Loading...
05/19/2005 J 1 I 11 Community and Economic Development (ALIFORNIA Department 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace California 92313-5295 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION (909) 824-6621 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING May 19, 2005 The reaular meetinq of the Grand Terrace Planninq Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace. California. on Mav 19. 2005. at 7:05 p.m., by Chairperson Douq Wilson. PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Chairperson Matthew Addington, Vice Chairperson Brian Whitley, Commissioner Robert Bidney, Commissioner Gary Koontz, Community Development Director John Lampe, Associate Planner Michelle Boustedt, Planning Secretary ABSENT: Tom Comstock, Commissioner 7:05 P.M. CONVENE SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING • Pledge of Allegiance led by Vice Chair Addington • Roll Call PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: NONE ITEMS: 1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 21, 2006 MOTION PC-17-2005: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to approve the minutes of April 21, 2005 Commissioner Whitley Seconded the motion MOTION VOTE PC-1 7-2005: Approved 3-0-1-1 r Chair Wilson Abstained Commissioner Comstock Absent 1 2. SA-04-21, CUP-04-10 E-04-12: Continuation of the project that will consist of a completely new auto service station with convenience market, car wash, and delicatessen. The convenience market will have a deli, a walk- in cooler, beer.and wine sales and convenience goods. Also proposed will be freeway signage identifying new service station and other businesses on the site. The existing service station building, existing signs and landscaping will be removed and replaced with a new service station building, new signs, including new freeway sign, and a new car wash. The existing fuel canopy will be retained and extended. The new station may be operated as a Valero Station. APPLICANT: RAMCAM Corp., on behalf of business owner, Mr. Fahim Tanios LOCATION: 22045 Barton Road (Approximately .66 acre parcel located on the south side of Barton Road just east of the 1-215 Freeway off- ramp. This site was operated as a Texaco and Shell fueling station in the past.) RECOMMENDATION: Open the continued Public Hearing, receive the staff report and public testimony, if any, and take this matter"off-calendar". Prior to Associate Planner Lampe presenting his staff report, Vice Chair Addington reported an Ex-Parte Communication. Vice Chair Addington reported that after last month's Planning Commission meeting of April 21, 2005, the Applicants for the project approached Mr. Addington and Commissioner Comstock in the parking lot. The Applicants appeared to be upset with the end result of the meeting and the conversation began to get confrontational. The owner threatened to move the project to the Loma Linda area, Vice Chair Addington felt that it was best to leave to terminate the conversation. Commissioner Comstock had continued to speak to the Applicant's and it was unknown what type of dialogue was held after Vice Chair Addington had left. t Associate Planner Lampe greeted the Commission and presented his staff report. The project has been continued from the last meeting of April 21, 2005, Planning Commission meeting based upon the Commission's motion for the Staff to work with the Applicant and owner of the business to come up with a new color scheme for the proposed building to be compatible with the canopy. Secondly, to revised the freeway sign to be in compliance with the City Sign Code. Lastly, to come up with an architectural design to reflect the California Craftsman style of the Outdoor.Adventures Center's Specific Plan. Following the Planning Commission meeting, the staff did meet with Mr. Fahim Tanios, the owner of the gas station site. At this meeting, the owner indicated that he was trying to decide on whether the project should move forward and comply with the Planning Commission's motion by redesigning the building and changing the color scheme, or to abandon the project. If the Applicant had chooses the latter he will re-open the existing station on the site with the existing building, canopy and layout, and simply make minor changes to reflect the station as a Valero Gas Station. 2 The Staff also called the Applicant to notify him that they were willing to work with him and the owner with regard to the design of the building by lowering the roof line and substituting the roof with a the roof instead of the standing seam metal roof that was discussed at the April Planning Commission meeting. i When the current staff report was written, there had been no word on how the Applicant planned on moving forward with the project. On Thursday, May 12, 2005, Associate Planner Lampe received a call from the Applicant who had indicated that the Owner had decided to re-design the building to comply with the Commissions directive to reflect the California Craftsman style of the Outdoor Adventures Center. The Applicant had agreed that in order to move forward, the continued hearing with the new plans could not be presented this evening. Therefore it has been agreed that the matter shall be taken off calendar so they may re design the project and reschedule the project for a future Planning Commission meeting. Associate Planner Lampe concluded his staff report. Chair Wilson invited the Applicant to speak on behalf of the project. Alex Irshaid - RAMCAM Corporation 670 E. Parkridge Avenue #101 Corona Mr. Irshaid was apologetic for the dialogue between himself, Mr. Tanios and the two Planning Commission members. It has been the decision of the property owner and Mr. Irshaid to go back to the drawing board and re-design the project to satisfy the Commission's desire. -- Planning Director Koontz advised that it would be to the satisfaction of Staff if the Application were to be continued to July. Vice Chair Addington asked staff, if the item should be continued to July, the Applicant would have to have.all plans submitted to the Planning Department in June. Planning Director Koontz replied that the Applicant has been advised that he will have 30 days to complete all of their plans and applications. Vice Chair Addington asked if the time would be considered sufficient to the Applicant and the property Owner. Mr. Irshaid was in agreement with the time frame. Chair Wilson closed the Public Hearing and brought the item back to the Commission for discussion and action. MOTION PC-18-2005: Motion was made by Vice Chair Addington to Continue SA-04- 21, CUP-04-10 and E-04-12 to Continue the project to the meeting of July 21, 2005. Commissioner Bidney seconded the motion. _ MOTION VOTE PC-1 8-2005: 4-0-1-0 Commissioner Comstock Absent 3 3. SP-04-02-, SA-04-02 SA-04-03, SA-04-04 SA-04-05, SA-04-06 TTM-04-01, E-04-01: Continuance of application for construction of a total of 16 lots, 15 to be developed with single family detached type units on individual lots ranging in size from 4,460 square feet to 5,914 square feet. The 16th lot of 12,007 square feet to be developed into a 4-plex type apartment building. APPLICANT: Massaro and Welsh, Civil Engineers, on behalf of Barney Karger, Owner/Developer. LOCATION: Approximately 2 acre vacant area consisting of two parcels located on the north side of De Berry Street between the Gage Canal on the west and Mt. Vernon Avenue on the east. RECOMMENDATION: Re-open the Public Hearing and receive the staff report and any public testimony. The Staff is making no recommendation for this proposal at this time; however, the Planning Commission may wish to consider three possible actions consisting of: 1. Deny these applications for the reasons given in the attached "Resolution of Denial' which is to deny this project because of a lack of information after giving the applicant more than sufficient time, almost one year, to provide the requested information. 2. Continue these items to a "date uncertain" but give the applicant a new deadline to submit all of the requested information to Staff by a specific date. Inform the applicant that failure to meet this new deadline will result in the denial of the project. (Once the staff has reviewed and analyzed the new information, the Public Hearing would be then rescheduled before the Planning Commission). 3. Continue these items to a "date uncertain" until the applicant has submitted the requested additional information and Staff has had enough time to review it. Associate Planner Lampe reported that at the Public Hearing of August 19, 2004, the staff had pointed out that various items had not been submitted, which were listed in a letter dated March 4, 2004, Incomplete Letter. The Commission had closed the Hearing and adopted a Motion for the requirement of seven items that needed to be submitted by the Applicant in order to move forward with the project. Included in the seven items was a Specific Plan document which was needed in terms of meeting all of the State Laws and Requirements. In November of 2004, it was reported to the Commission that no progress had been made in complying with the list of requirements adopted by the Planning Commission. The Commission had then asked Staff to bring the Item back at the regularly scheduled 4 Planning Commission Meeting of January 20, 2005. A second Public Hearing on the matter was then heard in which the Applicant, Mr. Welsh had indicated that the property owner had signed an agreement and was making progress in providing the additional items and the list would be completed. There was no communication from the applicant after the January, 2005, meeting. Staff received a letter on May 18, 2005, with regard to the status of the required items. The Applicant indicated in this letter that various items had been completed on the project and were still working on the Specific Plan. The Staff is not making an recommendations at this time, but are opening the matter to the Commission for their decision on the project. Associate Planner Lampe concluded his presentation. Vice Chair Addington stated that he was happy to see the Applicant had made a partial submitted to the staff. However, with the time frame that has been involved with the project, Vice Chair Addington asked is the Applicant seriously considering the required items. Chair Wilson invited the Applicant to speak before the Commission. Barney Karger 11668 Bernardo Way Mr. Karger felt that his plan that was submitted was superior to most of the residences in the City of Grand Terrace. Mr. Karger feels that "he has been kicked in the gonads several times" by the City. The Apartment buildings will not be proposed for the new application. Mr. Karger will not be using the area as a park. The lots will be used to allow for 91/2 foot side yards and 5 foot side yards on each side of each residence. At this point, Mr. Karger feels that he has done everything that has been required. With regard to the trees. Mr. Karger reported that the proposed parkway trees are the trees that are required by the City. As far as the proposed weeping willows that will be planted in front of each house, it would be the responsibility of the homeowner, because it will located on their property. Paul Welsh - Massaro Welsh Architects 1572 N. Waterman Avenue #5 San Bernardino Mr. Welsh greeted the Commission and reported that a submittal was turned in on May 18, 2005. At this time, Mr. Welsh reported that once minor needed corrections of the specific plan are completed, he will be submitting the specific plan to the staff, and another requested hydrology study. Chair Wilson asked if Mr. Welsh had informed City Staff when he will expect to complete and submit all the required studies. Mr. Welsh replied that he had not spoken with the Staff. Per the,list of required items, Mr. Welsh reported that the revised tentative map and grading plan, the NPDES Study, revised landscape plan and the acoustical study had been submitted. The only item that needs to 5 be completed at this point is the specific plan. At this point and time, Mr. Welsh feels that the submittal should be completed within a week's time. Chair Wilson closed the Public Hearing and brought the item back to the Commission for comment and action. Vice Chair Addington asked staff when the submittal deadline to have a completed submittal package for the June meeting. Planning Director Koontz replied that it would be very difficult to put the item onto the June agenda at this time. Staff has not had the opportunity to go through what has been submitted, and at current, staff has not received a completed submittal package. Chair Wilson asked if there is a 30 day time frame statute for a finding of a completed application or a finding of an incomplete application. Planning Director Koontz replied that the notice of completion/incompletion process was performed initially. At this time it is the Staffs preference to take whatever is being submitted at this time for a final review of the project. Chair Wilson asked Planning Director Koontz what he anticipated in so far as being able to review all of the materials being received in the next couple of days. Planning Director Koontz feels that at least a two week process would be needed in order to send out a hydrology study as well as review the new grading plans and other information that needs to be reviewed by staff and the various agencies. ` Chair Wilson closed the Public Hearing and brought the item back to the Commission for discussion and action. MOTION PC-19 2005: Commissioner Whitley made a motion to continue the public he for SP-04-02, SA-04-02, SA-04-03, SA-04-04, SA-04- 05, SA-04-06, TTM-04-01 and E-04-01 until the July 21st Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Bidney seconded the motion MOTION VOTE PC-19 2005: 3-1-0-1 Vice Chair Addington voting No Commissioner Comstock Absent 4. SA-05-05, E-05-03 CUP-05-02: To construct a wireless telecommunication facility as part of a network covering the Southern California area consisting of a 52 foot high monopole designed to resemble a pine tree and a small equipment building. APPLICANT: Nextel Communications, Barbara Saito - representative LOCATION: 21893 Barton Road in the City of Grand Terrace 6 RECOMMENDATION: Open the Public Hearing, receive the staff report and testimony, close the hearing and approve the Resolution calling for approval of SA-05-05, CUP-05-02 and E-05-03 based on the findings in the "Resolution of Approval" and subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Associate Planner Lampe reported that the Applicant has filed three application under the City's Wireless Telecommunications Ordinance. The project consists of a 52-foot high monopole designed to resemble a pine tree with a small equipment shelter building measuring 12 x 20 feet. The new facility will be part of what is called an EMSR System which is a new digital system that will replace the cellular analog system. This new system is a new and efficient way of transmitting communication signals for cellular phones. The subject site is located on the southwest corner of Barton Road and La Crosse which is the service road that runs along the Interstate 215 Freeway. The proposed tower and equipment building will be located at the southerly end of the subject site just off of La Crosse Avenue. The surrounding area is developed to the small commercial center including Demitri's Restaurant and to the northwest of the site is a testing laboratory. The Barton Road Mobile Home Park is also within the area. To the southwest of the site is the In N Out Body Shop. A letter of opposition has been received from that business. The proposed site is located in the C2 Commercial Zone. The General Plan category for the site is General Commercial. The surrounding properties are also Zoned C2 to the north of the shopping center. Farther to the west, the area is Zoned MR Restricted Industrial. The nearest residential site is the Grand Barton Mobile Home park as mentioned previously. The site plan shows the proposed location of the tower which would be located at the southerly site of the location. The tower will be 52 feet in height. The tree will stand a little higher to mitigate the visual impacts of the tower. To the immediate north of the tower will stand the shelter building which will be screened from view from La Crosse by the existing mobile home sales facility. The pole will be located 25 feet from La Crosse and meets the technical requirement in the City's Telecommunication Ordinance in that it does not encroach at any required setback area. The site will not have a great deal of traffic to it. There will be a monthly maintenance serviceman that will utilize the parking lot right next to the project; so no on street parking will be needed. The project was filed in compliance with the requirements and regulations of the City's Wireless Communications Ordinance. The Staff feels that the simulated tower will look more natural if vegetation is planted at the base of the pole. Additional trees have been conditioned to be added around the base of the monopole and at the easterly side of the equipment building. 7 It is Staffs opinion that this project does qualify for a Negative Declaration. A detailed letter was received from "In N Out" Body shop in which they feel that there are various health risks involved with the facility such as this one. In 1996, the Federal Government passed the Telecommunications Act which stipulates that local Government cannot deny a project such as this, because of health issues related from the radio frequency emissions from the site. The City Attorney was contacted, and he had confirmed that it was the correct interpretation of the law in which citys do not have the power to deny an application based on alleged health affects from a proposal such as this. Associate Planner Lampe concluded his staff report by recommending that the Planning Commission approve the proposed wireless telecommunication facility consisting of the 52-foot high monopine designed to resemble a pine tree, and a small equipment building under the stated applications, and also that the Negative Declaration calling for the approval of this project in not having an adverse affect to the environment. Commissioner Bidney asked what would happen if the telecommunications technology should advance in the future, would these monopoles be deemed useless, and if so, what would happen to the monopoles. Planning Director Koontz replied that under the City's Wireless Telecommunication Ordinance, should an antenna or any ancillary equipment be abandoned for more than 120 days, the property would have to be returned to its prior state. Chair Wilson opened the Public Hearing. Barbara Saito -'Nextel Communications 310 Commerce Street Irvine Ms. Saito .greeted the Commission and addressed the issues with regard to abandonment. Nextel does pay rent to each property where they place their monopoles, if the facility will no longer be used, all equipment will be removed. Vice Chair Addington commented Ms. Saito on her completeness of her package submittal. Richard Rollins 22737 Barton Road Mr. Rollins greeted 'the Commission and informed them that the flag pole at Richard Rollins Park is not only a monopole, but also a flag pole. Should the monopole for wireless telecommunications no longer be used, the pole will continue to be a flag pole to service the park. Mr. Rollins commented about certain areas of the City containing dead spots. It is fortunate that most wireless companies are now taking care of those dead spots with advancement of technology. 8 MOTION PC-20-2005: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to approve SA-05-05, E-05-03 and CUP-05-02. Commissioner Bidney seconded the motion MOTION VOTE PC-20-2005: 4-0-1-0 Commissioner Comstock Absent 5. SA-05-06, E-05-04: The conversion of an existing single story, 1,350 square foot home into an office for a manhole production and installation company. This project will also consist of the conversion of an existing barn, garage and several outbuildings into approximately 3,500 square feet of material storage warehouses. There will also be approximately 70,000 square feet of outdoor production and storage for a construction yard. APPLICANT: Manhole Builders LOCATION: 21712 Vivienda Avenue, Assessor's Parcel Number 0275-191- 02 RECOMMENDATION: Open the Public Hearing, receive testimony, close the Public Hearing, and approve SA-05-06 and E-05-04 with Conditions. i. Prior to Planning Technician Gollihar's presentation, Vice Chair Addington reported an exparte communication. Vice Chair Addington reported that Jeffrey McConnell had come to his residence to share a few items of concern with regard to the project. A minor concern was with regard to the project being built upon a flood plain. A major concern was the project is being constructed near a residential area, and the possibilities of commercial vehicles traveling through the residential neighborhood. Commissioner Whitley reported that Mr. McConnell also came to his residence and the conversation was along the same lines as the conversation of he and Commissioner Addington. Commissioner Bidney also reported that Mr. McConnell also works at Terra Loma Real Estate where Mr.. Bidney is currently employed and Mr. McConnell took Commissioner Bidney for a drive around all of the streets around the proposed area. Planning Technician Gollihar greeted the Commission and presented the Staff report. The request is for a Site and Architectural review to convert an existing single story home consisting of 1,350 square feet into an office as well as convert an existing barn, garage and various other outbuildings into 3,500 square feet of material storage buildings. The site and surrounding area is zoned residential as well as Industrial M2. The present site is a non conforming use, which is a residence on an industrial location. The properties to the north, east, west and southwest are also Zoned M2 Industrial. Properties further to the east are Zoned R2 Low Medium Density Residential. The properties directly to the south of the project are Zoned R1-7.2 Single Family Residential with an Agricultural Overlay. 9 The request to convert ,the existing single family home and a construction yard are consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code. The general layout shows that that is a steep cliff at the edge of the bluff where the single family residences are located. A site plan has been submitted that shows where the production areas and storage areas as well as the parking areas. ,A fence has been proposed to separate the storage area from the driveway and parking area of the applicant. Presently, there are no easements placed on the subject site. There is an easement on a northerly property for a non conforming residence and have created an access road on the easement. The easement is 420 feet from the subject site. A landscape plans has been proposed consisting of many trees. As well as various bushes and plants to screen the residences located on the properties on either side of the site. Some trees have been proposed to be moved from the production area and relocated to screen the site from the surrounding residences. A condition has been added that since the main access road will be utilized by the applicant, the building and safety department has modified their conditions to include a dedicate a 30 foot portion of the road to create a public road from Terrace Avenue to a portion of the applicant's property. The Applicant has been advised that several citizens have voiced concern with regard to a truck route. At this time, there are trucks that end up getting lost and travel through the residential area, in which some of the residents have had to guide trucks away and out of the neighborhood. The Applicant has been advised that all of their commercial vehicles must travel by way of Terrace Road to get to La Cadena Boulevard or to the nearby freeways. The Applicants have one diesel truck which will take two trips per day. It has averaged that a total weekly trips including employees, material delivery would consist of 230. The Traffic Engineer did not require a traffic study. The Traffic Engineer did suggest that some type of paving along that access road to prevent dust and to allow for better travel. The access road to Vivienda should also be repaired. The Environmental Impact report with the Negative Declaration had some typographical errors on it, so therefore the application could not be improved at this meeting. Staff is requesting that the application be continued to allow for the Staff to be able to revisit the environmental documentation for the next regularly scheduled meeting in June. Chair Wilson opened up the item for discussion to the Commission prior to opening up the Public Hearing. Vice Chair Addington asked if the City Engineer had an opinion with regard to the two inch thick gravel base. Planning Director Koontz replied that two inch rock has been proposed and not two inch gravel. 10 Commissioner Bidney felt that the fire department should be called to make sure that they have reviewed this project properly. The ingress and egress seems to be inadequate for the area. Commissioner Whitley asked if the traffic engineer gave any consideration for input with respect to signage of the streets. Planning Technician Gollihar stated that street signage was not a requirement that was added, but rather the company would be responsible for improvement of the roads that they will utilize. Commissioner Bidney asked who owns the street from Vivienda down to the wash area underneath the railroad bridge. Planning Technician Gollihar replied that it was to his understanding that there is a portion that is, owned by the County of San Bernardino, and there is portion owned by the City of Colton. The City of Grand Terrace owns the portion of the road that leads from the driveway of the proposed site to Terrace Avenue passed Vivienda to Walnut. From that point, it becomes the City of Colton's property. Chair Wilson opened up the Public Hearing. Stacey Jaureguy-Applicant 5021 Stone Avenue-Riverside Ms. Jaureguy greeted the Commission and is in agreement with regard to Continuing the application for the next meeting. Vice Chair Addington asked how much noise will the concrete mixer generate. Ms. Jaureguy replied that a decibel reading has been requested from the manufacturer. The manufacturer informed her that the mixer noise would be less than a diesel truck engine type of noise. Chair Wilson asked why rock was going to be used rather than concrete for the drive areas of the site. Ms. Jaureguy replied that the Storm Water Division's preference was for a non impervious surface due to water filtering into the ground rather than the water sheeting off of the property onto other portions of the area. The rock that is being proposed is for 2 inches of 3 1/4 inch rock. Ms. Jaureguy also replied that permit numbers have been issued with regard to operation of the equipment. Bobbie Forbes 11850 Burns Avenue Ms. Forbes read a letter that voiced her opinion with regard to the project. Ms. Forbes is aware that the area will develop in the future, but would like for the area to develop in a way that will be agreeable with the neighboring residences. Ms. Forbes also feels that Terrace Road is presently too small for any type of commercial trucks to travel. 11 Jeffrey McConnell Walnut Avenue Mr. McConnell presented a slide show of an outdoor concrete production plant in the Rialto area. The project was slightly larger than five acres and has been in existence for some - time. The slide show depicted commercial trucks, various concrete molds, outside storage areas, and roadways. William Kaminsky 11818 Burns Avenue Mr. Kaminsky reported that the County had the area zoned as agricultural prior to its Incorporation. When the City was incorporated Mr. Kaminsky stated that it was the City's requirement to zone the area as manufacturing. Mr. Kaminsky feels that all of the streets that the project will be using are substandard. He has measured the streets in which he has found that they measure from 18 to 22 feet in width. He also feels that a storm drain contribution will be required by San Bernardino County Flood Control. Jerry.Guthrie 21769 Vivienda Avenue Mr. Guthrie has lived in the area since 1964. At that time there were cattle and horse ranches in the flood plane. Mr. Guthrie reported that between 1969-1971, the area was flooded from 7-8 feet in height. Mr. Guthrie reported that the applicant had knocked on his door the night prior to the meeting, and stated that the applicant would have two trucks leaving in the morning, and two more trucks leaving in the afternoon. Mr. Guthrie also feels that the noise from the mixer will be too much of a hindrance to the residences. Fie feels that their property values will go down considerably should the project be built. Larvin Houston Houston Harris Corp Grand Terrace Road Mr. Houston feels that the entire City of Grand Terrace was considered agricultural, but it was before the City was incorporated. Mr. Houston feels that the project is another example of progress within the City. Mr. Houston also feels that the road does need to be improved if it is going to be used by the applicant. Mr. Houston's business was required to asphalt their parking lot, and has complied with all of the requirements of the City. Mr. Houston has also placed 3 1/4 inch gravel in some areas where some of the service trucks drive and the gravel have not disappeared. Jeffrey McConnell 21758 Walnut Mr. McConnell wanted to clarify the requirements of the fire department, and will they require additional fire hydrants within the area. 12 Mario Franklin 21779 Vivienda Avenue Mr. Franklin purchased a home in the City of Grand Terrace six months ago. Mr. Franklin was unaware that the area would be developed into manufacturing, and does not wish to have such a view. Shauna Padilla 21797 Vivienda Ms. Padilla states that a neighbor of hers has a daughter that is a severe asthmatic and need -hospitalization because of it. Ms. Padilla feels that the dust could be detrimental to the health of some of the residences. Chair Wilson closed the Public Hearing and brought the item back to the Commission. Vice Chair Addington asked staff to work over some conditions with the water quality and the air quality boards. The post construction best management practices also need to be worked on as well as the issue with the noise of the concrete mixer. Vice Chair Addington would also like to know what the operation hours will be and can they be governed. MOTION PC-21-2005: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to Continue SA-05-06 and E-06-04 to the June 16, 2005 Meeting. Commissioner Whitley seconded the motion. MOTION VOTE PC-21-2005: 4-0-1-0 Commissioner Comstock Absent ADJOURN SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 9:15 Pm CONVENE PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION • Information to Commissioners None • Information from Commissioners Miguel's will be presented before the Planning Commission at the June, 2005 meeting. The condominium development at DeBerry Street is moving forward. 13 ADJOURN PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION 9:17 PM NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON June 16. 2005 Respectfully Submitted, Approved By, Gary Ko6ntz, Plann66 Director , ou�Nilsori',\th6oifman PI a ing Commission 14