[{"_1":2,"_75":-5,"_76":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6134039,"mediaKeyId","5688575-a33d9d711dca3955ecf294f2d85d4570","parentId",5688575,"title","Pinole planning commission refines guidance for APN 80 redevelopment, urges labor standards and returns item for further edits","audioSeconds",2558,"startMs",1367000,"endMs",3925000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5688575-a33d9d711dca3955ecf294f2d85d4570&start=1367&end=3925","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5688575-a33d9d711dca3955ecf294f2d85d4570/thumbnail_1367000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6134039/Pinole-City/Contra-Costa-County/California/Pinole-planning-commission-refines-guidance-for-APN-80-redevelopment-urges-labor-standards-and-returns-item-for-further-edits","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6134039-41b97b0b550fcdffb690bc07eabaf997/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144142&Signature=V9gjb8J1-JPbf3f3HVAWdRZpAotNk9DlafyoJiFu-Ib5bfRk~x3FzDy4NcxvltYSS9NlCJfSwYiM59lU4L1Jgo2j5lME0UUeTiydpWP36LZ7C3Mo3rwhfibFx5k4LU-GblJ1UbfYa0mnZuhRWIGru6tfuuLy02Q-qWY2a5T44lkcteKJnLOU8fkFShJLnob9zZL1wQ2nHSjtekgxqWn95BZlf~NGyOdHORUiZ3jJnKRShGBW1bCbXUplI1W7CGRGAv-C~9pq5qESAjqrtyaoMmSelDO0o1V25WpgP6f~GEJA~~3K8iV8lHgcs3ke9ZYMI83SZdGV0Y8O2rXzHlKD2g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Pinole City, CA","date","2025-08-25T00:00:00Z","article","The Pinole Planning Commission on Aug. 25 reviewed and revised draft guidance for redevelopment of the APN 80 shopping center, amending the exhibit to “strongly encourage” use of the city’s project labor agreement and voting to continue the item so staff can incorporate a range of edits requested by commissioners and members of the public.

The item centers on a draft resolution and an accompanying Exhibit A that compiles the commission’s ideas for how the largely vacant shopping center site might be redeveloped. Commissioners, staff and public commenters discussed traffic mitigation, grocery and restaurant anchors, affordable housing, community open space, parking design and labor standards.

Why it matters: The commission’s guidance will be sent to the City Council and could shape early expectations for developers and community groups about what uses and conditions the city favors for the site. Commissioners emphasized clarifying the document’s organization and strengthening language on traffic mitigation, housing affordability and workforce protections before it goes to council.

Most consequential actions taken: The commission voted 6-0 to amend Exhibit A to include a recommendation that the city’s project labor agreement be strongly encouraged in implementation of any projects related to the site. Commissioners also voted 6-0 to continue the item to the next regular meeting so staff can integrate the changes discussed.

Discussion and public comment
Planning Manager Hannon told the commission the packet contains a draft resolution reflecting the commission’s April direction and that the developer had expressed interest but did not appear at the meeting. He said staff could either bring a revised draft back to the commission for final action or forward commission edits to City Council.

Commissioners proposed a number of textual changes. Commissioner Ooch asked that a sentence saying developers “should consider ways to mitigate potential traffic impacts” be changed to say they “need to” mitigate traffic impacts. Commissioner Huey asked that language describing community needs be revised to reflect that some needs are self-identified and others may require outreach. Commissioner Lam Julian suggested moving lengthy examples into a footnote for Council convenience and Commissioner Bender and Vice Chair Menes urged the packet be reorganized into broader categories (goals, potential uses, examples) rather than a long undifferentiated bullet list.

Several commissioners requested tighter wording on housing and retail: one commissioner asked that the draft explicitly encourage affordable housing in any residential component, and others recommended including language that would attract a “unique grocery option” to the site in addition to traditional anchors.

Public commenters emphasized labor standards and local benefits. Ruben Galvan, a representative of NorCal Carpenters Union Local 152, urged “strong labor standards” including fair wages, health benefits, apprenticeships and enforcement to prevent wage theft. Galvan said those protections ensure the community benefits from construction jobs and that substandard labor practices lower quality and safety.

Staff and procedural limits
Planning Manager Hannon told the commission there is no active development application for the site; the drafting and discussion are advisory guidance to be sent to City Council. He said specific permit conditions, including any requirements tied to a project labor agreement or prevailing-wage-like protections, would be considered when a concrete proposal and application are filed.

Other topics discussed included parking design and programmatic alternatives. Commissioners and public speakers suggested avoiding large, uninterrupted surface parking that creates heat islands and long pedestrian walks, and discussed parking garages and structured parking as alternatives that can free ground-level area for retail, open space and pedestrian amenities. Commissioners also discussed development incentives: staff said waiving routine fees was unlikely but that development agreements could include economic incentives or conditions of approval tailored to public benefits.

Next steps and timing
The commission directed staff to consolidate and reorganize Exhibit A (grouping goals, potential uses and examples), add language encouraging affordable housing and community-oriented open space, refine parking guidance, and include the strong encouragement of the city’s project labor agreement. Staff recommended bringing a revised draft back to the commission before forwarding to council; the commission voted unanimously to continue the item to the next regularly scheduled meeting so staff can implement the requested changes.

Votes at a glance
- Motion to approve minutes of June 9, 2025: approved, vote 6-0.
- Motion to amend Exhibit A to add language that the commission “strongly encourages” use of the city’s project labor agreement for projects at the APN 80 site: approved, vote 6-0.
- Motion to continue the APN 80 item to the commission’s next regular meeting so staff can incorporate edits: approved, vote 6-0.

What was not decided
No development application, design review, conditional-use permit or construction authorization was before the commission. Staff and commissioners repeatedly noted that any binding labor or wage requirements, fee waivers or other conditions would be applied (or not) at the permit stage or through City Council action, not by this advisory resolution.

Community context
Commissioners and public speakers said the site — identified in the record as the former Safeway/CVS shopping center — is well-located for transit access and regional views and could support a mix of retail, dining, housing and community space if redeveloped. Commissioners asked staff to make the draft clearer about community benefits the city seeks, to preserve examples in a concise format for council review, and to include clearer language on required traffic mitigation and parking design.

The commission will revisit the item at its next regularly scheduled meeting after staff submits a revised Exhibit A that reflects the commission’s and public’s input.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Meeting - August 25, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Pinole Planning Commission amended its draft guidance for redevelopment of the APN 80 shopping center to recommend the city apply its project labor agreement, asked staff to reorganize and clarify exhibit language, and continued the item to a future meeting so staff can incorporate commission and public input.","taxTitle","Pinole City, Contra Costa County, California","taxId",71884,"location","headline","","shortSummary","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Pinole planning commission refines guidance for APN 80 redevelopment, urges labor standards and returns item for further edits