Group, and they are operating as
Finos. So hence forward I might say Bloom, you'll see it in your staff report, but
I'll try to I'll try to stick to Finos on this, okay? So the subject side here is
is zoned IG, that's the industrial general.
Dispensaries are allowed in this zone
with a conditional use permit.
The building in question is a two-story 16,339 square foot
office building.
And the dispensary will occupy this portion of it down here.
It's about 5,100 square feet, roughly,
of the 10,000, almost 11,000 square foot first floor.
The remainder of the building is occupied
by law offices and an electronics design and manufacturing firm.
I'll get to that later.
So this project is located in a very industrial area.
It's south of the intersection of Alvarado and Aladdin.
On this particular image, the dark green property is actually the site with the building and
the lighter green property is the one where the parking lot is proposed, but the building
itself is the subject the conditional use permit. The various uses nearby, the
nearest ones are auto detailing business to the west, a personal training club to
the north along Alvarado, a fabricator to the north also along Alvarado, wine
warehouse just to the east on Aladdin, and Georgia Pacific to the east. There's
also a tire shop just to the south of this property. As you'll see on the next
Next slide, this is just to show you what 1,000 feet looks like approximately.
This side is located more than 1,000 feet from any uses that might be considered sensitive.
In this case, the closest one is the Pacific Recreation Complex right here.
So it's about 1,300 feet from there.
So the proposal itself would result in a new entrance on the north side of the building.
So in this view down here, we're looking sort of southwesterly, making this the north face.
The parking lot will take access from Aladdin and Alvarado Street.
There are currently two driveways along each of those streets.
Two of them are not used and they'll be closed.
The proposal is to close them and level up the sidewalk so that it's regular sidewalk
replace the curb.
There will be bicycle parking along the Alvarado Street frontage adjacent to the parking lot.
So that would be right about here, this location or here.
Customers will be granted access to the building
after the employee confirms the age and identity
of the person who is seeking access.
So the applicant has indicated that they will comply
with all the provisions of the existing operating permit
in the municipal code.
That was one of the things that we require of them
because that operating permit essentially has been purchased
by bloom itself being purchased by Finos.
This use is consistent with the municipal code definition,
which includes retail sales and delivery.
The applicant, Finos, has a type 10 retail license
from the Department of Cannabis Control.
And finally, deliveries are confidential,
so we don't get ambushed.
We're getting deliveries to the site.
They're made through a secure entrance
on the south side of the building,
and visitors such as delivery staff,
other folks of that nature,
will be accompanied at all times by a member of staff.
The operating hours will be consistent
with the municipal code,
which currently has the operating hours
at 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Sunday,
so seven days a week.
This is a fairly long list of the various regulations
that affect dispensaries as part of the municipal code,
and this user complies with all of these,
or will comply through conditions.
So just an overview.
The dispensary has to be 1000 feet
from various specified uses such as parks,
youth centers, churches, 500 people in residential zones.
Sales are limited to patients,
caregivers and adults over 21.
Cannabis can't be consumed on site.
You can't sell alcohol on site.
Can have restaurants on site.
That sort of things.
There's no loitering.
Odor cannot, any odors from the dispensary
are not allowed to be detectable outside of the building.
And the site of the city have to be kept free of litter.
That's actually something we changed
in the municipal code last year anyway.
It's required of all commercial properties.
And then various types of security are required.
Security guards are required,
but they're not allowed to be armed.
Staff is recommending revising the security plan
to the satisfaction of the police department
to prohibit armed guards in order to comply
with the municipal code provisions.
So let's go through the site improvements.
The building exterior will be amended fairly substantially
on the north side.
This is currently a plain wall with some landscaping
in front of it.
So it'll be a new entrance glass with aluminum framing.
And that landscape will be removed
in order to provide the double doors and then
an accessible ramp from the parking lot.
So it will look rather different.
In terms of the lighting, there's currently none outside.
is quite dark there. The applicant is proposing adding exterior lighting to the building.
It will be wall-mounted and down-facing. And this is the photometric plan. You can
see there's very little, you know, it's hard to read here, but there's very little wash
off the site. There is no lighting currently, as you can see here, no lighting currently
proposed in the parking lot. However, the municipal code does require adequate lighting,
for dispensaries. Staff recommends revising the photometric plan to add lighting for the customer entrance accessible path of travel and on the parking lot parcel to be consistent with the zoning code.
You'll find that in the resolution.
In terms of the landscaping, this building is fairly old. It
days back to the sixties and it looks like it.
The existing landscaping is limited to some fairly small planters.
centers. This one on Alvarado Street is far and away the largest and some of the plants
in here are not doing very well. Also you'll see that the landscaping along the parking
lot is mature and probably needs a little refreshing. So on this portion of the site
plan you'll see that the landscaping that had been provided here and in these locations,
you couldn't see it in the photos, but there was also some over here and then some here.
is all proposed to be removed. We're recommending a condition of approval that the landscape
plans for both of the lots, the one with the building and the one for the parking, are
amended to replace the aging plants and to add trees along the street frontages. I think
that the closure of the driveways is going to offer some additional opportunities to
do landscaping. We do require landscaping and so planning to require the landscaping
here. We'd like this to look a little bit better than just a scraped parking lot.
So the parking lot north of the site is going to be re-striped to accommodate 50 parking
spaces, 43 of which are going to be reserved for the dispensary. On the site with the building,
the main site, there are various parking spaces around the building. Currently there are eight
available. One's going to be reserved for the dispensary manager. Now the parking spaces
in that area are going to be behind a security gate because the deliveries are going to be
occurring back in that area.
The zoning code requires only 10 spaces for this dispensary.
It's one space for every 500 square feet of dispensary and they're planning to provide
44 spaces which obviously exceeds the zoning code requirements by 34 spaces.
Staff believes this is going to be adequate to serve the site.
And once again, bicycle parking is intended to be located at the northeast corner of the
staff is recommending a condition of approval that requires two short-term and
one long-term bicycle parking spaces that location that would be consistent
with the zoning code. Currently there are a number of shipping containers and at
least one car and boat stored south and west of the building on the subject site.
You can see some of the containers here the building actually stacked up behind
each other. Currently there's a car sitting behind this juniper you
can't quite see it. But there's there's a lot of material here. The proposal again
would add security gates which will partially screen these the stored items
outdoors from view. However staff is recommending a condition of approval to
either remove from the site all of the items stored outdoors or to move them
out of view behind and west of the building. There's a little bit less room
there some of the stuff would probably have to be removed but we'd like it to
be out of sight. This proposal conforms to a couple of general plan policies. One is
for adaptive reuse, taking an industrial building where the space inside had been used for office
and converting it to retail. We believe this is very good and appropriate use of the property
and that it does comply with the general plan. And then for economic development, there's
a policy about employees serving retail. And the idea is to encourage the growth of new
retail centers serving St. Leon's employment districts including the
including the industrial districts and we believe that this proposal conforms
to that policy as well. So the findings the findings we believe you can make
this evening we're asking you to make are that the proposed location of the
use is in accord with the objectives of the code and the purposes of the
district in which a site is located. This property lies in the IG district as
noted where a dispensary is allowed with a conditional use permit the site
meets all of the requirements for separation from sensitive uses to that
the proposed location of the use in the proposed conditions under which it would
be operated or maintained will be consistent with the general plan will
not be detrimental to the public health safety welfare of persons residing or
working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use and will not be
detrimental to properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the
general welfare of the city as no to the property is or the proposal is
consistent with the general plan policies the site surrounded with other
industrial uses for quite some distance around and the use will be subject to
the performance standards in the municipal code. The third finding is that
as conditioned the dispensary will comply with the requirement excuse me
third finding is that the proposed use will comply with the provisions of the
code including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the
district in which it would be located. As conditioned and we've mentioned number
of conditions in here but as conditioned it would comply with the zoning and
municipal codes. We think it can make that finding. The final finding is that
the proposed use will not create adverse impacts on traffic or create demands
exceeding the capacity of public services and facilities which can't be
mitigated. This property is an area served by all the various municipal
services, water, sewer, police, and fire, and the intersection of Alvarado and
Aladdin has just recently been upgraded by by a property owner to the east. This
This use is not expected to exceed the capacity of public services on the site in the area.
So the proposed dispensary is categorically exempt from the CEQA in accordance with sections
15.301a affecting existing facilities and section 15.303c dealing with new conversion
of small structures.
This proposal involves minor interior and exterior alterations to an existing building
and the conversion of approximately 5,100 square feet of office space to commercial
space in an area where all the Public Services are available. So staff has
received quite a few comments on this project yesterday. The comments have been
distributed to the Planning Commission in advance of the meeting for review.
You've got a desk memo there that details them and provides a summary of
staff's responses to the comments. So I'll go over them briefly. The
first one involves the validity of the dispensary permit condition number 38 in the resolution
addresses this issue this issue the dispensary may not open unless it has a valid permit
operating permit the commission's action does not address the validity of the permit
which falls into the municipal code that will be addressed by city council or has been addressed
by city council there was a reference to a July 20th 2026 letter and that letter was
address the city council and city manager and was not submitted as a comment on this project
at that time so it was not addressed in the staff report. The first time I saw that letter was
yesterday. We received a comment about collisions at Alvarado and Aladdin and that there are
conflicts with an AC Transit bus stop there. So two of the four driveways, they're essentially
they're not being used but they'll be further closed so they won't be usable in the future
and this will reduce traffic conflicts.
We're not going to have a lot of people,
a lot of other points for cars turning in and out of the site
to conflict with other cars or bikes or pedestrians.
So there will be fewer conflict points.
Engineering's reviewed the comment letter that we received,
actually a couple of comment letters we received,
and the circumstances of the collisions identified
and determined that the collisions
were not the result of street design
and that no additional safety analysis is necessary.
Nevertheless, staff is recommending
following additional additional condition and I read quote prior to building
permit issuance the applicant property owner shall submit a final site access
and pedestrian circulation plan for both parcels for review and approval by the
city engineer the plan shall address driveway site distance the location of
the AC transit stop relative to the customer entrance and driveways and
pedestrian routes between the parking lot and the consumer and the customer
for that. And this is the new
project. This is the second
item. This is the second item
for entrance. So that's the new
condition that we're
recommending. The fourth item
had to do with transportation
to management, which I'll
refer to as TDM going forward
because it's a mouthful. The
city's TDM program does not
apply to this project because
the application was submitted
before the effective date of
the ordinance. Nevertheless,
staff does support measures to
reduce trips and recommends a
zoning code. And this condition would read, prior to building permit issuance,
the applicant property owner shall submit a TDM checklist consistent with
zoning code section 410 120 for review and approval by the zoning enforcement
official. For the life of the use, the applicant property owner shall
implement the mandatory and optional TDM strategies, commute surveys, and annual
self-certification required by zoning code chapter 410 and the TDM program
guidelines as though the project were subject to that chapter or comment
highlights we see some comments or a comment about the fire department
comments on this project and the fire department's comments actually concern
building permit issues so we deal with those when the applicant comes in for
building permit we actually don't even allow them to start the building permit
process until after they get a cup so any any concerns for the fire department
will be addressed at that time and the fire department will of course review it
staff review and so on. The numbers of customers. During this hearing, the applicant will speak
to the trip estimate that was provided to us as part of the application. Regardless
of the estimated traffic for this project, staff has reviewed the traffic and parking
and considered the amount of traffic and parking at other dispensaries in the area. San Leandro's
other dispensaries operate with less parking that's proposed with this project, which is
also more than four times the city's zoning code requirements. So we do think
this is going to be adequate. Staffing and parking, regardless of the number of
employees on site, the proposal does exceed required parking and appears to
be sufficient. And again, this is this project is coming in with more parking
than the other dispensaries have. But we don't see any reason why this would be
inadequate and it does exceed the zoning code. There was a question about, let me
see where we there's question about parking counts combined the two parcels
have 58 parking spaces 44 of those are going to be reserved for the dispensary
the proposed parking has more than four times the requirement and appears to be
adequate number nine had to do with the recorded part recording the parking
agreement condition number 51 in the resolution identifies what the parking
agreement must include and that the zoning enforcement officer and the city
attorney must review the parking agreement and approve it and that that's
prior to the final. With respect to the CEQA exemption question, there are two sections
of CEQA under which this is being considered exempt. The first is a Class 1 exemption,
or section 15.301. This is the negligible expansion of use. So the dispensary is compared
to the office use, which it's replacing.
So the 5,992 square feet that is occupying
used to be office space.
So we compare the office to the retail.
There are no changes to the floor area,
the building height, or any of the other
development standards.
And the tenants and the rest of the building
are gonna stay right where they are,
occupy the space that they're occupying.
The zoning code actually assigns office and retail uses,
the same parking ratio.
So we're not expecting any issues there.
And staff has reviewed all of the other various
environmental impact topics and has determined
that changes in the area are going to be negligible
with respect to the various environmental topics,
aesthetics and air quality and so on.
So the class three exemption,
it's a CEQA 15-303.
It has to do with converting existing small structures
from one use to another with minor exterior changes.
This project is going to affect less than a third
of the existing building in an urbanized area
where all the services are available.
We just don't see that this is going to be
any sort of a major change,
so we think it does qualify for this exemption as well.
Vehicle miles traveled.
Again, I'm gonna refer to that as VMT moving forward,
because it's a mouthful.
The city's guidelines for VMT
and the state's technical advisory
indicate that local serving retail
of less than 50,000 square feet
is assumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.
At 5,100 square feet,
This is well below the 50,000 square foot threshold.
So that policy does not apply to this project.
And finally, we were asked about unusual circumstances
and whether this exception from the exemption applies
if the project has unusual circumstances when compared
with typical projects in the exempt class
and there's a reasonable possibility of significant impact.
Retail use and existing multi-tenant building on an arterial
and developed area is very typical
of the types of exemptions we see.
And there is no reasonable possibility of a significant safety or VMT impact.
So we believe that it does clearly qualify for the exemptions.
So finally, we're recommending that you adopt the attached resolution approving PLN 250037
with the additional recommended conditions as approved, of approval as stated.
I do have a slide with that if you want me to go to that later
so you can read them back because they're lengthy.
With that, available for any questions you might have.
and deputy city manager, Eric Ingold is also here to assist.
Thank you for that presentation.
We'll open it up to the commission
for any questions to staff.
Does the commission have any questions for staff?
C2 in the queue, commissioner Rich first.
Yeah, I think my question might be,
first of all, thank you for that presentation.
I appreciate it.
And also for the quick turnaround on the public comments.
I appreciate the public comments as well.
My question I think is for the city attorney.
A number of the questions were regarding
municipal code ordinances.
And I just want to double check on our jurisdiction here
because there seems to be some split of authority
between the city council with their operating permits
and what we're doing here on a conditional use permit.
My question is, do we have the authority
to be making determinations regarding,
applicants questions regarding the municipal code?
So just to clarify, you're asking about the dispensary permit under the municipal code.
Yes.
Is that the ordinance you're referring to?
Yes.
So that is not within the commission's jurisdiction.
Today the commission is simply considering the conditional use permit that is part of
what a dispensary needs to be able to operate.
The dispensary permit is a separate permit that is issued by the council.
Thank you. I don't have any other questions.
Just a quick question on my end. With security, can you answer exactly so the security will
have – is there any policy in place for the stated force that the security guard can
use because it states that they're not going to have any kind of weapon? So do they have
a policy in place for what kind of force can be used?
I think I will allow Eric to answer that.
Thank you, Commissioner, for your question.
Generally speaking, the requirements for the security plan
are codified in the municipal code with that
and also typically the details of that security plan
are ultimately reviewed by the Santa Lander Police Department
and coordinated with them directly.
So it's really not directly
within the purview of the CUP directly.
Any additional questions from the commission to staff?
Just to piggyback on security, that was a question
that I had on my end as well too.
There was a slide that you had up stating
that the conditional use permit would be adhering
to the provisions of the existing operating permit.
And one of those bullet points
within the provisions was security.
So just curious, like what is the base criteria right now?
terms of the operating permit like what security measures need to be met as a
bare minimum knowing that there's a provision 41 security plan where there
there will be a resubmittal of the security plan that occurs but my
question is what are the base security criteria measures right now? They're
fairly detailed one of them for example is that there be 24-hour high definition
video and I believe it has to be retained for 60 days and then they have
of security guards, but I think Deputy City Manager Engelbart is a lot more familiar with
this than I am. He is looking it up rapidly. Thank you, Chair. If you allow me just a few
moments, I can look up the municipal code provisions to get that back to you momentarily.
And my other question was tied into conditional condition of approval 38, which you mentioned
previously, dispensary permits and licenses.
How does that relate to condition of approval 10,
demonstration of compliance?
It seems like 38, actually it seems like 10
allows construction to occur in advance
of 38 kind of going full circle
and having a permit in hand.
Am I interpreting that correctly?
That construction can occur
under condition of approval 10 and then trailing behind would be condition of approval 38 for
the overall permit being issued for the dispensary.
I believe technically that's true. However, because Phoenix has purchased Bloom, they
do have an operating permit. Okay. And if that's not within the commission's, you know,
privy in terms of weighing in on it was more just so for informational purposes to understand
What are the rules of engagement and what's the order of operations?
Technically, I suppose they could go in and get a building permit and do the work, but
they would never be able to operate.
If they didn't have an operating permit, they'd never be able to actually operate as a dispensary.
I don't know why you'd want to put the money in, because it's significant, but that is
possible.
Okay.
All right, those are all the questions.
Yeah.
Thank you, Chair.
I appreciate you allowing me the opportunity to look up the code, the specific code provisions
you'd inquired about so it's specifically the security requirements of the municipal
code are codified in section 4-33 under the cannabis dispensary permit section of the
municipal code. It requires high-definition security cameras or other technology that
produces high-resolution video. Cameras shall be in use 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, shall
cover the dispensing areas, storage areas, and those requirements for how long the duration
and that the recordings have to be retained.
This dispensary shall be alarmed
with a centrally monitored burglar alarm system
monitored by an alarm company licensed
by the state of California Consumer Affairs Bureau
of Security and Investigative Services.
I also would note that our dispensaries also,
those alarms have a separate line direct
to our San Lander Police Department as well
for their awareness so that they're aware specifically
when an alarm goes off at a dispensary
as opposed to just a general alarm in the city
from other business types.
During business hours, the dispensary sell
probably a minimum of two security guards,
duly licensed, and then there's a range of things
that they have roles and responsibilities
of the security guards.
And in addition to that, the municipal code
also requires a more detailed security plan,
which is subject to review and approval
by the Santa Ana Police Department.
Thank you for that, Deputy City Manager.
That seems like a robust plan that's included.
Maybe where I was going with this was
condition of approval number 41.
Once that comes back and there's a revised security plan,
is it safe to say that the criteria already established
for the security plan is not subject to change,
meaning it won't be relaxed.
It'll remain intact as it currently resides.
The only thing that could happen
with condition of approval 41
is potentially maybe increasing security measures,
but not decreasing security measures?
Certainly, yeah.
The conditions of approvals that are associated
with the conditional use permit tonight that's before you
and presuming an action is taken by your commission on that,
those would run with the conditional use permit,
would remain in effect.
And any additional safeguards that are incorporated
as a result of police department security plan details
would not undermine that.
Perfect, thank you.
Appreciate that.
That's all for me.
Okay, moving on.
thank you very much for that appreciate it next item on the agenda is public
hearing for this item with the applicant like to speak on this item I think we
have the applicant here okay transitioning off to the applicant good
evening chair Tohada members of the Commission and staff my name is Zach
Trevon and before you this evening on behalf of Enos San Leandro formerly
bloom San Leandro which is the same company just with a new name and a new
owner of Burt Sarkis. First I'd like to thank staff for working with us over the
last two years to bring this project before you and for the recommendation of
approval recognizing it meets all necessary criteria for your approval this
evening. This collaborative effort has been ongoing from the outset of our
engagement with previous ownership including notification and requested
approval for the ownership change as well as the city's decision to
accommodate our pending relocation to this newly proposed site. To touch on the
project, collaborating on what staff did. This is an existing two-story building
that we would be moving into an approximate 51 square foot space and
relocating from the company's former location at 1915 Fairway Drive to be
operated by Mr. Sarkis, a proven operator with a decade of experience currently
running 35 stores statewide. Before speaking on the merits of the project
and the qualifications of our owner, I want to address the motives behind the
opposition, which simply put is an organized effort by NUG, an existing
cannabis operator in the city to protect its business revenue at the expense of
the community of San Leandro. Nearly two years ago, Mr. Sarkis purchased Bloom San
Leandro, inclusive of its assets, during the company's pending lease
renegotiation at 1 9 1 5 fairway drive, where company operations were originally
located. Following the purchase of the company and mere hours before we were
sign a new lease we learned that a nug effectively circumvented our communication with the landlord
took the prospective lease from under the company and following its decision to allow
additional permits establish its second dispensary location for themselves at our original location
through that process i think i skipped a couple slides here sorry about that
through that process we maintain regular correspondence with city staff maintain
the company's financial obligations to the city and work with staff to obtain a zoning clearance
in order to propose the project before you this evening,
an even better equipped, ideal location
for our proposed operation.
While Mr. Sarkis may be new to San Leandro,
he is not new to operating licensed cannabis retail stores,
including our Oakland and Hayward stores
recently opened in the East Bay,
and again, 35 stores under ownership
and management statewide.
Burt has grown from a single storefront location
approved in 2016 to operating this network
of retail facilities, not only as a top performer
in each market, but also without any significant
regulatory violation, security issue,
nor any danger or disruption resulting from parking
or traffic at any location over the last decade.
Our track record of performance speaks for itself.
With $26.9 million in state and municipal revenue
produced from cannabis and sales tax alone in 2024,
we anticipate generating a combined $2.35 million a year
in city revenue, a significant benefit to the city.
This is important to note, as the opponents to this project site regulatory compliance,
minor inconsistencies in the operating statement, as well as parking and traffic as their quote
unquote main concerns, while we believe their primary concern is protecting themselves from
healthy competition.
We also feel it's important to note our store's commitment to diversity and equity in our
employment practices, with over 70% of our workforce coming from diverse ethnic backgrounds,
as well as 85% of our overall workforce
and 75% of our management comprise the female employees.
We also have a commitment to hiring locally
with our stated goal of our staff being 100% residents
of San Leandro and nearby communities.
Part of what our supporters will share tonight
are letters of support from community leaders, neighbors,
as well as our customers attesting to the quality
of our organization and operations,
which as in any jurisdiction involves ongoing communication
with local planning departments, police departments,
fire departments, and municipal administrators
to ensure we're meeting a high standard of performance
and unwavering compliance.
Such is the case here as it relates to our initial customer
and staffing estimates, security standards, and, yes,
corrections and clarifications to our operating statement.
This is not a unique or novel circumstance.
Upon your approval, we intend to abide by all city standards,
including all conditions of approval and municipal code
requirements, while maintaining constructive communication
positive relations with the city. Most importantly this project bears no
fundamental difference to any of the three approved cannabis retailers here
in the city when it comes to the nature of the proposed operations operations
that have been ongoing without incidents for years here in the city and while our
broad selection of products and affordable pricing make us a regional
draw for customers since our initial application and subsequent corrections
were submitted we have opened the two new stores in the East Bay one in Oakland
in another Hayward which will reduce anticipated traffic to this location as our estimates
were based on prospective customers region-wide. Even at a higher customer volume, our parking
capacity is more than four times the city's requirement with ample retail floor space
to accommodate customers throughout the day, including peak hours. As you can see, this
is a visual representation of our parking that's dedicated to customers. Our opponents
site several traffic collisions that took place near the site,
even without any cannabis operation occurring at the time.
That alone shows the argument as a pretext,
especially because this site sits,
just as Nugg's fairway drive location does,
at the corner of a traffic controlled intersection
in an industrial zone.
They're calling for a traffic study
and citing secret concerns as a tactic
employed to draw unwarranted skepticism
as to the suitability of this project.
This site was selected specifically for its parking capacity
and available retail floor space.
We've substantially exceeded the city standard parking requirement with 44 spaces exclusively
available for customers.
Beyond that, this operation will not involve delivery and will have the benefit of a centralized
product sourcing system from our affiliated distribution facility in series.
This allows us to bring in all inventory from a single source, limiting product transfer
logistics, reducing daily vehicle trips and increasing security.
This is also what allows us to provide the most competitive pricing in the market for
our customers.
Approval of this permit would not involve any significant impact.
With our utilizing an approximate 5100 square foot space and an existing building, no substantial
exterior construction, only aesthetic improvements, new accessibility upgrades, 360 degree lighting,
surveillance cameras, a new wrought iron security gate for secure logistics assets, as well
as new curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements for the city.
The safety of our staff, customers, and public is the highest priority.
Every customer is age verified before being admitted into the retail floor, logged into
our point of sale system, ensuring daily limits are respected, with all operations under close
supervision of our security staff.
Our proposed multi-layered security plan includes two licensed guards during all operating hours,
360-degree interior and exterior surveillance, live-monitored nighttime surveillance and lighting,
securing the facility 24 hours a day.
This will ensure the integrity of site security always remains intact.
With that we understand our final security plan will be vetted and approved by the San
Leandro PD and we welcome and look forward to the opportunity to work with them to ensure
the safety of the community here.
Once local approval is issued, we will immediately move forward with state license and building
permit applications and would secure all necessary local and state approvals before commencing
operations.
With that we ask you to adopt staff's recommendation to approve the categorical CEQA exemption
and conditional use permit for this site with all findings affirmed, inclusive of all conditions
of approval.
With that I thank you for your time and I would be happy to answer any questions you
may have.
Thank you for that presentation.
Very thorough.
Let's open it up to the commission.
Does the commission have any questions for the applicant?
Commissioner Rich.
Thank you for your presentation.
have a small question yes sir and it's regarding parking it seems that the
project is maximize the number of car spaces and minimize the number of
bicycle spaces and I'm wondering if you might consider increasing the amount of
bike parking bicycle parking on the site I think we'd be open to that thank you I
don't have any other questions any other questions from the Commission to the
applicant? A couple of questions for me just in terms of stakeholder engagement
just to get a pulse on communications and conversations that you have had
already based on the presentation and the parcel itself it's kind of split
between what's an existing use right now I want to say office and maybe some sort
of technology low-tech that's happening within the space how much stakeholder
engagement have you had with those tenants what's the pulse of their feel
on your business moving in next door? Absolutely well most of our
correspondence has run through Mr. Pennebaker who's here this evening he is
the property owner as well as a co-tenant in the space he's been integral
and assisting us through this process not only accommodating the lease but
working with us on our operations plan as well as the facility plans to ensure
that one there's ample parking for the co-tenants to that our operation is not
gonna serve as any disturbance to his business or that of the other co-tenants.
So Mr. Panda Baker is here. He's here to give his endorsement of this project and
again he's been a great partner for us to make sure that our impact is minimal
and that the store is gonna operate without incident. Yeah that's good to
hear. I'm sure he'll be part of a public comment once we get to that. He will. And
customer parking, it may have been covered in the staff report but to hear
from yourself would provide some clarity for me here. Customer parking, is that a
dedicated feature standalone from the tenants and the other operational uses
that are happening within the parcel, the offices and the low-tech stuff that's
going on as well? That's correct. So there's a number of spaces dedicated
exclusively to our co-tenants on the south side of the building. There's I
think eight on that side alone and then another six or seven on the the large
parking lot facility on the other side. So again exclusively dedicated parking
for customers is 44 spaces. Perfect. Yeah across the board in terms of interaction
that your services would have with the tenants it sounds like there's no
commingling which is which is great. It's positive to hear that. I'm encouraged
also by the fact that your location is within an existing IG zone for cannabis
dispensary so encouraged by that as well. We're very excited to have the
opportunity thank you all right thank you very much okay we will move on to
public comments we will go ahead and set the timer for two minutes on public
comments so with that is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on
this item do we have any speaker cards okay so we've got a few to work through
here I'll call three at a time just so that the next two can prep and be ready
for when they fall in the queue all right first name and apologies if I do
mispronounce I have believe it's Danny Zia or Ziva okay and next two would be
Sarah young I believe and Val Reyes good evening chair and commissioners as a
staff my name is Danny Zia and I'm a director with night surveillance group
which will provide 24-hour video surveillance license security services
for the phenos locations. I am in support of the approval for the proposed
conditional use permit. Security at a cannabis store is not a one guard at the
door operation as you know. It is a system built around technology and people
in three layers. We prevent, monitor, and respond. Prevention. During all retail
hours there will be two licensed unarmed uniform guards on site plus a security manager in the
lobby. Every customer's ID is checked window before they reach the sales floor. The lobby,
the sales floor, the storage area, and the office are each locked from one another so nobody moves
through building without authorization. Cameras inside and outside sorry my legs
are given out outside the building are live monitored 24 hours a day using
high-resolution cameras that work and low-light footage is kept for at least
90 days and is available to the San Leandro Police Department on request.
respond a licensed alarm company with panic button staff security on headsets
in real-time written emergency procedures and a named security liaison
city can call directly at any time. I've been in security for approximately 30
years, 17 of which have been in surveillance. I have over eight years of
history with Fino's management. I can say beyond the shadow of a doubt the whole
building will benefit from the operator being there. The new lighting and cameras
cover the parking area that every tenant uses and guards. Thank you.
I watched a lot during business hours. Thank you, Danny. Appreciate it. Thank you.
there's a chair right behind you just so you're aware thank you guys for help
there appreciate it okay city staff is checking in right now for available
resources to help Danny so he is joined by a few people right now in the hallway
and city is coordinating with PD to have someone here to check on Danny further
to make sure he's okay and everything's going to be all right. Okay maybe just
as a as a cautionary note if anyone gets called up to the podium and you have
mobility issues or limitations withstanding or you need any sort of
assistance please let us know we can bring out a seat you can have more
comfort at the podium when you're when your public comment is going on. All
All right, our next speaker was Sarah Young,
could be Sarah Vong, followed by Val Reyes,
and then is Iatalia Gutierrez, Iatalia Gutierrez, yes.
Hi, good evening, my name is Sarah Young,
I'm the Chief Executive Officer of Boys and Girls Club
in Manteca and Lathrop, so just a little over that way.
And I'm here this evening to share our personal experience
working with this operator,
we have an existing charitable partnership with them.
So about a year ago, when I stepped into my role as CEO,
was reviewing all of our contracts and our MOUs,
and I found that we had a significant delinquent balance
from the previous operator.
Mr. Sarkis and his team had stepped in at that point
and they actually fulfilled all of those obligations.
So about $60,000 worth of past due balance
from a previous operator, Mr. Sarkis team came in
and made all of those corrections financially,
bringing that current for our organization.
And as a nonprofit organization,
we serve our most vulnerable youth and community,
and a little over $60,000 was paid out to our organization
of a delinquent balance
that was not their initial responsibility.
Excuse me.
And those funds have been used for us to develop national programming, something we call smart
moves, which is where we teach our kids about substance use, healthy choices, and overall
building a happy and healthy future.
So most recently, as they've been working in your community, they've been reaching out
proactively asking about other youth-serving organizations that have a positive impact.
And I think that is very telling that they're committed,
communicative, collaborative,
they keep up on all of their agreements and have with us,
and that they really seem to want
to positively impact their community.
And they have made that right monetarily
and in all of their interactions with us.
So we've had a really positive experience with them,
not just as a nonprofit organization,
but as a city partner as well.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up, Val Reyes.
followed by Ia Talia Gutierrez and Gabriela Cuevas.
Good evening Chair and Commissioners.
My name is Val and I'm the weed map instructor
for the Premier Group.
I'm here in support of this permit
because what this company has done for my life.
I started in 2017 as a bartender receptionist
on the sales floor.
Today I oversee the Northern and Southern online marketing
for the menu and the website
and can verify our company offers very competitive wages
and real career opportunities.
All of our regional managers started exactly where I did.
Behind the counter, helping customers.
The company pays above a living wage from day one,
offers health, and promotes within.
Here's why that matters to San Leandro.
This store will hire 14 to 20 people.
Those are not just jobs.
They are the first rung on the ladder
that can lead to management career.
When you approve this permit, you're not only approving
a store, you're opening a door for San Leandro residents
to build the kind of career I was able to build.
On a personal level, this career has given me more
than just a paycheck or a job title.
It has given me the opportunity to grow,
challenge myself and build confidence and create a future.
I am proud to be an example of what can happen
when a company believes in its employees
and gives them the opportunity to succeed.
I respectfully ask you to approve Fino San Leandro.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up, Iatalia Gutierrez,
followed by Gabriela Cuevas and Ed Hernandez.
Good evening, Chair and Commissioners.
My name is Italia and I am a General Manager
at the Flavors location in Riverbank.
I am here to support approval of Fino San Leandro.
I wanna talk about what an opportunity to grow
can mean for a woman starting her career.
Being hired is the beginning.
What happens afterward matters,
whether someone teaches you, recognizes your work
or gives you a chance to take on more responsibility.
I started as a Bud Tender and today I am a General Manager.
For me, that experience changed how I thought
about my future at work.
I could begin to picture where I wanted to go next
and what I needed to learn to get there.
Having women in leadership made that path easier to see.
The company's approach to training and promoting employees
from within is important to that process.
I am proof that promoting from within
is part of our company's DNA.
I also think diversity matters along that path.
Employees from different backgrounds
should be able to see that leadership
is a possibility for them and understand what it takes to pursue it. The proposed San Leandro
store would give local applicants a chance to begin that process. I want women considering
these positions to see room to learn, contribute, and build a future with the company. My own
experience is why I believe these opportunities deserve your consideration. I respectfully
ask you to approve the conditional use permit for Fino San Leandro at 2777 Alvarado Street.
you thank you. Next is Gabriela Cuevas followed by Ed Hernandez. Ed actually
stepped out I think he's part of the contingent that's helping Danny out there
so we'll come back to Ed. Following Gabriela it would be Tasha Parra and
Esther Lopez. Good evening commissioners my name is Gabriela and I am a general
manager at X1. I am here in support of approval of the Fino San Leandro
conditional use permit for the proposed Alvarado Street location. When people
picture the cannabis industry they often do not picture me, but at this company I
am the rule not the exception. More than 70% of our workforce comes from diverse
ethnic backgrounds. 85% of our employees are women and 3 out of 4 people in
management or a woman from diverse backgrounds.
Those numbers were not created for a presentation.
They reflect who this company hires, trains, and promotes.
At our Oakland store in Montclair,
every person working the floor is a young woman of color.
That was not a quota.
It is who applied, who was hired, and who has stayed,
because this is a place where we are trusted with responsibility
and given a real path forward.
Not only has this company given me the opportunity
to climb up the ladder while obtaining a college degree.
It has also given me the opportunity
to learn how to become a successful business owner one
day as a Latina woman.
I think that matters for San Leandro, one
of the most diverse cities in the Bay Area.
The people who will work at the store
should look like the community it serves,
and they should have the same opportunity
I had to grow into leadership.
The company back set up with structure, consistent training,
clear expectations, and managers who are promoted
from the same entry-level jobs.
Women at this company do not just work here.
We run stores, we run regions, and we make decisions.
Approving this permit brings that culture
and those opportunities to San Leandro.
I respectfully ask you to vote yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, appreciate that.
Ed Hernandez, I see you're back.
Do you need a second, or are you ready?
Okay, we'll go ahead and back in the queue
with Ed Hernandez.
Thank you, by the way, for helping out there.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Good evening commissioners, my name's Ed Hernandez.
I appreciate the time to be in front of you this evening.
I have lived in San Leandro since 2004.
I own a business here and previously served
on this commission, so thank you for your service.
It's an honor to be in front of you again
on a different side.
I've also worked as a consultant
with the applicant on this project,
so tonight I'm seeking my personal and professional capacity
not on behalf of any public agency.
So I support the approval of Fino San Leandro.
I wanna focus on something every resident cares about,
uh, how we generate revenue to support our city services.
Now through this work on this project, I've been, have had the opportunity to
review the information provided by the operator, along with all publicly
available information and they are strong operator who are going to come
to San Fernando and do some good work for our community, generate that
revenue that we need cannabis retail only produces meaningful public revenue.
If the business actually opens succeeds and pays its obligations across its
locations as or is actually approximately pays about $15 million in cannabis taxes
and about $11.4 million in sales taxes,
just in 2024 alone.
Closer to home after taking over existing open dispensary,
the operator generated approximately 3.6 million receipts
during its first 12 months.
More than twice the prior year's receipts at the address
and paid cannabis tax four to six days early.
For San Leandro the applicant estimates this location
can generate approximately about a million dollars
in additional revenue for the city.
It's only estimate, but with this track record of success,
they'll be able to provide this revenue
in other communities and come to San Leandro
to do the work as well.
Finos already holds the cannabis retail permit.
Tonight's request is just to relocate the operation
to a more viable site.
As you know, it has 58 parking spaces
across two parcels, 44 reserved for Finos,
compared with 19 required by code.
It brings an established security and compliance system
to the site existing building.
City staff has completed review
and found out what their recommended approvals,
their proposed use can operate compatibly
with the surrounding commercial and industrial uses.
For me, the question is straightforward.
Can an existing selling cannabis business
move to locations better?
Thank you, appreciate it.
Gonna call out the next three names.
First name is Tasha Parra.
Esther Lopez would follow.
And then Chad Pennebaker.
Appreciate your special attention
for our security manager, Danny,
to make it out tonight.
Good evening, commissioners.
My name is Tasha.
I'm the director of operations
for the Phenos organization.
support the conditional use permit before you. When a commission evaluates a cannabis operator,
the most reliable predictor of how a store will run is how the operators have run their other
stores. So let me talk about our record. Our operational standards, 100% compliant with the
requirements of state in every local jurisdiction that we operate. That commitment guides how we
prepare a location, train our employees, and manage the business each day. This organization
opened its first store in Modesto in 2016 today it owns or manages 35 stores
across California including Oakland and Hayward here in the East Bay. In large
cities and small ones under many different local ordinances and state
regulations across that entire history it has operated without a regulatory
violation or suspension that does not happen by accident. It happens because
compliance is built into the daily routine IDs are checked out the door a
point of sale system that will not allow to exceed state purchase limits and every unit is tracked
in the state's track and trace system. Records are kept for seven years and weekly audits of
inventory. It also happens because there's one person accountable. Burt Sarkis is the owner and
chief executive of this store and if anything goes wrong at 27, 77, and 75 Alvarado, the city knows
to call and how and could expect it to be handled immediately. I believe is that is
what a city should expect from a responsible operator. The standards should be clear. Employees
should understand them and management should remain accountable for following them. This
permit is existing. The ownership is new. Burt may be new to San Leandro but he is not
new to the east bay and not too to running stores the right way. The question is rather
Thank you, appreciate it.
Esther Lopez, Chad Pennebaker, Max Waldorf.
Good evening, Chair and commissioners.
My name is Esther Lopez.
I'm a local business owner, and I'm here on behalf of Fino's to ask for your support for a conditional use permit.
My roots in San Leandro run deep.
My grandparents raised nine children in San Leandro in the Davis street area.
street area. They all graduated from Pacific High School. I still have family and friends
who grew up here and they support Finos coming to San Leandro. I spent nearly 10 years working
to open a cannabis store in Hayward. The project started as Auntie Honeys and with Burt and
the Premier Group we were able to open it as Finos of Hayward. Finos is the vetted team
that I vetted and they have a reputation
for giving back to the communities.
It serves in offering affordable cannabis, tested cannabis.
I've seen that commitment firsthand.
Burt's team worked with me alongside
and helped give more back to the Hayward community
than I could have done on my own.
I am grateful for their support
and the City of Hayward is also very grateful.
Um, here I've heard from residents, um, in San Leandro and they would like to see more
jobs, uh, created here.
And I ask that you approve the permit for Phoenix and San Leandro.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Chad Pennebaker, Max Waldorf and Samantha Soto.
Good evening commissioners.
My name is Chad Petnebaker.
My wife and I own the property of 2777 Alvarado.
I purchased a building in 1990 after operating a visit to the 718 Marina Boulevard for 33
years.
That's a total of 69 years that I've been in business in San Leandro and operated my
company.
As I've gotten older, my business has declined, and I've been recently looking at the possibility
of selling.
I really wanted to do that.
When I was approached by the applicant, I was delighted to find that they were interested
and just having the downstairs portion
of the front of the building,
which may mean my having the remainder of the building.
Had several concerns, parking, odor, traffic and deliveries
and building improvements in security.
They have come to the front in every one of these
and I think we have an outstanding combination.
As has already been expressed,
there's a lot more parking available
than is gonna be needed.
There's plenty of parking for me
as well as for the distribution.
I've been assured the odor is not a problem
because everything comes in, packaged,
and goes out in that same packaging,
that there is no open material on-premises.
Traffic and deliveries, there is gonna be a new door
put on the back side of the building,
the south side of the building for the deliveries coming in,
and all customers will be coming in
through the newly created north entrance.
Buildings and security,
already been quite well addressed. Finally, I'm here to request the approval as they go ahead.
After 69 years in San Andrew, I care about this community and want to see our business
and neighborhood continue to arrive. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Pennebaker.
Max Waldorf, Samantha Soto, and Mike Warda. Good evening Chair and Commissioners. My name is Max,
and I'm the chief technological officer of the Premier Group or the Finos organization.
I want to explain the role technology plays in running a responsible organization.
The employees checking inventory, completing a sale, and reviewing store records
need systems that support their work and give management information it can check.
Our organization centralizes technology support alongside functions such as compliance, inventory, and accounting.
That structure gives store managers access to people who understand the systems they rely on.
with support extending beyond the individual location.
The proposal describes sales and inventory systems
that support purchase limit checks
and the state's track and trace requirements.
Those tools work alongside our regular inventory audits
and daily cash reconciliation.
For San Leandro, this proposal will bring the support
of an established organization to the Alvarado street store.
I respectfully ask you to approve Fino San Leandro.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Samantha Soto, Mike Warda, and David Mariano.
Yep, we'll table that and come back to it.
So Mike Warda, David Mariano, and Carly Wetgen.
Apologies.
Good evening, Mike Warda.
Thank you, Chairman, members of the commission.
I just kind of wanted to bring it back
to the staff's done a fantastic job
of identifying the issues for the Planning Commission
identifying that the mitigations that have been sought have been agreed to and so that you know
that the you know the sort of weaponized issues that have been brought up with respect to these
issues are really non-issues and I think again staff's done everything and I don't want to waste
any more of the the commission's time thank you very much. Okay next up is David Mariano.
Good evening chair and chairman uh commissioners my name is David I'm a regional manager with the
with the Finos organization,
I speak in support of Finos and San Leandro.
Our project plan addresses parking and security
with practical arrangements for customers, employees,
and neighboring businesses.
The parking arrangement provides 55 spaces
across the two parcels.
44 are allocated to Finos,
including one for the manager.
14 are reserved for the other tenants of the building.
That allocation protects parking for the other tenants
while providing designated spaces for FINOS.
The security program provides two licensed unarmed guards
during retail hours, 24-hour video surveillance,
monitored alarms, support the onsite presence.
Security staff would monitor the lot
for loitering and onsite consumption as well.
Deliveries are organized
through an exclusive distribution partnership
with one or two scheduled visits a week.
A separate vendor entrance gives our operations
a planned secure process for receiving inventory
while customers use their own entrance.
We operate in 36 jurisdictions
and have a 100% compliant operation record.
We've solved parking problems
at the earliest stages of business.
You cannot be a top performer in every city
you operate without solving simple problems like parking.
This location has more parking spaces
than both NUG properties combined
and more than twice than what the code requires.
I believe that attention to daily operations
is an important reason to support this location.
And I respectfully ask for you to approve
Fino San Leandro.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Carly Wetgen,
Yessie Serrano,
and John Dattisto.
Good evening, Chair and Commissioners.
My name is Carly,
and I'm here in support of Fino San Leandro.
I brought a binder containing our community contributions
and thank you letters from organizations we have supported.
I wanted to share what those contributions represent.
They include support for food banks, hospice care veterans,
youth programs, school organizations
serving people with disabilities
and many other areas in need in our communities.
Our two most recent being from this month alone
to love never fails, supporting Bay Area victims
of human trafficking and survivors
and another to the heart of Bay Boxing
that work with underprivileged youth
giving a positive environment and mentorship.
Our employees have also contributed their time
through community cleanups,
local events, and volunteer activities.
We're committed to supporting our communities
with our time, our resources, and our involvement.
The letters help tell a story behind those contributions.
They come from organizations doing important work
in our communities,
and they show how support from local businesses
can help that work continue.
We wanna be a part of the community we serve.
As you consider this application,
I hope you look at all of the history
of giving an involvement.
It reflects the kind of community partner we want
in the San Leandro present, involved,
and eager to contribute.
I respectfully ask for you to approve
the conditional use permit of Fino San Leandro.
Thank you.
Can I give this to someone?
Good-bye.
Thank you for that, appreciate it.
Yese Serrano, John Datashow, and this one's in cursive.
OK.
Darlene Evans, I believe.
Good evening, Chair and Commissioners.
My name is Yese.
I'm the regional manager for our Oakland store, Montclair
Village, Antioch, and our newly opened Hayward store.
I am here in support of Fino San Leandro, which
will become a part of my Bay Area stores.
You have heard tonight that this is an existing
San Leandro permit with new ownership.
I want to tell you who the new owner is
because Burt Stark is maybe new to San Leandro,
but he is not new to the East Bay.
A little over a year ago,
his organization took over an existing store
in Montcaler Village in Oakland.
It was in the middle of a court supervised receivership.
The prior operator had stopped paying
its local equity partner rent and its vendors.
It would have been easy for that store to close.
It never closed, not for a single day.
Here is what happened next.
In the first 12 weeks under the new ownership,
the store did about $3.6 million in business,
roughly twice what the prior operator
reported the year before.
I am proud to say I was a part of the team
that turned that store around.
The new ownership also picked up
the equity partner support on day one
and has not missed a month since.
And it carries the Oakland equity brand on its shelves
in Oakland and 18 other stores statewide.
Oakland looked at that record, approved the transfer,
and now receives real tax contributions
the city deserves from a qualified operator.
That same organization now owns or manages
35 stores across California, including Oakland and Hayward.
San Leandro sits right between them,
and this store will have the same regional management,
training, and security standards from day one.
With a proven track record,
I respectfully ask you to approve this permit.
Thank you.
Thank you.
John Datashow, Darlene Evans, and Mariah Pryor.
Chair, what's your permission?
Mr. Datashow's assisting Danny,
and he's gonna withhold his comments for this evening.
Thank you. Gotcha.
So moving on to Darlene Evans, Mariah Pryor,
and Kaitlyn Griego.
79 years of age.
My sister was a police dispatcher
her liver more and retired from it. She died when she was 78. We have a relative who was
19 when he died from overdross. I worked for federal medical insurance in San Francisco.
Then I was a drafts person for a fire insurance company. I took two out of three legal secretary
studies and I was here when you had about three other people the other night. I would
like to know how they will be doing the advertising and what part, in essence, their community.
I think this should go forward, but I am against cannabis and I am presently getting no help
from the Center for Elders' Independence and I realize that the medical profession
is broken entirely. But such as they're going to have to teach people 40 hours about nutrition,
ten hours for the physicians and that's federal but where I see this I don't see
anybody saying where there will be restaurants because the Popeyes is near
our high school and there's been more than $2,000 damage over the last four
years it hasn't been addressed there's other things that go there in the police
that go there and such like that and it may be that they can cope entirely their
area, but nearby what they contrived to be. We have a superintendent of San
Leandro schools that I ask because somebody said something at the San
Leandro library and so our superintendent of schools doesn't even
live up to my knowledge in Alameda County and he's not there presently.
thank you Mariah Pryor Caitlin Griego and Cassandra Hernandez withdraw
withdraw comments Caitlin as well okay next is Cassandra Hernandez maybe I'll
just read the names and you tell me so remaining names I have are yes mean
team full fully air fully L K Carla Valdez and Nikko Anaya Nikko last card last speaker
Nikko you have one more okay thank you Planning Commission I've heard a lot about the Premier
group tonight. I will say they are formidable operators and good competition but what we're
talking here tonight is the building and the site itself and the requirements of an operator or
business like other of ours to get permitted in the city which NUG we did in 2018. When you look
at the differences between their conditional use permit narrative the project narrative and ours
it's night and day. What is what was put forward by Blum, San Leandro, DBA, Finos, whatever you
want to call the entity and who owns it, it is not comprehensive. There are basic fundamental math
equations that are incorrect. The fact that it even made it to this planning commission with
those errors included in it is surprising to me especially given what we had to go through
in 2018. Landscaping, I heard a ton of things about landscaping and how it looks ugly now
and will be better once they begin operating. Staff asked them to submit a landscaping plan.
A landscaping plan was never included in this project narrative even after staff had requested
it after multiple rounds of review in addition to deficiencies besides the landscaping the parking
when we submitted our application and our project narrative we were demonstrating 105 parking spots
a parking requirement being satisfied just by saying there's enough relating to the municipal
code that's fine but show me basic arithmetic and I would expect you guys
to want that as well for you to believe it. Thank you appreciate it. Last card I
have and we can make a final call now are there any additional speaker cards
out there anyone who hasn't submitted a speaker card that wants to speak seeing
none. This is going to be our last card. Last card is for Gordon Galvin. Galvin.
Good evening, Chair Tahada, members of the Planning Commission. My name is Gordon
Galvin. I'm a 30 year business and property owner in San Leandro and a
former member of the City Council another lifetime ago. And I just want to
start off by saying Chad Pennybaker is an institution in San Leandro. He's a
friend of mine of four decades and and I love him. But what I'm asking for you to
do tonight is to ask for more information on this CUP. I do not agree
with the city staff's designation of negative declaration for the CUP
particularly the issue of traffic needs further study to comply with CEQA
guidelines. It's not just the impacts of Fairway and Alvarado, it's the traffic
flow and impact of signals at Fairway and T Garden, Fairway and Wix, T Garden and
Marina, Marina and Alvarado and most importantly Alvarado and Monterey, the
entrance to the residential neighborhood. Secondly, I do not believe this project
has been properly vetted with the businesses and residents of this area.
Many business owners and residents are not aware of this project and I would
recommend a community meeting so the applicant can present this project to
the neighboring concerned parties. And finally the issue of clustering is a
concern so much so that the City Council has been studying the expansion of the
green zone for the past two years. This is a planning issue in part to avoid
what we have tonight with this CUP clustering. There will be four
dispensaries within two miles of each other and all the impacts are being born
by one part of our city district 3. Finally as I mentioned finally I just
want to comment on the the comment by the applicant that this is all about
competitors concerns. I don't think NUG is worried about the competition. The
concerns are about the traffic flow, the clustering, and the lack of... Thank you.
Okay with that, that was our final speaker for the night. I will now close
the public hearing and bring the item back for discussion by the Commission.
Do any commissioners wish to discuss the item? Commissioner Rich. I appreciate the
comments from the members of the public and I want to echo the concern that Mr.
Galvin just had about clustering. I think that is a legitimate concern. I
I don't, however, believe that that is the applicant's responsibility.
I think they are conforming with the zoning that is presented to them and the available
spaces that are available under that zoning.
So I am hopeful that the City Council will address that issue and will open up more areas
in the city of four dispensaries because this is the fourth dispensary that is set up for
District 3 and that does sound like clustering and it does seem like a legitimate issue.
That's my comment.
Any other comments from commissioners?
Commissioner Solis?
Yeah, a few comments.
Although I want to start off by saying I do appreciate from the employees that have spoken
and from Finos, I do appreciate the business model,
the hiring women, women of color.
I think it's a great thing.
However, I think that we originally okayed,
the city okayed three cannabis dispensaries
to open in the city.
I think they have.
And I think a lot of the concerns
that the last speaker had just mentioned are very valid.
Do I think it's about suppressing competition?
Probably, but it also does have some of the concerns
about public safety do have merit.
The nug dispensary on Tea Garden,
every time I drive through there, there's a problem.
Somebody walking across the street, Jay walking,
making U-turns in the middle of the street,
parked in the middle of the street,
every time I drive through there,
which is at least a couple times a week.
So yeah, public safety concerns.
It's probably about competition as well.
And I do have a question regarding this packet
that was turned in as public comment.
Do we know who was behind this?
Let's see, there we go.
I believe the one you're holding up,
is it the petition that you're holding up?
Yes, the No New Dispensary in West San Leandro.
That one comes from NUG, with the petition one.
Okay, it's interesting, I was looking through the signatures
and I noticed somebody that I know
and I took a picture and sent it to him right now
and said, if I sign something like that,
it was years ago, I don't remember,
but it has yesterday's date on it.
So I wonder if somebody from Node can address that,
or if you have a wet copy of the petition page.
Yeah.
Yeah, it's right here.
We, yeah, sorry if I got your name,
but if you wanna, yeah, if you wanna take that information,
sit on it and then you can you can coordinate back with Commissioner
Solis after the fact here yep certainly there's some clarification there but
public comment period is closed and looking at a lot of the dates on the
pages to the writing on the dates look really similar it's not circled and I'm
not gonna so regardless of those concerns I was gonna come in already I
feel the city of San Leander has enough cannabis dispensaries as it is. Not
trying to help the other dispensaries in town but we have to mitigate with
security guards and lighting and police backup. It's like why are we stretching
ourselves thinly like this to allow more businesses that are possibly going to
attract more crime. Another strain on our already overworked police department
You know, we had everyone was an employee that's speaking in favor of this.
So, of course, everybody has something to gain.
And then there was a speaker talking about, talking to kids about substance abuse while taking money
from a cannabis dispensary was kind of comical to me.
So, that's just not so much questions, but concerns on this.
I just don't feel we need another one, especially in such a constricted area of the city.
there are plenty of other cities in the East Bay that don't have any so that's
that's my comment thank you any other comments from commissioners pausing
there no comments okay yeah on on on my end here this is interrelated to last
week special session that we had where we were looking at currently three
active and approved cannabis dispensaries in San Leandro as the city
described that approval was already set for four and they prefaced the fact that
this item would be coming forward to the Planning Commission this week as the
fourth conditional use permit under the existing rules and regulations of the
provisions for cannabis dispensary approvals meaning that it's still
within its zoning code for industrial and it's not outstretching beyond the
industrial limits which was a hotly debated topic last week during our
special session so I'm encouraged by the fact that this item came forward and
it's proof positive of the fact that within the in within the existing limits
of approval for zoning there is indeed parcel space available for cannabis
dispensaries. So not needing to outstretch to other districts is still
kind of a holding point to me and again I'm encouraged by what's been put
forward and it checks all the boxes in terms of rules and regs and zoning
requirements. So just from a compliance stance I am okay. City has blessed this.
I've heard some encouraging remarks today from the public and moreover I'm
I'm again encouraged by the fact that the entity in front of us was able to operate
and find a location within the confines of the existing rules and regs in place for current
zoning ordinances tagged to cannabis dispensaries.
So in light of that, that is my comment and I hear, I see Vice Chairman Doza in the queue.
Thank you Chairman.
I have read through all the information that was provided
and also listened to all the presentations.
To me, objectively speaking,
I don't see any problem with this application.
The issue of crime and things like that
have been mentioned.
I just want to ask the staff, the city staff,
if you have any information about that.
My understanding is I never hear that there's any problems with crimes around,
you know, dispensaries, so I just wanted to see what your take is on that.
What information you have on that?
Thank you, Commissioner, for your question.
I would say, generally speaking, it has not been, had a substantive impact on the operations
of the Sand Lander Police Department.
Thank you, that's my understanding, too.
Okay, that's what I wanted to say. Thank you.
Any other comments from commissioners?
Further comment about checking all the boxes.
I think it does check all the boxes.
And I think they've proved that they are a responsible company
employer.
But just because it's to be done doesn't mean we should do it.
I think, again, in such a small area,
we're going to have four dispensaries.
San Leandro needs another dispensary
like we need another Walmart, like we need another McDonald's,
like we need another Starbucks.
So just because it's to be done
doesn't mean we should do it.
Any final comments by commissioners?
Okay, with that, do I hear a motion
to either adopt the resolution or dot, dot, dot?
This proposal.
Is there a second?
Seeing no second, motion on the floor dies.
Back to, do I hear a motion?
Commissioner rich I
Moved to approve the resolution with the conditions that staff recommends including the two latest
Conditions that came today in the staff's report
regarding the site access and pedestrian circulation plan and the transit demand the TMD, sorry
So those are two conditions that weren't in our packet that were then provided today as supplemental information
Okay. We have a... It has been moved by Commissioner Rich and seconded by Vice Chair Mendoza to adopt
a resolution approving a conditional use permit to allow the operation of a cannabis dispensary
within approximately 5,092 square foot tenant space on the first floor of an existing two-story
sixteen thousand three hundred thirty nine square foot office building at two
seven seven seven Alvarado Street. Please cast your vote. Results on the board from
what I can see the motion passes. Four yeses, one abstention and one no.
Decisions of the Planning Commission are final unless appeal to the city council
by filing a form to the city clerk within 15 days of the date of this
action the form shall specifically state the reason for the appeal and
appeal and an appeal fee is required. Okay we are resuming now for that last
item reading into the record officially here that decisions of the Planning
Commission are final unless appealed to the City Council by filing a form to the
city clerk within 15 days of the date of this action the form shall specifically
state the reason for the appeal and an appeal fee is required. Moving on the
next hearing item is agenda item 7B PLN 26006 consideration of a
conditional use permit to authorize the relocation and expansion of an existing
convenience store at 1935 Washington Avenue into an adjacent former auto
Auto Repair Bay, increase in the sales area
from approximately 365 to approximately 707 square feet.
The request includes continued sale of beer and wine
for offsite consumption in the Relocated Convenience Store,
CCH, community commercial, Alameda County Assessor's
Parcel, 7573-1-3, A&M, gas station,
Inc. applicant, David Christopher R. and Alex R. Etow property owners maybe please
have the staff report. Thank you. Good evening members of the planning
commission I'm Anne Wong associate planner in the project before you is at
1935 Washington Avenue PLN 26-006 is a conditional use permit for convenience
store. The project site is a corner lot. The site is 15,657 square feet or 0.34 acre. The
site contains an existing 1,148 square foot building containing convenience store with
a canopy and eight gas pumps. The convenience store sells alcohol, food beverages and small
convenience items primarily for offsite consumption. The site was previously granted a conditional
use permit by the Board of Zoning Adjustments in 2023 to sell beer and wine. The subject
property is zoned community commercial with a housing overlay and is located on the southwest
corner of Washington Avenue and Castro Street. Properties across the street to
the north are zoned downtown area two. Properties across the street to the east
and the south have the same commercial community housing zoning and there are
also properties nearby zoned residential duplex. The applicant and property
owner are requesting approval to relocate and expand the existing
convenience store into the adjacent former auto repair bay increasing the sales area from
365 to 707 square feet the request continue
Includes continued sale of beer and wine for off-site construct consumption in the relocated convenience store
the relocation and an
Associate minor exterior modifications were completed without the required permits and they're now proposing the
conditional use permit to get the required permits.
So you can see that the 707 square foot auto repair store
is converted to the new convenience store.
And the old 365 square foot convenience store
is converted to a storage room
and the existing buildings footprints remain the same.
There are minor modifications proposed to be legalized
with the conversion of the convenience store.
The auto repair bay had a garage door at the side of the building and that has been removed
and replaced with the wall.
The front of the building had two single doors, one that opened into the 365 square foot store
and the other that opened into the auto repair store.
The single door to the auto repair bay now proposed to be legalized to a convenience
store was replaced with double doors.
The zoning code requires a conditional use permit
for the concurrent sale of motor vehicle fuel
and alcoholic beverages and for a convenience store.
There are standards required for businesses engaged
in the concurrent sale of motor vehicle fuel
and alcoholic beverages such as no alcoholic beverages
within five feet of the cash register or front door
unless in permanently a fixed cooler,
A no sale of alcoholic beverages from a drive-up window,
no alcoholic beverages from an ice tub,
no alcoholic beverages advertising at the gas islands
or visible from outside the building.
And then there are convenience store standards as well.
They are not to be located within 1000 feet
of a school park library recreational facility.
There are no exterior vending machines
and hours of operations are limited to
from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.
In addition to minimum standards set forth
in the zoning code and requirements imposed
by Alcoholic Beverage Control, ABC,
the Planning Commission may impose
reasonable necessary conditions
in order to make the required findings.
The existing convenience store
has a current tobacco retail license.
The tobacco retail regulations
would still be recommended,
would be a recommended condition of approval
to continue following on.
There are things like maximum of 10% of floor area
for display of tobacco products
and a maximum of 15 linear feet of tobacco display area.
In addition, staff will also be recommending conditions
that will improve the site, such as landscaping
to be reinstalled and maintained, fence replacement,
the exterior vending machine to be removed
because that doesn't comply with the code right now.
merchandise outside so there's a chest freezer and propane cage removal or
They can apply for an outdoor facilities permit
There are unpermitted banner and off-site advertisement signage. We want that removed and then litter control
So staff is recommending approval and the rationale is the request does not
Establish a new use or a new alcohol outlet beer and wine sales at the station were approved in 2023
No new ABC license is required and ours would remain 6 a.m. To 10 p.m
All work is within the existing building approval would also require building permits for the completed work and bring the site into compliance through conditions
addressing landscaping fencing litter
signage and the exterior vending machine
Staff believes the Planning Commission can make the required findings that the project is in accord with the zoning code and purposes of the
Commercial community housing zoning district is consistent with the general plan
Does not create adverse impacts and exit is exempt from CEQA as an existing facility
Meeting the findings with the recommended conditions approval the business can be operated and maintained in an orderly manner without being detrimental to the surrounding
area
Given the whole of the record staff recommends that Planning Commission adopt a resolution
Determining that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines
15 301 and approving a conditional use permit PLN 26 dash
0-0-0-6 to authorize the relocation and expansion of an existing convenience store into an adjacent former auto repair bay
increasing the sales area from approximately
65 to approximately 707 square feet the request includes continued sale of beer and wine for off-site
consumption in the relocated convenience store at
1935 Washington Avenue based on the recommended findings of fact and subject to the recommended conditions of approval
This concludes staff's presentation. I'm available to answer any questions you have and the applicant team is also present and can answer questions later
Thank you
Thank you for that presentation
Opening it up to the Commission. Does the Commission have any questions for staff?
Commissioner rich
Thank you for the presentation
This is the second time this project has been before this Commission. It was here in
2023 some conditions were established at that time. My question is
aside from the unpermitted work
has the applicant substantially complied with the conditions that this commission established back in 2023 and I'm specifically
referring to the conditions
Regarding maintenance that was established in 2023
The project shall be well maintained and shall be kept free of litter debris and weeds at all times
prior another condition was prior to commencing the sale of beer and wine fencing along the southerly property line shall be replaced and
D prior to commencing sale of beer and wine all dead dying and sparse landscaping shall be replanted and maintained in a healthy and
Growing condition at all times
Those three items seem similar to what I see in the current staff report about site site improvements. It talks about
installing and maintaining
landscaping and it states that a
Portion of the Washington Avenue frontage includes some trees and shrubs that do not appear to be maintained
It states that the fence needs to be placed along the southern property line because it's in poor condition
And it says that staff is recommending
Requiring litter control on the site because staff has observed litter outside the dumpster in areas of the landscape
escaping strips I
Don't mean to cherry-pick items here
The question is in staff's opinion has this applicant
Substantially complied with the conditions at this Commission
previously placed on the project when it got its conditional use permit prior to
The expansion and relocation
so I wasn't the project planner for the
for PLN
21 dash zero zero five one. That's the
permit that you're
Asking about but what I did observe is when I went on the site for this project
I did observe that right at the site isn't up to par right and that's why and I did look at those conditions
And that's why I'm placing them those same conditions on there. So perhaps that
In 2023 when the site was written when the PLN was approved
That the applicant property owner may have improved it, but perhaps they did not maintain it
But I have the property owner and applicant here and they can answer more about
What they did after that permit that was approved in 2023 until now
Thank you
Is there some ways that we can incentivize compliance?
if there's some way to
heighten the awareness of some of these issues that appear to be
Previous conditions and our conditions again and not just conditions again because they're a good idea
But conditions again because they seem to be falling below the standard that we expect
Yes, because like I said in this presentation and the staff report, they will be required
to apply for building permits to come into compliance when they've illegally converted
the store, and when planning staff reviews that building permit, planning will add a
requirement to that building permit that a planner has to final it.
So they have to do a final inspection.
And I can say when planning staff puts these conditions,
they do do the follow-up planning inspection
and will not final the project
until things like landscaping
and all the conditions of approval for the PLN are met.
Okay, thank you.
And my last question is,
would this expansion have the effect of increasing the area
that can be used to display tobacco products
over what was approved previously in 2023
based on a percentage of the floor area.
So if it used to be 300 and something square feet
and now it's 700 and something square feet
and you can have X percent devoted to tobacco products,
does that mean that this project now can devote more area
to tobacco products than it could have previously?
I believe so because the code is based on percentage,
but Waylon, would you be able to confirm?
Thanks for your patience.
So the expanded convenience store is subject
to the tobacco retailing requirements
that the commission saw at the end of last year.
So the restrictions in terms of tobacco display area
are maximum of 10% of Florida dedicated
to tobacco products and a maximum of 15 linear feet
of tobacco display area.
At the time that the convenience store
was originally permitted, those rules were not in place.
these are additional restrictions that will ensure future tobacco sales or not
expand beyond those limits which we need to be reasonable thank you those are my
questions Commissioner Jennifer I think it was actually answered I was gonna
follow up with the work pretty much I was going the same thing with what he
was asking so I think my question was answered any further comments from
commissioners. Just one question for me Commissioner Rich hit on a lot of my
points. The last presentation that we had there was a kind of a handy map that
showed a reference point for the distance between the parcel to sensitive
receptors in this case schools the classification of Boys and Girls Club
I'm not sure if that's falling under like a sensitive receptor but what is
the distance from this location to the Boys and Girls Club if that information is known.
Yes, I believe it's in the staff report, but it is more than 1,000.
It is more than. I want to say when I did double check for the Boys and Girls Club,
it was probably around 1,200 feet. Let me try to find it. The staff report indicates 2,400 feet.
Perfect and then
Yes, one thousand five hundred feet from boys and girls club, okay, perfect
and then a little bit of a piggyback here to Commissioner rich the
Conditions of approval you clarify that the building permit process
Would require final sign off from planning to make sure that the landscaping the fencing all of that has been
Met has been adhered to but in terms of like downrange maintenance of those items
How can we safeguard the maintenance of those items to make sure the condition doesn't fall by the wayside?
can we put a timetable in terms of like intervals where
City staff can go back verify the maintenance provisions are being up kept
That's interesting of Commission ensuring long-term compliance
I think staff can recommend a condition that to put the obligation on the
applicant to supply to provide verification that maintenance
requirements are being met on a interval that the commission needs appropriate
maybe a year or every couple years it'd be difficult for staff to to ongoing
maintenance just ongoing basis monitoring this I think understood yeah I
I was thinking, you know, an interval that makes sense.
Maybe that's on an annual basis.
And the city and the applicant can determine
how those safeguards and checks and balances
are put in place.
If that's photo documentation or onsite visit,
that would be between the city and between the applicant.
But having some form of record
to make sure that the maintenance isn't in a condition
where, as the example Commissioner Rich said,
in 23 it was approved and we're here in 26
and some of those conditions still remain.
So good to know that we can put a timetable on this.
Any further comments from the commission?
No?
Okay, I don't know that we have an applicant presentation,
but we do have the applicant here with the applicant.
Actually, we can go ahead and call the applicant up
during the public hearing portion of this.
So if the applicant would like to speak,
you can go ahead and speak now.
Good evening, everyone.
My name is Kasim.
We decided to expand the store, especially
with the high demand of our customers requesting.
It used to be a really small store.
They would request some eggs, bread, cheese, butter,
especially customers with EBT.
So we expanded the store.
We did hire a licensed contractor
who promised to go through all the city requirements,
pull on out the pyramids and all of that.
And I happened to be a victim, you know.
He haven't pulled out any of these pyramids
that he promised us he would until I shockingly,
you know, I was surprised he didn't.
And to touch in some of your guys' comments
For maintaining the grass and all of that,
we do hire a company that they come and we pay the monthly.
And we do have the invoices and checks
that they take care of the landscaping.
And for the vending machine, the water vending machine,
that's a new company.
They came, they installed it.
This is my first time hearing that I cannot have it,
but I could have a, it's called Bremo Water,
or Brine, Brine or Bremo Water,
I would have to, you know, take it, you know, away.
And yes, there is a sign, I think, at tobacco company,
they did, they hang a banner outside the,
in the face of the building, they came, I was in prison,
they talked to my employee at that time, they hang it,
I would remove it.
And for the fencing, since 2023,
We have done a lot of work into the fencing,
especially between us on the car wash.
And if there is any requirements
that you guys want us to follow,
we will follow whatever city requires to do, we'll follow.
And again, for the store, we just expanded the store.
We do have the up-to-date tobacco and ABC license.
Yes, we were not required to renew the tobacco license.
However, we did renewal the tobacco license, the ABC license,
I mean, I'm sorry.
And they're presented from ABC license.
They came to the site, and they approve us, and they sign us.
And we do have copies of the paperwork for that.
So long story short, we just expanded our small store
to a bigger store to provide more to our customers.
Now we have a microwave.
Now we have a vending machine, a slushie machine.
We have a coffee station.
We have more bread, eggs, and all that stuff.
we have fish bait and all of that that a lot of customers you know used to ask
us if we can provide but since limited space we were not able to do before and
if any requires requirements you guys want us to follow we'll go ahead and
fulfill and check all the list thank you so much thank you for that I'll open it
up to the Commission if they have questions for the applicant yes
Commissioner Solis. Yeah that unpermitted work that was a concern for me and I do
appreciate your answer. So the work was done and you fix that you say you have a
company that does landscaping regularly taking care I mean I very rarely drive
past there but I mean are there plants or anything that are unkempt or not
doing well? You know everything you know is like one of the gas station to be
I've been in this location, you know, so often.
I moved to San Leandro in May 2025,
and I always spent my time in this gas station.
It's 1935 Washington Avenue.
You could look it up. You could, you know, visit the station.
Yeah, no, I know where it is. I just don't drive by there.
No, just like some...
So, Commissioner Rich is concerned
about the expansion of the tobacco products.
Is that an intent of yours?
We are within that 15 linear square feet, but you don't plan to do we are 13
You know and yes, it was small story. It's not like a bigger score store
now we have a bigger shelf behind our back now and it's way less than that 25% of
Retail sale or receipt sales. It's way below our focus to be honest with you
It's a gas station most of our cell is gas and propane and you know grocery like convenience stuff for our
for our customers most of the tobacco is like in Safeway or the liquor store
like a block to the right the end of the block is a liquor so most our
customers are there okay thank you thank you any other question any further
questions from commissioners so then just to just to recap here you intend to
follow the current tobacco sales ordinance that's in place that was
recently adopted within the past year so you're adopting that you're not
pursuing anything above and beyond yeah that's correct 100% okay auto repair is
what you were doing before in that vacant space what was the extent of
auto repair fluids mainly did you get to the point of collecting fluids
disposing of fluids oil yes we do have like a I wasn't there before it was in
this my family's business but you know I was in a different place but I still
feel like they used to have recycled oil, but not basically, yes, it was an auto shop
like Prey, Brakes, Oil Change, stuff like that, and they decided to extend the store
instead of the mechanic garage.
The subgrade condition within the auto repair space, was it to the extent where you had
an existing, or you have an existing oil water separator?
I'm just trying to get a feel for what subgrade utilities from an auto repair facility would
Potentially need to be you know abandoned in place or cut capped and other
Yeah, I've got to imagine city staff has probably vetted that and
Verify the subgrade conditions of existing oil water separator or any other sort of potential
environmental hazards that may be there from an auto repair facility
If thank you
If if I could maybe just redirect the question to city staff can cities staff expand on that
What's the what's the subgrade condition within the auto repair facility?
Anything environmentally hazardous oil water separator other that needs to be accounted for in terms of remediation?
So at the beginning when we received the application we do route one of the departments that we routed to is environmental services
and I believe that they
They
attractive at the look they either gave some conditions of proof, but
They if there were outstanding comments like that would have been that it
Okay
Okay, we have an answer sure
Thank you. Mr. applicant
explained to me and we did change the underground tanks to comply with California standards
double wall carbon fiber tanks and that was like I would say late 2024, Armin Norman was
the company who did the underground tank you know changing and they did all what was required
to shut down basically the mechanic shop whatever hazardous material they took care of it they
did the soil sample and getting all of that and they told us do it a shop I
mean the store or storage whatever you guys want to do it's no longer a shop
okay that's when Armin Norman that changed the underground things for us
perfect that's good to hear from the applicant specifically I appreciate that
you guys have taken that into account thank you sir thank you thank you for
the answer there okay is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on
this item do we have any speaker cards we do so we have two speakers here first
one is Kasim Abdullah okay so applicant speaker thank you Kasim next speaker is
Darlene Evans this is mainly about perception of gasoline stations and what
they do and what they sell seven eleven caught on fire on November 1st this is
It was 2026, I think it was 24.
And the latter would be able to be seen from Metro Park
where I used to reside.
They sold beer and liquor there.
And I was curious about the high school area
because I lived across the street from it.
I went in there on Canada one day, 40 beers and wines there.
There was one time I went over, because my phone didn't work,
that somebody shot somebody in the stomach.
And I went over to use their phone.
Very rude.
7-Eleven isn't coming back there.
The supermarket that's on the corner there near the high
school, that has had graffiti and so on and so forth.
Working for the fire insurance company, Pacific Fire Rating
Bureau, that became Insurance Services of California
from San Francisco later to San Ramon.
We did inspections six months, a year and a half, and a year.
So I'm thinking the outside because of the other places
that have the washing of the cars
and the people that come for 15 minutes at which you hire,
and they don't really care that much.
But I think that you should have your businesses,
if you're going to get maybe a million dollars a year
from the previous thing that went on here,
maybe you need to find out first you pay your debts
and maybe 20% go toward doing more inspections
or something like that.
Because to walk in the city and have it so ugly,
our railroad situation, I got 12 seconds left,
that shouldn't be like that.
What do our volunteers have to do?
Do we have to be railroaded?
But to have liquor and stuff there,
that's not the business of gasoline.
Okay, thank you.
Any other speaker cards, no?
No other speaker cards.
I will now close the public hearing
and bring this item back for discussion by the commission.
Do any commissioners wish to discuss this item?
Commissioner Rich.
Yeah, thank you.
I am concerned about the condition of the site
based on staff's report.
if the applicant were to substantially comply
with the conditions that would address my concerns.
But I wanna be clear that there are a number
of conditions here that address the issues
of landscaping and litter and the fence
and ongoing maintenance of those conditions.
Condition number four for modifications,
24 for fences, 27 for landscaping,
29 for litter control, 31B for fencing,
31D for landscaping, 50 for litter,
and 77 under stormwater for landscaping
and plant selection.
If the applicant were to comply with these conditions,
this would be an easy project to support.
My concern is it is not clear that the applicant
has complied with those over the past three years,
And I'm not sure what we're doing differently now
to ensure compliance.
So I'm hopeful that this bully pulpit
will help to encourage compliance,
but I don't know if we have anything more than that
than we can put in that if there was failure to comply
with these specific items that are occurring again,
the landscaping, the fencing, and the litter,
failure to comply with that would be a breach
of the conditional use permit.
I'm wondering if there's something we can do
along those lines to raise it to make sure that the good applicant does good
compliance with the conditional use permit. Mr. Secretary? In response to that
question, failure to comply to any condition of approval can be grounds for
revocation of the use permit, which would come back before the
planning commission, and staff will be able to initiate that process if it
determines that conditions are not being complied with.
I think as Chair Dauda suggested,
perhaps in motion, you can include the condition
that on an annual basis,
the applicant submit documentation to staff
that demonstrates all maintenance conditions,
including fencing, graffiti, lighting,
landscaping signs under their control
are being complied with
and that fail to maintain the site.
Maybe grounds for revocation in accordance
with zone code section 5.24, .136.D.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Commissioner Tabjula?
See if the condition use permit is approved today.
Like, I mean, how much time would the applicant get
to satisfy the requirements in it?
So, like, when do you go back?
Or, like, how do you see if those requirements are mapped?
Yeah, so, if you were to approve this project tonight,
There is a 15-day appeal period and protocol we highly recommend that the applicant apply
for building permit after the 15-day appeal period but really after that after that 15-day
appeal period it's up to the applicant when they want to apply for building permits. In this case
you know we they are not in compliant right now so I would say that they would apply immediately
As soon as they can to get into compliance
And then when they do the building permit process, you know after the building permit gets issued
They hire a contractor to get the work done. I mean
They if they if the building permit shows that they need to hire any contractors to fix anything, right?
They need to do it building inspectors would come out to inspect the
Inspect the site and then they would find out they would sign off for the building permit and then that's when planning
Gets a call and to do a planning final inspection and the planner will make sure that these conditions
Regarding the site improvements, right landscaping fences will be finished
Thank you. Appreciate that. I
Do have a second question
In terms of I know like I mean there is going to be like double from 365 feet to 700 some square feet
And I know like this location is like in the middle of like really dance like residential area
Have there been like any complaints or any?
Any police issues or like any like homeless issues that have been reported or the staff is aware of any of the issues
at this location
Staff is not aware of any issues or any incidences. Okay. Thank you. That's all chair
Any further comments from commissioners?
No
Do I hear a motion?
to adopt the resolution
We discussed a few
Timetable amendments and I think mr. Secretary was drafting up language to that effect. So
Yes, vice chair Mendoza
We approve the resolution.
I'll second.
Okay, we have Commissioner Rich, yes.
Point of clarification, was the motion
including Chair Tejada's condition
as restated by Secretary Lee?
Okay, so we have a motion, motion on the floor
to adopt the resolution with timetable conditions
that were mentioned for the items Commissioner Rich
alluded to and Mr. Secretary picked up in the record.
So the landscaping items, the graffiti items,
the litter items, there were a handful of others
that I can't quote now, but Mr. Secretary has them down.
Those items are being picked up as part of this resolution.
Second on the floor was from Commissioner Solis.
So with that, we can go ahead and cast our votes.
Motion passes unanimously with six yeses.
decisions of the Planning Commission are final and less appealed to the City
Council by filing a form to the city clerk within 15 days of the date
of this action. The form shall specifically state the reason for the
appeal and an appeal fee is required. All right that concludes the second item on
the agenda. Next item on the agenda is Hearing Item PLN 2009 0 0 0 6 and PLN 21 0 0 0 1.
Consideration of an amendment to the development agreement for a 66 unit residential development
project located at 2450 Washington Avenue PLN2000090006 and PLN210001 to extend the
term of the development agreement by three additional years, APN77D141025, WM Matthews
Inc. applicant and property owner. May we have the staff report, please.
this is working good evening good evening chair and commissioners my name
is Felipe morphine Martinez I am the project planner of the item before you
project number PLN 26-0021 this is for a request of an amendment to the
development agreement of a residential project located at 2450 Washington
Street the amendment request is for an additional three years term extension
only. In 2011 the city council adopted a resolution and ordinance approving a 66 unit residential
development project located at 2450 Washington Street. In 2021 the project development agreement
was amended to allow the project the flexibility of offering the units as either rental or for sale
units. It also applied to the city's inclusionary housing ordinance requiring affordable units and
extended the agreement through January 4, 2027. Currently the 2.85 acre site is occupied with
a two-story professional office building. The site is surrounded by a mobile home park to the south
and east single-family homes to the north and auto-oriented commercial and industrial uses across
Washington Street west of the site. The project as approved provided 66 units with 11 affordable
units across 12 residential buildings. The unit sizes range approximately between 700
and 1,000 square feet, offering six different floor plans with one and two bedroom options.
And provides 135 parking spaces, a recreation building, a community pool, and ample open
space. The applicant William Matthew Brooks of W.M.
Matthews Inc. is requesting a three-year extension of the development agreement to allow additional
time to move the project towards construction. The applicant explained the previous existing
tenant lease obligation had limited their ability to move the project forward. However,
these obligations have since been resolved allowing the applicant to focus on advancing
the project. The applicant has demonstrated good faith and effort to move the project
forward by hiring consultants reaching out to potential home builders and meeting with
city staff to discuss next steps in the development process. The proposed amendment would extend
the term of the development and would not change the project's land use density or design.
Extending the development agreement would support general plan and housing element goals
that encourage the construction of new housing units. Given the city adopted a mitigated
negative declaration and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program in 2011, no further
environmental review is required under SQL guidelines sections 15162 as the amendment
only extends the development agreement terms and does not change the project's design density
or conditions of approval. This hearing was noticed through newspaper publication posting
at city halls and project site as well as mailed notices to property owners within
500 feet of the site. No comments have been received. The proposed amendment is consistent
with the general plan and housing element goals of encouraging new housing development.
It also does not change the project's land use, density or design.
For these reasons, staff recommends that the planning commission adopt a resolution recommending
that the City Council approve the amendment to the development agreement extending its
term by three years through January 4, 2030.
Please note that Exhibit 8 contains an error and will need to be revised to reflect the
proposed three-year extension and to not a five-year extension extending the agreement
to January 4, 2030, not January 4, 2032.
This concludes staff presentation.
Staff is available for further questions or comments.
Thank you.
Thank you for that presentation.
Does the commission have any questions for staff?
Commissioner Solis.
What's the holdup with this project?
So as mentioned before, the applicant indicated
that there was prior lease agreements.
So currently it's an office building
those lease agreements did not allow them to proceed forward so that's why
they are asking for additional time. Commissioner Rich. Thank you for that
presentation. I apologize I didn't submit these questions in advance. I got a
little behind. So if you can't answer them that's fine. They're a little off
the wall. The first one though I hopefully is it's pretty straightforward
for maybe a city attorney question is this a discretionary action by us or is
this sort of ministerial if you understand my question I believe this
is a I would refer to the discretionary so the Planning Commission can approve
or deny the extension if it if they are not granted an extension they'll have to
go through the whole development process over again with the current regulations
because it's discretionary can any of the conditions be modified tonight and I
apologize I didn't submit that question prior to the meeting we have not
anticipated amending any of the conditions what we've proposed today is
only to extend it with the current conditions and I can turn to the
secretary but I believe that would maybe require some further analysis on our
end. Okay, thank you. Yes, I would concur with that. You can add conditions, however,
given the short time frame in which the request came in and the amount of time we
need to process it, I think staff's recommendation is to stick strictly to
the extension of time because more time we need to analyze a new
conditions effect on the on the project and they may not be possible in the time frame
but I don't know what condition you had in mind we can discuss.
Regarding parking but let me go through with a couple other questions if I could and could
the applicant build with greater density today given state law and local law on this site?
state law and yes but this this project is only for the amendment of the
agreement and not be understood project if we if we didn't approve it tonight
they could come back and build likely could get something approved perhaps
ministerially because of trends and oriented development of greater density
than what we're seeing before us any idea what parking requirements would
look like under today's and this is what I really wish I asked in advance so I
mean to put you on the spot? Yes I would need to look at the exact location with AB 2097 parking
may be reduced and also if you are considering density bonus you could waive some of those
requirements so the parking for a project not this project but for a project that would be
coming in today could have a different ratio. Does the project include any bicycle parking?
can get back to you on that. I know that the site is well served by a bicycle
lane on the San Leander Boulevard and its proximity to the BART Station. The
report stated that 11 units in 2021 were included as affordable units under
the city's inclusionary ordinance. Do you have any understanding of what level
of affordability those units would be providing? So those, the affordable
housing agreement would be done once the project would be approved they're
built prior to the building permit and that would be done through the housing
division so at this time there isn't a affordable housing agreement plan but
they would be required to have one when they came in 15 years ago it didn't have
a affordable housing requirement and when they came back five years ago it
was added at that point?
Is that accurate?
Okay, those are my questions, thank you.
Commissioner Tovjulu.
Thank you for the presentation.
Could you elaborate a little bit on the development agreement
like I know it was done in 2011, like so many years ago.
And we're not amending any of the requirements
or anything in there today.
So are all those things applicable?
Correct, so the development agreement would remain the same
with the amendments that occurred in 2021.
And then this agreement would only be extending the time,
the timeframe to 2030.
You may have touched on this a little bit,
but like what does the path look like?
I mean, once it clears here today,
so what are all the other steps that the project has to go
through for it to become a reality?
Like you already spent 15 years,
and is it going to take another, how many?
Well, hopefully only three.
So the request here would be to have a resolution
to recommend for city council and then city council
would then act on it to do the amendment of that ordinance.
So once it goes through city council and it gets extended,
then they have those three years to apply
for additional building permits
and also get all of those requirements ready
for construction.
Thank you so much.
That's all too.
Any other questions from commissioners to city staff?
Just curious here.
You mentioned good faith efforts
that the developer has had with the city
to kind of work through the tenant agreements
that have held up the process for the past couple of years.
Could you maybe expand on a timetable
that the developer has shared with you?
My main concern is when can we expect a shovel in the ground
and really expect some movement
when it comes to development of this 66 unit?
I would hate to get to the point of three years from now
we're having a similar discussion
about extending it in additional three years.
That's my question is what is the timetable?
Right so the applicant has with the development agreement does work they are required to check
in with the city yearly and provide kind of that timeline and I believe in the past they have been
providing a letter notifying us that they're still in the works or they're still committed to the
project. Okay and in terms of any sort of substance that the city has received for this development
has it expanded beyond renderings and high-level elevation graphics? Do we have anything more
detailed and concrete that would lead the city to believe this is trending in the right direction
to a building permit and ultimately a shovel in the ground being constructed?
Right, so the applicant has hired consultants and did reach out to us to proceed, but with the
limited time that there is an amendment would be needed okay so if I may add the
the applicants extension request letter which is attachment for in the staff
report does talk about the thought process and the three-year extension and
what and provides some some marks to hit in order to to have development occur
within three years so that's something the applicant has provided maybe perhaps they
can speak to a lot more when they have an opportunity to talk but but there is there
is some expansion beyond this the project plans okay appreciate that yeah certainly
it'll be a question for the applicant once the applicant comes up but I'm encouraged
by the fact that you're saying in the eyes of the city the applicant has
engaged with the city brought forward design consultants maybe not just like
rendering consultants or elevation consultant but design MEP FP civil
structural consultants to talk through what this project could be and
ultimately progress to within three years that's what I'm hearing okay okay
Thank you. I appreciate that. Let's see. I think the applicant is here. Would the
applicant like to speak on this item? Good evening, Chair and Commissioner. Thank
you so much for your time today and thank you staff for your report. My name is
Cheyenne, consultant for the owner of the project. We are here to, you know, to
introduce ourselves and to explain that the reasoning why we requesting this
three-year extension. In the last few months or so, we have been working
directly with staff, with consultants, with engineers, you know, and potential
buyers too. My background is with the presidential builder, working for
national home builders in the past, shape, toll, party. So I've been connecting with
quite a few of them. It has been a very positive discussion, if you say. So that's
us turn up maybe and then answer your questions right there. We're moving forward with that.
Yeah. And then with me is Bill, the property owner, and you might want to say so.
Hi, thank you for your time. We're excited to move this project forward and engage with
a qualified home builder who can help us do that. We believe we need a three-year extension
know to do that due to the developer agreement expiring shortly and we
appreciate your consideration of that okay thank you from the Commission to
the applicant questions from the Commission Commissioner Jennifer you
stated they stated the delay was doing due to leases are those all expired now
and has everyone vacated or um no the building is currently fully occupied but
our leases now have a clause in which there is a notice
that the landlord can give to terminate the lease.
And so, you know, at the appropriate time,
it would be able to give ample notice to the tenants.
To be able to move it forward is what you're-
Yes, and so we could cancel the leases with notice.
Okay, all right, thank you.
Commissioner Rich.
Thank you for proposing this project.
I hope you build it.
I think it would be good for San Leandro.
Do you know if this project has any bicycle parking
in the plans?
It's had to meet the requirement with the city's
parking requirement, including bicycle as needed.
And so my question, and I'm not sure it goes to you now,
but it would be, would this project
be under the 15-year-old requirements
or the requirements of 2026?
The development agreement walks in the development standards
that were in place at the initiation
of the development agreement.
So that'd be 2009 development standards.
So my question to you as the applicant
is I wouldn't want to establish new condition at this point.
I'm wondering if you would consider voluntarily complying
with the 2026 bicycle parking requirements.
Commissioner Jennifer, are you still in the queue?
Okay, your mic is on, I'll turn it off.
Commissioner Solis, I thought I saw your hand up.
Did date where that might happen?
Because I mean three more years tacked on to what's already been going on.
Is there like a projected date that may happen?
It's a six-month notice period for the tenant.
In the next, it would be, I'm not sure the exact month that it would be.
So the trigger is six months and so as we work through the process,
as we get closer within 12 months or so,
then we will ask owner to give notice
so that they have plenty of time to move forward
with wherever they're going to want to go.
But you have no intent, no projected date that may happen?
Well, we have to make that before the deadline of the three years.
Right.
So it's two years from now.
Now regarding the construction,
do you have an intended builder or?
We have been speaking with a few
that are interested in this site right here.
Do you have any understanding
if any one of those is a union contractor?
I can't speak to that at this point, no.
That is the operation,
so I wouldn't be able to speak to that.
Okay, I think it's very important to this community
to ensure that those construction jobs
or high-end jobs that provide not just good wages, benefits,
retirement opportunities,
and not just typical home builders these days
that offer cash payments and no benefits for the workers.
So I hope you take that into consideration.
Right.
The builders that we have spoken with,
they are national home builders,
a few that I worked for before too,
and so I don't foresee that will be any problem.
Thank you.
Any other comments or questions from the Commission?
So Secretary Lee was alluding to this within your guys' applicant package.
There's details of what happens now for the next three years.
Maybe you can just walk me through piggyback a little bit here off of Commissioner Solis.
I'd like to get a little bit more understanding from you two.
What is going to be happening?
the next 90 days look like? What does the next year look like? You know, a broad
two-year time frame is very broad and I'm just looking for a little bit more
granularity of what actually happens so that worst-case scenario, three years
from now, we're not back here having this same discussion about extending this out
an additional three years because at that point in time this would have
generated in 2009 and we would be up against what? 2030 at that point in time?
coming up on 20 years of continuous delay so can you please educate me on
the next three years? Yes, months one through six post approval and
technical baseline. During months four to twelve we would work on the final map
and improvement plan production. This would involve preparation of the final
map in the supporting subdivision improvement plans.
And then months 10 through 20, we
would go through the city and agency review cycles,
specifically engineering and public works plan check,
which can run three or more correction cycles.
Then months 14 to 26 would involve a home builder
due diligence in transaction with a qualified home builder
who would need a stable, unexpired entitlement
in order to commit to the project.
And then months 24 through 33,
we would hope to have the final map approved and recorded.
And then the remaining time of the three years
would involve the transaction
with the Planning Commission in city council.
Maybe just talking out loud here
and secretary you can chime in
if appropriate or not appropriate,
but the timeline there, I think at a high level,
just hearing that through, tends to make sense
and supports the three-year timeline.
Is there an opportunity for us to hold fast
that timeline from the applicant
really maintaining the schedule
as just read to us right now?
And if it's not, can there be recourse
where we ultimately have this go back to step one
And come back to the planning commission as a step one sort of item that has to now comply to current rules and regulations
not rules and regulations from 2009
the
Development agreement has an obligation for an annual report that submit the staff demonstrating
That they are meeting their timelines and their obligations. I can commit from a staff level that we we will
closely
Review to ensure that that's the that's the case if
the staff can initiate procedures to terminate the agreement if it's clear that that a
Reasonable effort is not being made to move forward with the project
Okay, is there a way what was just read right now can be used in terms of a timeline?
That's attached to this approval
so matching what was just read by the applicant needing to occur within that zero to three year time frame and
For matters that potentially delay that timeline that are within the city's control
Disregarding those items if the if the delay is caused by the city, but if delays are strictly caused by the applicant
Can we hone in and?
Tag this three-year timeline as part of this approval
Yes, I think we can accurately reflect them in the record what the obligation is for
Every commitment that the developers making the move forward. Yes
Thank you. I appreciate that
Yeah. I think in doing so, it just gives us the milestones for the next three years that we can,
we can all hold each other accountable to. So with that, any further questions for the applicant?
No. Thank you, applicant. Appreciate it. Thank you. Let's see, is there anyone from the public
who wishes to speak on this item? Do we have any speaker cards? We have one. Okay. Thank you,
Thank you Darlene for going the distance, Darlene, our speaker.
I used to pretend when I was young that I would be building buildings, but then I got
tired of high school, so I went and took vocational classes and became a drafts person, the first
one that was hired because the inspectors, they had problems.
And here's what I think, you got 11 units.
How big is your square footage?
Because if you have 16 units, you can have on-site management in California.
If you have three floors, then you have to have sprinklers in your building.
About your parking and about your storage.
I was outside yacking, so I didn't see this earlier.
But where I'm at, it's $100 parking and it's underground parking and you get some cabinets.
But if they would be able to have more units and have smaller units but have it so they
had storage, I pay for 20 feet by 10 feet, 400 bucks a month, $100 more than other people,
and I had to wait a year and a half for them to do the fire department stuff.
And there were other things that goes on.
And I think this should be 16 units.
I think that there should be management there.
I'm older.
She's older.
He's young.
still have to do the blueprints.
They still have to do the whole site business.
And I think three years with the financing, as it was,
I was a proof operator for Bank of America.
They don't even have that position anymore.
It's a little device that you go to the bank
and it moves your paper along.
I think they need to consider their finances.
If they've been waiting for some other situation,
I think they need to get it under their belt,
because this is a priority.
This is from 2009.
Thank you, Darlene.
Seeing no other comments or speaker cards, I should say,
I will go ahead and close public hearing
and bring this item back for discussion by the commission.
Do any commissioners wish to discuss this item?
Commissioner Rich.
Yeah, thank you.
I think it's difficult for the applicant
to give a hard timeline in the economic world
that we're in today.
a number of larger projects in San Landro
that are currently stalled and have been stalled for years.
So when the economics aren't working
and when developers can see that the large 600 plus unit
Maximus project by FH Daily or the project across the street
from Sprouts is not going, that makes
it hard for other projects to go.
Medium sized projects is this one.
I would love to see this project go.
I think three years is plenty of time for them to draft plans,
submit for permit.
I think that's all we're saying doing in three years
is submit for permit.
So I think that takes about a year to do that
and should get the permit.
I mean, in three years, this thing could be well
under construction if, as the developer says,
if it penciled out.
They may have an idea right now
of whether it seems to pencil out right now
and they're ready to go.
I just know that there, or we've seen,
that there's a number of projects that are installed
in San Landro because the developers aren't seeing
that it works out and that project that sprouts went up
and people aren't jumping in behind it to go forward.
So there is a larger economic issue here
than just somebody who like it appears
they may be dragging their feet,
but they may be dragging their feet
because they don't want to lose money on the project.
That's my comment.
Thank you, any other commissioners, comments?
Are you in the queue Commissioner Solis?
any other commissioners? Yeah I hear you Commissioner Rich. To me it's more so
time value of money and if this dates back to 2009 you know there there were
opportunities when the economy wasn't the way that it is right now and for
this project to have moved forward and advanced I have to believe there was a
window whatever for whatever reason that window closed and we are where we are
now call it what 15 16 years later so like you I do want to see this project
move forward I have a strong advocate for this project moving forward I just
feel as though there should be some sort of accountability measures to advance
this project to move forward within the next three years some hard and fast
accountability measures to do so I agree within one year should be a done deal to
have plan check building permit issued and move on into construction in an
ideal world. Whether that happens and if it's Groundhog Day three years from now
we'll see that's my caution and my worry is that we get to this point again
because myself along with a few other commissioners have already lived this
once where there was an exact same request for this to be tabled and for it
to be moved, and it is Groundhog Day for me.
So that's my comment.
OK, so with that, do I hear a motion?
Commissioner Tabjulu?
I'll make a motion for approval.
Motion on the floor.
Commissioner Rich?
I second.
Second, Commissioner Rich.
Discussion on the motion as it stands?
OK, no discussion on the motion.
Let's see.
It has been moved by Commissioner Chabjulu
and seconded by Commissioner Rich
to adopt a resolution approving an amendment
to the development agreement for a 66-unit residential
development project located at 2450 Washington Avenue,
PLN 2009 0 0 0 6 and PLN 21 0 0 0 1 to extend the term of the development
agreement by three additional years APN 77 D 14 10 25 W.N. Matthews Inc. applicant
and property owner please cast your vote. Motion passes six yeses one abstain.
decisions of the Planning Commission are final unless appealed to the City
Council by filing a form to the City Clerk within 15 days of the date of this
action. The form shall specifically state the reason for the appeal and an appeal
fee is required. All right that was the final item. Moving on to Commissioner
report and announcements. Does staff have any updates under this item? Yes
Chairperson, just real quickly the City Clerk's office informed me
that four planning commissioners have terms expiring at the end of the
calendar year and that's commissioners Zuber, Solis, Rich and Tabjulu but
members are encouraged to reapply to serve on a planning commission and you
can do that through the city's website we can put you in touch with the city
clerk if you need help to take those actions. That's it for staff. Any
Commissioner updates. Yes Commissioner or Vice Chair Mendoza. Quick
announcement. So the Planning Commissioners Academy it's gonna be on
March 10 to the 12th. Okay and I just got an email today saying congratulations
your submission has been approved. So I'm gonna be presenting a session. The only
thing is like you know I put it for 15 minutes they want it to 75 minutes so so
it's gonna be called housing first demystify what planning commissioners
need to know what the evidence actually shows just a quick description here
this section will examine housing first through the lens of system thinking
language planning and real world experience it will briefly distinguish
housing first from shelters, transitional housing, treatment programs and
simplistic housing owning approach. As many of the commissioners have seen I'm
very interested in that topic so and then finally the city has been
sponsoring our attendance to the to this event so hopefully it will happen this
years I'm gonna be requesting that see if that's possible I know it's not
guaranteed but yeah and it's just to just add on to add on to that I
understand that the more information and registration information for the for
the for the academies coming out in the next month it's already a look out for
that and we'll for that the planning commission when it comes out we are
budgeting to send planning commissioners to the event to the conference and there but
there is limited budget available so we'll need to calculate the costs and make sure
and see how many commissioners we can potentially send. So more information about that will
be coming out probably in the next month and we'll keep you informed.
Well, at least we're gonna be serving 30%
that they're giving me for, you know,
being for 20 presentations.
So, thank you, that's it.
All right, that's good news.
Chair, Vice Chair Mendoza,
best of luck there with your presentation as well.
Yeah, then last time I was in Monterey,
I presented a Spani Harding Orchestra.
That was in 2021, so it would be nice to go back.
There you go
Just just one question for me for the secretary the item that we heard last week
the expansion of cannabis dispensaries plus two
Within the San Leandro limits outside of industrial
I'm hearing that that item is now going to City Council as a special session this Monday. Is that correct?
that item is scheduled for the City Council on Monday and so that includes the Planning Commission's recommendations as well as
Meet as well code amendments that didn't come for the planning commission
So there's a larger packet that the Commission is that the council is considering on Monday
got it, okay, and
It is a City Council meeting not a closed working session. So general public is
Encouraged and invited to attend. That's correct
Okay
And then in terms of recommendations
that are going forward to city council for that item,
there was no clear cut recommendation.
Last week's discussion was just more so that.
It was a discussion with, I think, points from both sides.
So how is this being packaged ultimately for city council
for them to take the information in?
The staff report that went forward to city council
included a section related to planning commission action
staff did their best and tried to capture the discussion and the
efficacies. I got both sides of the issues that both both side of the topic
that the commission presented and explained that a failure to act still
proceeds on to City Council for their consideration. Okay sounds good. Thank
you for that. Alright if there's no other announcements we are officially closed
at this time so the time is now 959 and this meeting is adjourned.