Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-24-2007 PC Minutes DRAFT DRAFT la Co . . to CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 24, 2007, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Schaub called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chair, Schaub, Vice-Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Tomlinson, Biddle, and King, Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, Erica Fraser, Senior Planner, Ms. Karaboghosian Karaboghosian, Associate Planner, Mrs. Debra LeClair, Rl~cording Secretary, Ms. Rhonda Franklin, Secretary Absent: None ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - None MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS - The June 26, 2007 ffi.nutes were approved with two amendments as requested by Cm. King. Cm. Biddle abstained from the vote due to his absence during the June 26, 2007 meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NONE CONSENT CALENDAR - NONE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS 8.1 P A 07-020 Veterinary Surgical Associates (VSA) - A request for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a veterinary surgical facility within an existing building and a reduction in required on-site parking. Ms. Laura Karaboghosian, Associate Planner, presented the sp~cifics of the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Tomlinson commented that you can drive through the old Dublin Honda site from the proposed project site and asked if the area would be part of an access easement or would it be closed at a later date. Ms. Karaboghosian responded that she did not believe that the access would be closed. Ms. Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, mentioned that there is an application before the City for the Dublin Honda show~'(lom site which is adjacent to the subject site. The access point would be addressed as a part ot 'hat application. 70 Jury 21. 200; DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Wenhrenberg mentioned that it looks more like a fire access easement. Chair Schaub asked what Cm. Tomlinson's concern was. Cm. Tomlinson responded that he was getting to a question regarding parking. Cm. King asked about the placement of the building on the lot and the address on Amador Plaza Road. Ms. Karaboghosian responded that the site is a land-bound piece of property (no street frontage). Cm. King responded that he understood that the address was Amador Plaza Road but the building was set back from the street. Chair Schaub mentioned that the proposed site is the old Honda Parts Department. Cm. Tomlinson asked if the Campbell facility has any storage 5pace. He commented that the parking study calculated parking requirements based on the square footage of the facility minus the emergency square footage. When the study calculated the formula for the Dublin site they deducted the emergency square footage as well as the 1,700 sqnare feet of storage space. He was concerned that if there is no parking at the Amador Plaza '~d site, clients would park at adjacent properties, hence the reason for the questions regarding the easement. Cm. Tomlinson asked why they deducted storage from the Du:>lin site and not from the Campbell site. Ms. Karaboghosian answered that they didn't have the floor plan of the Campbell location. The study took into consideration how the site would be utilized and deducted the emergency care facility from the Campbell location and also took into consideration the number of staff members on-site at any given time, which was 15, which is consistent with the Dublin proposal. The study found that 31-37 parking spaces would be sufficient in order to accommodate the proposed use. Cm. Tomlinson said he wanted to be sure we were doing a fair comparison. Chair Schaub was concerned that this was the 3rd parking stud:r from Omni Means that had an incorrect date and wanted to ensure that Staff is aware of this situation. Chair Schaub commented that in the study they mention that there is shared parking in the Campbell facility. The study mentioned that up to five parking spaces may have been occupied by vehicles not associated with VSA but this is not apparent in the study. Ms. Wilson indicated that the Public Works Department contracts with the parking consultants and that she will make sure that they are made aware of the Chair Schaub's concerns. Cm. King commented that when there is a proposal to reduce parking, predicting parking capacity is subjective and the experts try to reduce it to mathematics. He thought there is an uneven amount of parking in the City of D:tblin in relationship to the amount of traffic. He was also concerned about the justification for the reduction for this application. P[annl:Ufj Commission 1:ii!{fuf.n 71 JU(Y 2{ 2007 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Biddle commented that the parking calculation was a good example of not using the parking factors blindly because the factors indicate that there should be approximately 110 parking spaces. He didn't think the facility needed 110 parking spaces. Cm. Biddle questioned the building being off the street and the fact that it is an emergency animal hospital. What kind of signage will be allowed on the ~treet? Ms. Wilson answered that the code doesn't allow for off-site signage. Ms. Wilson indicated that we will work with Dr. Gaudet to get appropriate signage for their building. Cm. Biddle was concerned about the landscaping at the site deteriorating and noticed that there was no maintenance requirement in the Conditions of Approval. Ms. Wilson answered that the application is for a conditional use permit to allow the use. M~. Wilson also indicated that the City will ensure that the site is maintained properly including Natering the plants. Chair Schaub commented that there is an SDR but that the Commission does not have it before them at this time. Ms. Wilson answered that the Applicant recdved an SDR Waiver for minor modifications to the facility for their use. Cm. Biddle asked if there is an applicable specific plan provisions that must be met. Ms. Wilson indicated that Dr. Gaudet is only making minor modifications to the existing building consistent with the previous zoning, which is a Commercial Zone. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if businesses in the area were noticed. Ms. Wilson responded yes. Chair Schaub wanted to make sure that when noticing a project with a requested exception to the code that the requested exceptions are discussed in the notice. Ms. Wilson stated exceptions are a part of the public notice. Chair Schaub opened the public hearing. Dr. Dwight Gaudet, Veterinary Surgical Associates, 1410 Monument Blvd., Concord, CA 94520 expressed his reasons to have the project approved. Cm. Biddle asked how many employees are in the San Mateo site. Dr. Gaudet answered there are 20 employees. There has never been a problem with emplcyee parking, most take public transportation. In Campbell, where the parking study was performed, is where their largest oncology center is, which is much larger than Dublin. In Campbell the facility shares 5 spaces with the shop next door and the accurate number, the day of the study, was 32. If you use 32, that will change the ratio from to 2.45 to 2.85. Dr. Gaudet also.ndicated that the Campbell facility is the largest of the 3 and is an oncology center so it's very busy practice. Campbell has a must larger market than Dublin. In the application Dr. Gaudet indicated that it would be unlikely for them to need more than 28 spaces at any point. 72 Jury 2{ 2007 DRAFT DRAFT Chair Schaub mentioned that with Togo's and other restaurants in the area, their parking lot is generally full. Dr. Gaudet stated that the ER clinic shouldn't need more that 15 spaces since they are open during off hours. Dr. Gaudet indicated that he understands th3.t they will have to apply for a permit for signage and is willing to work with any conditions. Cm. Tomlinson asked if the Campbell facility has storage spacp. Dr. Gaudet stated that they have approximately 950 square feet, in addition to the 16,000 square feet that is quoted in the study which makes the building approximately 17,000 square feet. Cm. Tomlinson asked if the emergency facility in Campbell wes 3,000 square feet. Dr. Gaudet answered that it was 3,000 square feet and the Dublin facility would be 4,000 square feet. Cm. Tomlinson asked Dr. Gaudet to explain how his business 'Norks. He asked whether they used the emergency portion of the facility during the day. Dr. Gaudet answered yes but only minimally, that they only share the restrooms and the stairways, and the situation is the same in the Campbell facility. All referrals are from general veterinarians who don't have their equipment or expertise. Cm. Tomlinson asked if there is an operating room for emerge:1cy hours and one for regular hours. Dr. Gaudet answered that there is a shared operating room facility for both ER and medical facility and designed to be situated between the two sl~parate spaces. Cm. Tomlinson was concerned that the Commission should know enough about their business that they can ensure that parking won't become a problem for:he other businesses in the area. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if they are ready to open as far as staffing, etc. Dr. Gaudet answered they have already hired 3 people who will start February 1, 2008, as long as the facility is ready. They anticipate opening February 1, 2008. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if he would offer his employees carpoe,ling. Dr. Gaudet yes. Cm. King commented that he thought the facility was great for the community, and would provide a needed service. Cm. King also asked if the referral sources were a working relationship at present. Dr. Gaudet answered that they are currently working with 480 veterinary practices and 1,100 veterinarians around the bay arEa. Cm. King asked if most of their business will come from referrals from established vets in the bay area since if they were counting on walk-in business it was not the best location. Dr. Gaudet answered that it was a great location for visibility from 1-680 and great accessibility to 1-580 and 1-680 and for emergency work that's important. 99% of business is from refErral but they would be doing marketing and an education program for their referring veterinarians. Dr. Gaudet noted that the ER facility in Concord is set back similar to the Dublin facillty and the location has not been an issue. (PlarrniilH (om mission 1\i!fiu&lr 73 JU[Y 21, 2007 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. King asked what was in the building before. Dr. Gaudet cnswered that it had been parts and service for the Honda Dealership. Cm. King stated that he was reluctant to approve something trat would get in the way of a specific plan but didn't see any problem with this application. Cm. Biddle asked for an explanation of discharges on Saturday mornings. Dr. Gaudet answered that there are no normal clinic hours on Saturday only discharge of patients that had been worked on Thursday or Friday. Any cases that needed tc' be seen would be seen in the emergency facility. Cm. Biddle asked about the roll-up doors. Dr. Gaudet answen~d that the doors will be removed and filled in but no changes to the structure of the building. Although they would have liked to do something wonderful architecturally the cost was prohibitive. They will use color and other things to make it nice. Cm. Biddle asked if they needed the loading dock. Dr. Gaudet answered that the area will be blocked off for more parking spaces. Cm. Biddle asked about delivery trucks. Dr. Gaudet answered that all deliveries are from small trucks. Cm. Biddle asked about medical waste disposal. Dr. Gaudet answered that there was a small quantity, they use the same company and they always adhere to the regulations. Cm. Biddle asked when they would open. Dr. Gaudet answen~d they planned to open on Feb 1, 2008. Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. On a motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. Tomlinson, and voted on 5-0-0, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 34 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERAn: A VETERINARY FACILITY IN THE PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) ZONING DISTRICT WITH A REDUCTION IN REQUIRED ON-SITE PARKING LOCATED AT 7159 AMADOR PLAZA ROAD (APN 941-0305-033) PA 07-020 8.2 P A 07-023 Chipotle Mexican Grill- Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor seating. cP/;lnniufl Commission :'\1 eeting 74 Juty 21, 2007 DRAFT DRAFT Ms. Karaboghosian, Associate Planner, presented the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Wehrenberg was concerned about the proximity of the tables to the parking lot. Ms. Karaboghosian answered that there is a Condition of ApprovaH which prohibits them from being closer than 2 feet to the curb. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the curb was step up or even with the parking lot. Ms. Karaboghosian answered that it was a step up curb. Cm. King and Cm. Wehrenberg were concerned about trees in the seating area. Ms. Karaboghosian indicated that there will be trees as a part of thl~ new landscaping. Cm. King expressed concern about the eating areas that were Lot accessible to the public (because of fencing) unless you are a patron of the restaurant. Ms. Wilson answered the staff report discussed the potential for fencing if alcohol is proposed to be served. There is no fencing being proposed for this application. Cm. King asked about the laws regarding serving alcohol in ar outdoor dining area. Ms. Wilson responded that Alcoholic Beverage Control licensing rE'quires a barrier, such as a fence, for an area where alcohol is served. Cm. King commented that the choice is to serve alcohol with fencing or no alcohol without fencing. Ms. Wilson answered yes. Cm. Tomlinson commented that alcohol sales are basically about separation and enclosure. He suggested that a planter would provide some separation from the cars and asked if they could be placed as a protection between dining patrons and cars, wit:1in the 2 ft between the seating area and the curb. Ms. Wilson answered that there is no irrigation in this area and the path of travel for ADA regulations must be maintained. Chair Schaub mentioned that in Walnut Creek there is curb seeling and his table was almost hit by an SUV while parallel parking. There are large planters on the curb but not very effective. Cm. King expressed concern regarding which side the restaurant should face. The plan suggests that they should be facing Amador Plaza Road but was concerned about the Village Green that was planned in the future and how that would affect those plans. He thought the project should face inward. Chair Schaub mentioned that a Village Green was proposed in the specific plan for the area. Chair Schaub opened the public hearing. Ms. Elizabeth Valerio, Valerio Architects, expressed her reasons to have the project approved. Cm. King asked why the project is ideal for Dublin. (Planning Commis:n'on ~lfeeting 75 Jury 21, 200/ DRAFT DRAFT Ms. Valerio responded that traffic, area and the population cOvers the spectrum of diversity and age groups. The developer designed the building; Chipolte would be adding only the signage and outdoor seating. Based on the ADA requirements the project would face the parking lot and would keep clearance for path-of-travel. She did not want to put up fencing which would decrease the number of tables and chairs in the outdoor seating area. Chair Schaub commented that a more interesting sidewalk with some curves would have been better in the shopping center plans. Cm. Biddle asked if Ms. Valerio was aware of the windy condi:ions in Dublin. Ms. Valerio answered that the umbrellas would be anchored to the ground but they would prefer not to anchor the tables and chairs so people can move them around and share space. Cm. King wanted to restate Cm. Tomlinson's comment regarding a planter that would add a psychological separation from the vehicles. Ms. Valerio answered that it would be possible but if they are placed within the 2 ft clearance they would encroach into the path-of-travel. Cm. Tomlinson commented that his idea was to place the planter within the 2ft clearance and then asked if the 2ft clearance is designed as safety for the tables or maneuvering for the cars. Ms. Wilson said the 2ft clearance is for the safety of the diners. The Commission could add a condition to allow a planter box for separation. Ms. Valerio indicated that it would be nice but they would have to water it. Chair Schaub commented that they would have to water down the patio every night anyway so it shouldn't be a problem. Cm. King asked about the opening date. Ms. Valerio answered that the restaurant would open by November or December. Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. Cm. Tomlinson is in favor of the project, and thought it would be nicer with a portable planter strip in the 2ft clearance. Cm. Wehrenberg would like to see a barrier, but would like to keep it consistent with the rest of the shopping center. Ms. Wilson added that if the Commission felt strongly about adding the barrier Staff could add a condition but that it would only apply to the ChipoIte store front. Cm. Wehrenberg commended the Staff for the Conditions of Approval. On a motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. King by a vote 5-0-0, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted (note: no additional conditions were ad:led): CfJ{annmg Commission lif{fu41r :Meeting 76 .lury 21, 20m DRAFT DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 35 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN OUTDOOR SEATING AREA IN A PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT 7000 AMADOR PLAZA ROAD (APN 94l-0305-040) PA 07-023 8.3 P A 06-061: Grafton Station Shopping Center Development Agreement. Ms. Erica Fraser, Senior Planner, presented the specifics of the:>roject as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. King asked if there were conditions for the property owner to disclose to a new owner. Chair Schaub asked whether the development agreement had l~nough information that any new owners would understand the commitments. Ms. Wilson commented that the information contained in the Development Agreement cites the Resolutiom of Approval. Ms. Fraser added that the Development Agreement does explain all fees and improvements that have to be made and that most of the Grafton Station improvements have already been done. Ms. Fraser gave the example of another development, Casamin Valley, which has many improvements that must be made and are listed in the development agreement. Cm. King asked about the improvements to Dublin Blvd. Ms. Fraser answered that Dublin Blvd is almost complete. Cm. King was concerned about the transfer portion of the development agreement. Ms. Wilson answered that this development agreement is based on a form :leveloped by the City Attorney for use with the Eastern Dublin Specific Planning area. Cm. King commented that Para 18 of page 11, states that the agreement runs with the land. Ms. Wilson agreed that any new buyer would be subject to the agreement. Cm. Wehrenberg commented that the agreement is good for 5 years. Ms. Wilson agreed and stated that the project must be done within that time period. Chair Schaub opened the public hearing. Simon Woo, of Dublin Ranch asked where the development is located. Ms. Fraser pointed the project out on the slide. 1\mut:.lr 77 .lury 24, 2007 DRAFT DRAFT Mr. Woo asked if there were 4 buildings. Ms. Fraser explained that the layout of the shopping center was approved in 2006 and the design of 5 buildings has been approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. Woo asked if there was housing. Chair Schaub answered that there would be restaurants and shops. Cm. Biddle added that everything south of Dublir blvd and 1-580 is zoned commercial. Ms. Flora Woo - 3275 Dublin Blvd, Dublin, asked when the project would be complete. Ms. Fraser answered that the project is anticipated to be under construction within next four months with a phased approach, and will take a year to finish. Chair Schaub added that everything is approved except for thE second big box store and the two restaurant pads. Ms. Fraser indicated that there are no applications for the restaurant or second big box store sites at this time. Ms. Fraser indicated that there is still a lot of work to be done t::> finish the project. Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. On a motion by Cm. Tomlinson, seconded by Vice-Chair Wehrenberg and by a vote of 5-0-0, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 36 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A UEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR GRAFTON STATION LOCATED AT THE SOUTH\VEST CORNER OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD AND GRAFTON STREET AND BORDERED BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD AND NORTHSIDE DRIVE IN AREA H OF DUBLIN RANCH (APN 985-0009-015-02) P A 06-061 NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE 10. OTHER BUSINESS 10.1 Study Session: P A 02-065B LED Sign - Master Slgn Program Amendment for GM Auto Mall. The Applicant has requested approval of a Master Sign Program Amendment to allow a 7'R" x 13' LED picture display panel on the existing 35 foot tall freeway sign. {j>{(}nning Commission -'Rfffu&rr ~41ectin~.q 78 July].l, 2007 DRAFT DRAFT Ms. Fraser presented the Staff Report. Chair Schaub asked who owns the sign. Mr. Inder Dosanijh, the Applicant, indicated that General Motors is the owner. Cm. King asked how often the picture will change. Ms. Fraser answered that the picture will change approximately every 4 seconds at a minimum. The Applicant, Inder Dosanijh, 3093 Broadway, Oakland, CA S4611, expressed the reasons to have the project approved. Cm. Wehrenberg commented on the size of the sign which is 13 feet across and 7' 8" in height. She also indicated that she travels on Highway 4 and the signs there are extremely glaring at night. Chair Schaub thought those signs were incredibly bright at night. Mr. Dosanijh thought that the San Leandro sign was twice as large as the sign in this application. Cm. Wehrenberg asked about increasing sales for hummer dealership, and though that the current gas prices were taking care of that. Mr. Dosanijh answ~red that his dealership had brought $6 million worth of sales last month to Dublin. Cm. Tomlinson asked if the sign is for use by all the dealerships that are part of the GM Auto Mall or only for the Hummer Dealership. Ms. Fraser answered that the sign is part of the GM Auto Mall but the LED panel would be owned by Hummer, Saturn & Saab. Cm. Tomlinson expressed concern about the information dispb.yed on the sign from other businesses not in the GM Auto Mall. Ms. Fraser responded thet off-site signage is prohibited by our zoning ordinance and no other businesses could advertise )n the sign. Cm. Wehrenberg asked how the City could condition the brigI-tness and how an electrical engineer would have to determine the candle foot. Ms. Fraser :ommented that it would be difficult to condition the brightness of the sign. Chair Schaub thought it would be impossible to determine hoVl bright it could be. He is absolutely opposed to this sign. No other communities in the eLrea allow these kinds of signs and they are completely inappropriate for the area. He also does not like the fact that the sign changes and thought that this is a dangerous situation next to the freeway. Cm. Biddle's recommendation would be to rewrite the zoning Jrdinance and prohibit electronic reader board signs in the future. gYanniufJ Commission 1:i?{fUkir 'Heeling 79 lury N, 2007 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Schaub commented that the commission will have the opportunity to address this issue when they work on the City Community Design Element. Ms. Wilson agreed that the Commission would be able to address these signs at that time and that the City will be working on revising the sign ordinance in the City's Municipal Code that would address these concerns. Cm. King commented that the sign is located west of the Tassajara Rd. and wondered if it would be a distraction to drivers on 1-580 and if this is an area :)f back-up on the freeway. Cm. King asked Mr. Dosanijh if his dealership was the only one using the sign. Mr. Dosanijh answered that the sign was there before they moved in and he is buying the property from GM which includes the sign. Cm. King asked if he would have total control over what is on the sign. Mr. Dosanijh is in discussion with the neighbors regarding sharing the sign. Cm. Wehrenberg commented that the yellow Hummers are good marketing tools on the side of the freeway but that the weeds are a problem. She understands that he will be working with CalTrans to take care of the weeds. Ms. Fraser indicated that the Applicant had made a request for an encroachment permit from CalTrans. Cm. Wehrenberg stated that since this is a gateway into Dublin she is not in favor of having a sign of this size as a gateway to the City. She mentioned the el~ctric sign at the Dublin High School is appropriate for their use and that they turn it off at night. Ms. Fraser indicated that we have no jurisdiction over the schools. Cm. King asked, in trying to determine whether the distractior is the size or the brightness, if it would be a problem if the sign was LED but the picture never changed. Cm. Tomlinson pointed out that there are 64 levels of dimming: in the specifications so the brightness issue could be addressed and was not the major problem for him. Cm. Wehrenberg mentioned that the signs in Antioch were orange and very bright and actually bothered her eyes as she drove by. Ms. Wilson added that there are signs that were recently apprcved, including the Grafton Center (Lowes) which will be a 75 foot high sign. Cm. Wehrenberg mentioned that she is not objecting to the size of the sign but the fact that it's LED. Cm. King asked what Cm. Wehrenberg didn't like about the LED sign and asked if it would make a difference if the picture never changed. Cm. Wehrenberg answered that it's the brightness. pr(jllniuf} Commission 'Meeting 80 'lury 24, 2007 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Biddle felt that the sign would be like a billboard and he thought that 25ft is big enough. He also expressed concerns about the land east of the site and lhe Commission might be precedence setting. Cm. Tomlinson pointed out it was interesting which cities werl~ mentioned in the Staff Report that allow the large signs and the cities that don't allow them and Dublin is moving towards the cities that don't allow them. He stated that he likes the fact that it's a good looking sign, as well as the Hacienda sign but looking at it from a precedent perspective and the thought that the other dealerships will want one and he is not in favor of the pr')ject. Mr. Dosanijh said he has a very good working relationship with the City and is willing to work out a compromise. Cm. Tomlinson mentioned that the signs by the Oakland Colis,~um needed to have a state law passed in order to allow them. Chair Schaub commented that the Commission is not in favor of it as it stands now. If Mr. Dosanijh brings it forward it would either be denied or approved. If it was denied you could appeal it to the City Council. Mr. Dosanijh stated that he will not go forward with the sign because he has other projects in the City. 10.2 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff, including Committee Reports and Report:; by the Planning Commission related to meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234). Ms. Wilson mentioned two joint study sessions, August 7th and August 14th, with the City Council and Planning Commission. The first meeting on AugLst 7th will be a kick-off meeting for Downtown Specific Plan process and the Community Desi~;n Element, in the Regional Meeting Room at 5:00 p.m. Dinner will be served before the m2eting. The consultant team, RBF Consultants, will be in attendance. The second meeting on August 14th before the regular Planning Commission meeting, will be in the Regional Meeting Room from 5:00pm to 7:00pm, with dinn'2r served before the meeting. The meeting is on The Plaza project which is a high rise, mixed use development proposal, in eastern Dublin, east of Tassajara, along Dublin Blvd. The Planning Commission did not have any items to report. (Planning Commission 1?rgUt:.11 }rfeetm,q 81 jury 2./, 20U7 DRAFT ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, t~" Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: ----- DRAFT Planning Commi:;sion 'i\efiuf.tr ~\leetiniJ 82 ]u(y 2{. !OUi