Loomis planning commission recommends council approve Carmenere 24‑lot subdivision with conditions on lighting and flood controls

The Loomis Planning Commission on a unanimous vote recommended town council approval of the Carmenere vesting tentative subdivision map (application 2401), a proposed 24‑lot residential subdivision on about 98 acres along Del Mar Avenue.

Planning staff told commissioners the site consists of parcels on both sides of Del Mar Avenue east of the railroad tracks and south of Sierra College Boulevard, and includes oak woodlands along the Antelope Creek riparian corridor and wetlands associated with Sucker Ravine. Staff said the project proposes lot sizes ranging from about 2.3 to 4.6 acres, two courts off Del Mar (Court A on the west and Court B on the east), a gated emergency‑vehicle access to Bankhead Road, underground utilities, and a pedestrian Class I trail linking the development to the Loomis Union School District site to the north. Staff also said the project would deed‑restrict five lots to meet the town’s inclusionary housing requirement: three ADUs restricted to very‑low income households and two ADUs restricted to low‑income households, each deed‑restricted for 55 years and to be built concurrently with the primary residence.

Christie, planning staff, summarized environmental review: the town circulated an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND; SCH 2025070798) for 30 days and received seven comment letters from agencies and one from a resident. Agency comments covered hazards and soil contamination, vehicle‑miles‑traveled calculations, conversion of agricultural land, stormwater treatment and floodplain mapping, and sanitary sewer connection standards. Christie said responses were prepared and that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) contains measures intended to reduce impacts to less‑than‑significant levels, including biological surveys (special‑status plants, monarch butterfly, western spadefoot toad, Northwestern pond turtle, nesting birds and raptors, burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, roosting bats, American badger), wetland delineation/permitting, Section 1602 (Lake and Streambed) coordination, an Oak Woodland Management Plan and tree‑removal mitigation, cultural and tribal resources protocols, asbestos/lead and organochlorine pesticide testing, well abandonment permits, and a stormwater pollution prevention plan.

Town engineer Richard said the town’s land development manual generally requires sidewalks on private streets and cautioned that decomposed‑granite (DG) trails are difficult to maintain to ADA standards and may require frequent repair; he recommended durable, ADA‑compliant surfaces for pathways that the HOA will maintain. Richard also described the town’s construction standards and noted the manual allows alternate lighting designs where the character of the surrounding neighborhood warrants “unusual design,” subject to review.

Owner‑applicant Mike Fournier described the project’s vineyard‑style frontage and said the development is intended to preserve a rural character while providing housing and infrastructure improvements. Fournier described donating land for a PCWA pressure‑reducing station, extending sewer and water trunks to benefit future development (and the school connection), and installing conduit to enable multiple fiber providers to serve the subdivision and the school. He said the applicant anticipated a 12‑foot‑wide trail with an 8‑foot paved center for ADA compliance and that the gated Bankhead access would be strictly for emergency vehicles.

Public commenters largely voiced support for the project’s lot sizes and vineyard landscaping but raised concerns about street lighting and sidewalks. Several residents said sidewalk installation along the courts would be out of character and urged lower‑impact lighting. Alfred Angioni, Loomis Union School District director of facilities, said the subdivision complements the district’s school planning and infrastructure work.

Commissioners discussed changes to the draft conditions of approval after staff noted Placer County Flood Control requested additional items: submission of HEC‑HMS/HEC‑RAS modeling files, confirmation of drainage report values and peak‑flow tables, and improved mapping of the Antelope Creek 100‑year floodplain on tentative map sheets. Commissioners also debated condition 33 (street‑lighting requirements from the construction manual). The commission directed staff to replace the strict street‑light prescription with a requirement that the owner prepare an exterior‑lighting/ street‑lighting plan that the planning department and town engineer will review and approve prior to site‑improvement plan approval; the revised language preserves the town’s safety standards while allowing lower‑impact alternatives in recognition of the site’s semi‑rural character.

Votes at a glance: The planning commission vote was unanimous to recommend town council approval. Roll call recorded ayes from Commissioners DePillo, Kelly, Lee, Wilson and Chairman Onderko.

What the commission recommended: The commission asked that the council adopt the IS/MND and MMRP, include the recommended Placer County Flood Control clarifications and drainage deliverables among the conditions of approval, and accept a modification to the applicant’s design guidelines reducing a proposed 50‑foot rear setback in the design‑guideline text to 30 feet (the 30‑foot figure still exceeds the town’s 25‑foot minimum). The commission’s action was a recommendation to the town council; final approvals and recordation of any map remain subject to council action and completion of the site‑improvement and permit processes.

Implementation notes: Staff said conditions will require biological surveys, wetland permitting (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and state certifications), an Oak Woodland Management Plan and tree‑removal mitigation, cultural/tribal monitoring and protocols, an ADA‑compliant pedestrian pathway, and a lighting plan approved by the planning department and town engineer prior to site‑improvement plan approval. Placer County Flood Control’s requested deliverables (HEC modeling files, peak flow tables, and clarified mapping of the Antelope Creek floodplain) were added to the conditions.

Key quotes (selected): Mike Fournier, owner‑applicant: "We're putting tubes in, pipes in, that are designed with the necessary radius to support fiber optics," describing conduit to enable multiple providers. Richard, town engineer: "It's in the best interest of the HOA to have some of what of a surface that will endure the test of time," arguing for durable, ADA‑compliant pedestrian surfacing.

Next steps: The planning commission forwarded its recommendation, including the revised condition language and added flood‑control items, to the town council for final action and any map approvals.