Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Quickquack topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Placer County approves Quick Quack Innovation Center design review modification with clerical errata
Summary
The Zoning Administrator approved a design review agreement for the Quick Quack Innovation Center (PLN25‑00109), with staff reading clerical corrections to the conditions of approval into the record. No members of the public spoke against the item.
Get email alerts on the Development Quickquack topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Placer County Zoning Administrator on Oct. 23 approved a design review agreement for the Quick Quack Innovation Center (PLN25‑00109), finding the project consistent with the previously certified Sunset Area Plan and Placer Ranch Specific Plan environmental impact report and adopting conditions of approval as amended by an errata read into the record.
Staff told the hearing the errata corrects clerical errors in the recommended conditions of approval and does not represent a substantial revision to the analysis. The read corrections removed one non‑applicable condition, adjusted language in two conditions and renumbered the remaining conditions. Staff specifically described revised language requiring improved plans to show construction of a public road entry driveway onto Placer Boulevard and two public road entrance driveways onto South Loop Road, removal and restoration of existing curb cut stubs, and construction of a center median along the project frontage on South Loop Road to restrict southern access to right‑in/right‑out only.
Environmental Health and Engineering staff verbally stated support for the project subject to the conditions of approval as amended. An applicant representative said the site will include two nonpublic washes for product development and confirmed receipt of the errata and agreement with the conditions.
No members of the public offered comment at the hearing, and the Zoning Administrator noted the appeal period could be waived since no public testimony was given. The approval was expressly made subject to the conditions of approval as amended by the errata read into the record.

