Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 12-19-1988 . r' _ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ . • Re~ular Meeting - December 19, 1988 A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on December 19, 1988, in the Meeting Room, Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m, by Cm. Barnes, Chairman. * ~ ~ * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, Mack, and Okun, Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director; Rod Barger, Senior Planner; Trudi Ryan, Project Planner; and Gail Adams, Planning Secretary. ~ ~ ~ ~ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Cm. Barnes led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. ~ ~ ~ ~ ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA iVone ~r*~* MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes of December 5, 1988 were approved as corrected. ~ ~ ~ ~ -0RAL COMMUNICATIONS None ~ ~ ~ ~ WRITTEN COMMUNIGATIONS Mr. Tong advised that the Commission had received 5 action letters. ~t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c~c~~~~~c~~~~~~~~~~~*~c~~~~~~~~~c~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*~~c~e~~~c~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-221 December 19, 1988 . ~ ~ ~ * ~ * PUBLIC HEARINGS SUBJECT: PA 88-110 The Woodlands Directional Tract Sign Conditional Use Permit (Village 7) to be located off-site on a vacant lot (APN 441-305-34) on the north side of Dublin Boulevard, east of the Chevron Station on the northeast corner of San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard Cm. Barnes opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report. Mr. Barger indicated that this application was for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a directional tract sign identifying Village 7(The Woodlands) which would be located off-site on a vacant lot east of the progerty on the northeast corner of San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard. Mr. Barger indicated that the Applicant was proposing to use a 7 foot tall, 32 square foot single-face freestanding sign identifying the subdivision and directions for reaching it. The sign would be perpendicular to Dublin Boulevard, would have a 10' front yard setback from the Dublin Boulevard frontage. It would also be approximately 87 feet from both the Grand Auto and Chevron property line. Mr. Barger indicated that the vacant property had been used for directional tracts signs in the past and the site currently contains one for the Kildara development. Mr. Barger indicated that Staff recommends approval of this Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Okun asked what the wording would be on the directional sign. Mr. Barger stated that Attachment #3 of the Staff Report shows the wording for the directional sign. Cm. Burnham questioned the direction in which the sign would face. Mr. Barger stated that this was up to the Applicant, as long as the sign complied with City standards. Gloria Kocal, Applicant, indicated that she agreed with the Staff's conditions of approval. Cm. Barnes closed the public hearing. On motion from Cm. Mack, seconded by Cm. Okun, and with a vote of 4-0 and one absentee, the Planning Commission adopted ~**~~~~~~*~~~~c~~~t~c~~~~~~~~~~~~~*~~~~~~~~*~~~c~*~~~~~c~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c*~~~~~~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-222 December 19, 1988 ~ , ~ ~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-071 APPROVING PA 88-110, THE WOODLANDS (VILLAGE 7) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ALLOW A DIRECTIONAL TRACT SIGN WHICH IS TO BE L(?CATED OFF-SITE ON A VACANT LOT (APN 941-305-34) ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD JUST EAST OF THE CHEVRON STATION AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAN RAMON ROAD AND DUBLIN BOULEVARD SUBJECT: PA 88-114 YMCA Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review to install a portable building at the Frederiksen School site in order to establish YMCA childcare services and youth programs to accommodate up to 35 school age children ~K-6th Grade) Cm. Barnes opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report. Mr. Barger indicated that this application was for a Conditional Use Permit to establish a year round childcare/youth services program for up to 35 school age children at the Frederiksen Elementary School, and Site Development Review to locate a 1248 square foot portable building in the playground of the school site, which would be used for the childcare/youth services program. Mr. Barger indicated that the YMCA had been operating at this location without use permit approvals for the past three years with no complaints. The YMCA was made aware of the City's permit requirements and shortly thereafter submitted their application to the City. Mr. Barger indicated that presently the YMCA is operating out of one of the school's classrooms. Because of increased enrollments, school officials are now in need of the classroom. The YMCA would like to continue providing childcare/youth program services and are requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review to allow the continuation of these activities in a 1248 square foot portable building that would be located on the school premises. Mr. Barger indicated that the childcare/youth program operation would serve ug to 35 children, grades K-6. Operating hours would be 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday-Friday. Peak operating hours are before and after school. Mr. Barger indicated that parking and circulation patterns were observed at 7:30 a.m., 12:00 p.m, and 3:30 p:m. No traffic problems occurred. He also indicated that only half of the parking spaces on the site were utilized during these hours. Mr. Barger indicated that the design of the 1248 square foot portable building was acceptable to Staff. Its shape, colors and materials would match those of the existing school building. It will be handicap accessi~le and located on the east side of the school site. ~~~~~~~~~~t~~~*~~~~~~~~~c~~~*~~~~r~~c~~~~~~*~~~~~*~~c~t~~~~~~c~~~*~~~~~~~~~~~**~~~~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-223 December 19, 1988 ~ . Mr. Barger indicated that there was one modification to Condition #2 of Exhibit B. This condition should read "The childcare service and youth program shall be limited to school age children (K-6 grades) during the school year and limited to the 4-15 year age group during the summer program." He indicated this would give the YMCA more flexibility in order to service a wider age group of children. Mr. Barger indicated that Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review requests. Cm. Okun asked if summer programs would be established for the children. Mr. Barger indicated yes. Cm. Burnham asked if the YMCA could take care of a sick child during school hours. Mr. Barger indicated yes. Cheryl Russell, 939 Wagoner Drive, Livermore, Program Director of YMCA, indicated that she had no problems with the Staff's conditions of approval. She indicated that Condition #2 would give more flexibility to the YMCA program. She indicated that daycamp programs are provided in the summer months. Cm. Okun asked if there would be two Staff inembers at the YMCA present at all times. Ms. Russell indicated yes, this is a State requirement. Cm. Barnes indicated that she approved of the project and that it helped the working parents of the community. Cm. Okun asked who was responsible for the building. Ms. Russell indicated that the YMCA was responsible for the building, including the furniture, supplies, etc. Cm. Barnes asked what the average cost for childcare services was. Ms. Russell indicated that the average cost would be $1.80 an hour. Cm. Barnes closed the public hearing. Cm. Barnes commended the YMCA for their program and wished that they had been around 25 years ago. Cm. Mack asked if there were plans for extended services. Regular Meeting PCM-7-224 December 19, 1988 , ~ • Ms. Russell responded by stating not at this time. Cm. Barnes asked if the YMCA served only the Frederiksen School children. Ms. Russell indicated that there are service providers at other schools, however, the YMCA did not exclude school children that do not attend Frederiksen School. She indicated that the State requirements limit the children capacity to 35. On motion from Cm. Okun, seconded by Cm. Mack, with a vote of 4-0, with one absentee, the Planning Commission adopted ' RESOLUTION N0. 88-072 ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 88-114 YMCA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUESTS TO INSTALL A PORTABLE BUILDING AT THE FREDERIKSEN SCHOOL SITE IN ORDER TO ESTABLISIT YMCA CHILDCARE SERVICES AND YOUTH PROGRAMS TO ACCOMMODATE UP TO 35 SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN (K-6 GRADES) AT 7243 TAMARACK DRIVE On motion from Cm. Okun, seconded by Cm. Mack, with a vote of 4-0, with one absenteee, the Planning Commission adopted RESOLUTION N0. 88-073 APPROVING PA 88-114 YMCA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH CFIILDCARE SERVICES AND YOUTH PROGRAMS FOR UP TO 35 SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN (K-6 GRADES) IN A PORTABLE BUILDING AT THE FREDERIKSEN SCHOOL SITE AT 7243 TAMARACK DRIVE On motion from Cm. Okun, seconded by Cm. Mack, with a vote of 4-0, with one absentee, the Planning Commission adopted RESOLUTION N0. 88-074 APPROVING PA 88-114 YMCA SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUEST TO INSTALL A PORTABLE BUILDING ON THE FREDERIKSEN SCHOOL SITE IN ORDER TO HOUSE YMCA CHILDCARE SERVICES AND YOUTH PROGRAMS TO ACCOMMODATE UP TO 35 SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN (K-6TH GRADES) AT 7243 TAMARACK DRIVE SUBJECT: PA 88-009 Heritage Commons Planned Development Rezonin~, Tentative Map and Site Development RevieY,r located at Amador Valley Boulevard and Stagecoach Drive Cm. Barnes opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report. Ms. Ryan indicated that this application was for a Planned Development Rezoning, Tentative Map and Site Development Review and the Planning Commission would be making recommendations of approval to the City Council. . Ms. Ryan indicated that the location of the property was at the corner of Amador Valley Boulevard and Stagecoach Drive. The parcel size was 17.45+ acres. - ~~~~~~~~~~~c~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*~c~c~~*~~~~~~~c~e~~ ~~~c~*~~c~t~~*~~~*~~~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-225 December 19, 1988 • ~ Ms. Ryan stated that Heritage Commons was approved for 309 residential units by the County in November of 1981. The first phase of 73 units is complete and the remaining units to be developed on the property is on the agenda for consideration by the Planning Commission. Ms. Ryan indicated that the General Plan designates this property as medium density (duplex, townhouses and garden apartments) and stream corridor. There are approximately 14.5 acres in medium desnity and 2.95 acres in stream corridor. When Zoning Unit 1494 was established, the General Plan was not in effect and the stream corridor not established. Presently, the permissible number of units allowable is 90 to 206 (one dwelling unit per acre of stream corridor). Ms. Ryan indicated that General Plan Guiding Policy 3.1 states: "preserve oak woodlands, riparian vegetation, and natural creeks as open space for their natural resource value". Ms. Ryan discussed the zoning ordinance requirements regarding Planned Development Districts, Change in Zone District Requirements, Site Development Review Requirements, and Subdivision Requirements. Ms. Ryan indicated that 4.7 acres of this site would be dedicated to Zone 7 Flood Control District for maintenance access. The 4.7 acres is a larger area than the 2.95 acre stream corridor. This acreage would be permanent open space. Ms. Ryan indicated that the remaining 12.75 acres, would have a density of 16.1 units per acre by preserving an additional 1.75 acres for stream corridor and clustering the units onto the 12.75 acres. Ms. Ryan stated that the 20' scale drawing on the wall shows the site including the developable areas. She discussed parking/circulation, building coverage, Zone 7 Dedication, and Landscape/Recreation areas within the pro j ect . Ms. Ryan indicated that the pro~ect would have direct access off of Amador Valley Boulevard and the main road loops through the project to join with Stagecoach Drive. Alamo Creek Road winds through the project dividing the site into three sections. Ms. Ryan indicated that 14 of the 26 buildings are adjacent to the creek, each building is adjacent to the parking areas with pathways leading to entry landings. Ms. Ryan indicated that there were setbacks from the creek and road that were less than the 10 feet typical requirement because of the irregular shape of the site. At this point, Ms. Ryan discussed the project site using the color boards that were attached to the wall. Ms. Ryan indicated that there were 56 proposed one bedroom-two bath units; 110 two bedroom-two bath units; and 40 three bedroom-two bath units. Each unit included a washer and dryer, separate water heater, private storage area and balcony or patio. ~**~t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~**~~~~~~~~t~~~~~r~~~~~r~~r~*~~~~~~~~~~t Regular Meeting PCM-7-226 December 19, 19$8 . ~ • Ms. Ryan indicated that the elevations on the building showed stucco exterior with wood trim, detailing which include decorative strips of wood, windows with divided lights and lattice fences, walls and archways. Recreation facilities include pools, tot lots, tennis courts, plus a community center which include recreation room, lounge, exercise room, bar area and restrooms with showers. Offices are adjacent to community area. Ms. Ryan indicated that the landscaping plan includes street trees, canopy trees and vertical accent trees which have low water requirements and are tolerable to local weather conditions. Ms. Ryan indicated that the dedication of land for park use ~ould be .009 acres per dwelling unit which would require this project to have a total of 1.84 acres for dedication. Ms. Ryan indicated that the parking ratio for this pro~ect was 2.23 spaces per unit which exceeds the normal Planning Department requirements. 1~aenty-nine percent of the open parking stalls are for compact vehicles which is within the Planning Department's requirements. The conditions of approval require 15$ of ali parking spaces to be reserved for visitors. Ms. Ryan indicated there were concerns regarding traffic, noise and biology which were identified in the Environmental Assessment. Studies were prepared and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. Ms. Ryan stated that noise levels on the second floor units closest to Amador Valley Boulevard would exceed the State requirements and a condition requiring mechanical ventilation or air conditioning would be required for these units. Ms. Ryan discussed biological concerns relating to the project. First, mitigation measures were incorporated to preserve and protect trees as well as a maintenance program. Second, conditions of approval were added which would help preserve the riparian forest habitat. Ms. Ryan indicated that there were also traffic concerns with the current configuration of Amador Valley Boulevard. The entrance on Amador Valley Boulevard would be restricted to right turns which would cause vehicles to attempt U-turns at Wildwood Road at Amador Valley Boulevard and at Stagecoach Drive on Amador Valley Boulevard. Mitigation measures have been included requiring a median break with acceleration lanes on Amador Valley $oulevard opposite the main entry road of the pro~ect. Ms. Ryan stated'that Staff was recomrnending approval of five resolutions recommending the City Council: 1) adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance; 2) adopt a monitoring program for mitigation measures [this is per the new State Law AB3180]; 3) rezone property to a Planned Development District; 4) adopt Tentative Tract Map 5883; and adapt the Site Development Review. Ms. Ryan stated that a letter had been received by the Planning Department opposing the project and distributed this letter to the Planning Commission. Regular Meeting PCM-7-227 December 19, 1988 , , ~ • Ms. Ryan stated that there were photographic slides of the site and full sized site plans available for review if the Planning Commission wanted to see them. Cm. Barnes asked to see the slides. Carl Steinberg, Applicant, discussed the development company's background and experience with project of this magnitude. He indicated that his project had a well designed landscaping scheme with a full amenities package which would appeal to middle income families. Mr. Steinberg indicated that his project had private entrances on Amador Valley Boulevard and easements had been recorded for access from the existing Heritage Commons. He invited the Planning Commission to tour the project area and would like to do future developments in the area. Cm. Okun asked if this development would be a combination of apartments and condominiums. Mr. Steinberg stated that his development would have condominium standards and a tract map would be recorded; however at this time they would be rented as apartments. Cm. Okun asked if the units would eventually be sold as condorniniums. Mr. Steinberg indicated yes. Cm. Burnham asked questions regarding connections to and from the property and was concerned that both developments could be accessed from the other. Mr. Steinberg indicated that there was a barrier at this location and a property fence would be erected to secure property lines. Steve Cameron, 6610 Conestoga, had concerns over inadequate parking and traffic of the existing project. He indicated that it was difficult maneuvering onto Stagecoach Drive now and with the new development, this would be very hazardous. He indicated that red curbs had been painted on the street and there was inadequate parking facilities for the current development proj ect. Cm. Burnham asked the Planning Director about the painted curbs. Mr. Tong indicated that the Alameda County had approved the Planned Development and parking conditions and parking was not approved on the street. Mike Hughes, Attorney representing Heritage Commons, had concerns regarding Stagecoach Drive. Was this street owned by the City, was there an access easement recorded for maintenance purposes? He indicated that he was concerned over the rights of the Homeowners Association, property owners and the City. Cm. Burnham asked the Planning Director if Stagecoach Drive was a public or private street. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t~c~~*~~~~~~c~~~~c~~~~c~~~~~*~~~c~~~~~~~~r~c~~~~~~~*~~~~c~~~~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-228 December 19, 1988 ~ ~ Mr. Tong indicated that Stagecoach Drive, south of Amador Valley Boulevard, was a private ro.ad and was the responsibility of the Heritage Commons' Homeowners Association. Ms. Ryan indicated that there were conditions of approval regarding maintenance and access on Stagecoach Drive and that maintenanee would be the responsibility of both projects. Joyce Pasqual asked if the new development would share the Heritage Commons project name. She asked what access point would the construction workers be using and was concerned about the safety of the children in the area, and the setbacks from the existing project. Mr. Steinberg indicated that most construction traffic would be accessed through the main entrance with limited access through Stagecoach. Ms. Ryan stated that the setbacks between the projects were a minimum of 10 feet with most areas having setbacks of 15 - 30 feet. Ms. Pasqual was concerned over the square footage of the units and stated that this was inadequate space. Randall Gardner, 6592 Conestoga, was concerned over traffic and would like the Planning Department to do another traffic study on the surrounding area. Laura Fisher, 6586 Conestoga, was concerned with the additional rentals and that there was a need for more affordable houses for sale. Frank Cameron, who had sat on the Contra Costa Planning Commission, had concerns over traffic issues, setbacks, landscape buffers, creek area and riparian vegetation. Mr. Cameron indicated that the traffic study was short-sighted and the street should be widened at the main entrance of the project. He indicated that the 15' setback was not enough and a buffer was needed. The creek area could be well maintained and enhanced. There should be a median break and a stop light installed and the main thoroughfare because of the children walking through the area. Mr. Cameron indicated that an Environmental Impact Report should be looked into that would address all problems and issues. Steve Cameron, was concerned over the size of the units and would like the units to be condominiums instead of apartments. Ms. Pasqual indicated that there was a demand for saleable units and discussed the average cost of housing in the area. Mr. Steinberg discussed access easements, traffic/parking issues and studies, maintenance concerns, landscaping buffers, creek design, and tree preservation. *~~~~~c~~~~~~~~c~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t~~**~~~~~~~~*~~c~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~t~~~~c~c~r~~~~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-229 December 19, 1988 . ~ ~ Mr. Steinberg indicated that grant deeds on the original development showed recorded access easements. He recognized the traffic concerns and indicated that two access points were necessary. There had been a complete traffic study done on the new development. Mr. Steinberg indicated that the traffic/parking concerns along Stagecoach Drive was a separate issue and was not related to the current project. He stated that the parking ratio on the new development was over-adequate and that the occupants of the first phase would be using the new development's parking areas. Mr. Steinberg indicated that the two projects would have to share the cost of maintaining Stagecoach Drive. Mr. Steinberg stated that there was a landscape buffer in the plans and the creek area was designed for the en~oyment of the residents. There were about three trees that would be removed, however 90~ of the trees would be preserved. Mr. Steinberg indicated that a median break would had been long considered by Staff and the safety issues had been resolved. Mr. Steinberg indicated that all environmental issues had 'been reviewed during the General Plan and the previous pro~ect. A11 City, Dublin San Ramon District, fire, police, and school district requirements had been met. Cm. Burnham asked if the fencing was required along the creek. The Planning Department indicated that a 6 foot vinyl clad fence was a Zone 7 requirement. Mr. Steinberg stated that this type of fence blended in with the landscaping. Cm. Barnes asked about the traffic study taken and how many trips per day would be involved. Ms. Ryan indicated that there would be an average of 1,648 trips per day with 10~ of this traffic at peak hours. Mr. Hughes stated that the easement issues were still up in the air and this issue would need to be resolved before approvals could be made. Cm. Burnham asked if the CC&R's could be provided. Ms. Ryan indicated yes. Mr. Hughes indicated that the Homeowners Association should be provided copies of those documents. Cm. Burham asked Ms. Ryan about the creek design and if there were similarities to the design in other projects. Regular Meeting PCM-7-230 December 19, 1988 . ! i Ms. Ryan and Mr. Tong indicated that there were similarities in Ron Nahas' project which is called the Villages. The tree preservation and stream corridor revegetation requirements were similar. Cm. Burnham was concerned over the school population and would like to have more information on the school district's future plans. Cm. Barnes closed the public hearing. Cm. Barnes had concerns over the traffic impacts on Amador Valley Boulevard and requested more information on the traffic patterns. Cm. Okun requested that the overcrowding of the schools should be resolved before approvals were made. Cm. Burnham had concerns over the configuration of the main entrance road and requested clarification. Mr. Steinberg indicated that traffic impact fees could be made part of the developer's responsibility. The Planning Commission requested the Planning Department to acquire additional information on the access easement, traffic and school system issues. Mr. Tong indicated that the Planning Department would request a representative from TJKM and Abrams & Associates to attend the next meeting. On motion from Cm. Mack, seconded by Cm. Okun, the Planning Commission continued this item to the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for January 17, 1989. ' Cm. Barnes requested documentation to be available at the Library for the public. * ~ ~ ~ NEW BUSINESS OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS None ~ ~ ~ ~ OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Tong indicated that the City Council had approved the West Dublin General Plan Study which consisted of approximately 4,000 acres. There were two applicants, Eden Development had the bulk of the acreage and Schaeffer Heights had 335 acres. Mr. Tong indicated that ABAG's Housing Need Determinations were discussed at the last City Council meeting. ~*~~~~r~~~~~~~~r~~*~~r~~~t~~~~~~~~~~~~*~~~~~~~~~~r~~*~~~~~~~~~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-231 December 19, 1988 . . ~ i Cm. Burnham asked if the Villages fall into low cost housing categories. Mr. Tong indicated that there were 4 categories; very low, low, moderate and above moderate. Each City needs to determine their own housing affordability goals and it had been determined that Dublin could provide enough housing for its workers. The Village projects were considered above-moderate cost housing projects. Mr. Tong indicated that the City Council had an additional adjourned meeting on the Hansen Hill project. The Council had requested additional information and this item had been continued to January lOth meeting. On motion from Cm. Burnham, seconded by Cm. Mack, the Planning Commission approved cancelling the January 3, 19$9 meeting. ~ * * ~ PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' CONCERNS Cm. Burnham asked what kind of long-term plans the school district had regarding school enrollment. Mr. Tong indicated that long-term plans were difficult to determine. Cm. Burnham asked the paving needed to be looked into at the Amador Valley Boulevard and Amador Plaza Road street area. Cm. Burnham asked about the Goodwill store regarding the drop-off trailer located on the premises. He stated that the area needed to be cleaned up. Mr. Tong indicated that Goodwill had been contacted and a Conditional Use Permit was required for the trailer. Cm. Okun asked about the construction work on Betlen Drive and was concerned about the streets being ruined. Mr. Tong indicated that the project was Pulte Homes and the Public Works Director and Engineers were loolcing into the problem. Cm. Barnes asked about the workbench at the hardware store. Mr. Tong indicated that the City has started the legal process under the provisions of the Property Maintenanee Ordinance. Cm. Barnes asked if the Property Maintenance Ordinance had provisions for commercial property as well as residential. Mr. Tong indicated that the ordinance included commercial and residential property. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c~~~~~~~t~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-232 December 19, 1988 ~ ~ ~*~t~ ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. * ~ ~ ~ Respectfully submitted, P anning Commission r rson ~ ~ Laurence L. Tong Planning Director ~~~e* ~~~~~~~c~~r~c~~~~~c~~~~*~~~~~~c~c~c~~~~~~c~~~~~~~~*~*~~c~~c~~~~r~~~~~ ~*~~~c~c~~~~~~~~c~~c~~ Regular Meeting PCM-7-233 December 19, 1988