Loading...
10/16/2003 I Community and Economic Development (ALIfORNIA Department 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, California 92313-5295 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION (909) 824-6621 MINTUES OF REGULAR MEETING. October 16, 2003 - The reqular meetina of the Grand Terrace Plannina Commission was called to . order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on October 16, 2003, at 7:00 p.m., by Chairperson Douq Wilson. PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Chairman MattheW Addington, Vice Chairperson Brian Whitley,.Commissioner Robert Bidney, Commissioner Tom Comstock, Commissioner Gary Koontz, Community.Development Director Jahn Lampe, Associate Planner Michelle Boustedt, CDD Secretary ABSENT: None 7:00,;P i'0. CONVENE SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ -,PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING b Pledge of Allegiance;led by Commissioner Comstock ® Roll Call PUBLIC 'PARTICIPATTION: None ITEMS: 1. MINUTES Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 18, 2003 RECOMMENDATION: Approval 1 MOTION: PC-29-2003 Commissioner Bidney made a motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated September 18, 2003. Commissioner Comstock seconded the motion. MOTION VOTE: PC-29-2003 Approved 5-0-0-0 2. BRSP-03-01/E-03-08 A proposal to revise the current Barton Road Specific Plan in order to simplify its administration, to encourage quality commercial development along the Barton Road corridor, to reformat the document to current State guidelines for Specific Plans, and to reflect changes in the community since its original adoption. APPLICANT: Community Development Department of Grand Terrace LOCATION: Properties generally along an approximately 1.3 mile long corridor on both sides of Barton Road extending from the 1-215 Freeway on the west to the intersection of Barton Road and Victoria Street on the east. RECOMMENDATION: Reopen the Public Hearing continued from September 18, 2003, and receive testimony. Close the Public Hearing and Recommend to the City Council that it Approve and Adopt the Ordinance Amending the Barton Road Specific Plan under BRSP-03-01 and Approve and Adopt the Negative Declaration for this proposal under E- 03-08. Planning Director Koontz presented the revised Draft Barton Road Specific Plan. The staff was presented with input from the General,,Public as well as the Planning Commission at the September 18th Commission Meeting. The primary areas that were re-drafted pertained to Planning Area 3 next to City Hall in the Office/Professional Area. Two additional master plan areas were added to the Draft Barton Road Specific Plan. Planning Area 4, is.the triangular property that sits west of City Hall. Planning Area 5 is the southwest corner of Preston and Barton Road. Both areas primarily need to be utilized as Office/Professional type of uses with support retail and service commercial uses. - . Commercial uses have also been suggested to blend in with Office/Professional uses that have already been permitted. The newly drafted Land Use Matrix illustrates the additions. 2 The Specific Plan area has not been changed as far as expanding the area at the westerly portion of Barton Road and staff feels that the current planning process is adequate to address consistency issues associated with the Barton Road Specific Plan. It is suggested by Staff to keep the current planning process for that particular area. Planning Director Koontz closed his presentation and invited any questions or comments from the Commission. Chair Wilson opened up the Public Hearing for comment. Tony Petta 11875 Eton Drive Mr. Petta 'asked if the changes to the AP Zone in the Draft Barton Road Specific Plan apply generally to all of the AP Zoned areas in the City. Planning Director Koontz "replied that the proposed changes in terms of land uses specifically deal with the Barton Road Specific Plan. Anything else within the City would have to reference back to the original Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Petta asked if the area located west of City Hall from Barton Road and Palm Avenue would still be considered for apartments as well as Office/Professional. Planning Director Koontz replied that apartments would not be zoned for that particular area. Everything west of City Hall would be considered in Master Plan Area 4, as Office/Professional with retail uses to support that particular area. Charles Haddy-Developer 2209 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport Beach Mr. Haddy asked the Staff with regard to the property that lies between two apartment projects on- Preston Street between Palm and Barton Road. If a conditional use is allowed for that particular area, what type of setback and density will be allowed? Planning Director Koontz replied that the multi-family infill will be consistent to the existing multi-density or R3 Residential Zone. Chair Wilson brought the item back to the Commission for comment. Commissioner Bidney asked if any of the problems listed in Exhibit One were resolved with regard to Dr. Darwin's property. Associate Planner Lampe replied that Dr. Darwin was proposing to build a low wall along the easterly portion of the property line around the first of the year. The project was completed eight months ago. 3 MOTION PC-30-2003 Motion was made by Commissioner Whitley to accept and approve the amendments as proposed for BRSP-03- 01 and E-03-08. Motion was seconded by Vice Chair Addington MOTION VOTE PC-30-2003: Approved 5-0-0-0 3. SA-03-08 CUP-03-05/E-03-06 Construct a 69 Unit multi-family residential project consisting of 12 townhouse units, 56 apartment units and one office unit with a density bonus as allowed by the Zoning Code. APPLICANT: Heyming and Johnson, Inc. LOCATION: Approximately 4.8 acre, vacant parcel located generally on the north side of De Berry Street between Reed Avenue and the Gage Canal right-of-way. t RECOMMENDATION: Open the Public Hearing, receive the Staff Report and testimony, close the hearing and approve the Resolution calling for the approval of SA-03-08, CUP-03-05 and E- 03-06 supported by the findings and subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Associate Planner Lampe presented the Staff Report with regard to the above referenced item-. The subject site-is approximately-4:8 acres located on the-northerly side of DeBerry Street between the Gage Canal right of way and Reed Avenue on the west. The Applicant is requesting permission to construct a 69-unit multi-family or townhouse/apartment type project. The existing residence in the southeast corner will be demolished. The residence located on the southwest corner will be maintained and will be separated from the site through a Lot Line Adjustment. With the assistance of the City's Historian, the previous apartment project existed on the parcel and was demolished around 1990. The property has a history of being used as apartments. The surrounding area is single-family developed housing to the west, a retirement hotel located to the immediate north, and intermittent vacant residential parcels from Barton Road to the northwest. To the immediate east is a mixture of single-family residential along with duplex and quad-plexes. To the southeast is an apartment project called The Crest Apartments. The immediate south of the subject site are single-family detached housing. 4 Access to the site will be provided by DeBerry Street, which is a 66-foot wide local _ collector on the City's Circulation Element. Reed Street is a 60-foot wide local street running along the westerly side of the property. The subject property is zoned R-3, or medium density residential as are the parcels to the immediate east and southeast of the subject site. This R-3 Zoning is also located in the MDR or the Medium Density Residential category of the City's General Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan and the R-3 Zoning Code. Parcels to the north lie within the Barton Road Specific Plan. Properties to the immediate west are R1-7.2 Single Family Residential Zoning, as are the properties to the immediate south of the subject site. The proposed project proposes a total of 69 covered parking spaces and 86 open parking spaces totaling 155 spaces overall. The parking standard requirement has been met for this particular project. Vehicle access to this site will be by means of an in and out driveway off of DeBerry Street across from Willett Court. There will be a 50-foot stacking distance suggested by the City's Traffic Engineer so people will not have to wait out in the street to enter into the project. Access onto Reed Street will be restricted with the exception of an in and out emergency only gate at the location. At the center of the proposed development, there will be a recreation center with a recreation room, pool and spa, and a children's playground. The Applicant has proposed to construct a six-foot decorative block wall along the westerly property line with a setback of 12 feet from the curb face.. A block wall is also proposed-along the westerly side of the- Gage Canal: A-wrought iron- security type fence is also proposed along DeBerry Street that will be set back 15-feet from the property line. Overall, the density of the project figures to be 14.4 units per acre. The density includes a 20% density bonus over the normal maximum which is normally 12 units per acre. In order to obtain the density bonus, the applicant was required to file a conditional use permit by the zoning code, requesting that the density bonus be granted. The density bonus is based on additional amenities provided within the project, including various off-site improvements. The Staff believes that this project does qualify for a density bonus and provides for on-site amenities by way of the recreational facilities including the recreation room, pool, spa and playground. Being sensitive to the surrounding single-family residential neighborhood, the two _ residential structures on De Berry Street will be single-story in height. The town homes that will be located on the west side of the project will be two-story, however, the second story will be set back 42-feet from the curb face. 5 In addition, the applicant will be making off-site improvements along the southerly part of Reed Street and DeBerry Street where additional dedication and street improvements including curbs, gutters and sidewalks will be required. The house that has been on the site on the southwest corner will remain by filing for a Lot Line Adjustment and will record prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project. Preliminary landscaping has been conditioned to require a street tree every 40 feet on both De Berry and Reed Street frontages. It has also been proposed to require landscaping in the middle of every row of open parking of 10 or more spaces. A requirement has also been made that before grading permits are granted and approved for this project, a more detailed grading plan and a soils report will be required to be submitted for plan check prior to the issuance of any grading plan for this project. The proposed project will consist of three basic types of units. The townhouse project will consist of two floors totaling 1,100 square feet of living area with a small patio located on the-first floor. The two bedroom unit will be a single floor unit and will consist of 1,000 square feet with a 200 square foot patio. The one bedroom unit will consist of 800 square feet with a 100 square foot patio. The minimum living area requirements in the R3 Zone is 800 square feet for a one bedroom unit, and 1,000 square feet for a two bedroom unit. `- The elevations of the proposed project shows an architectural style of a Spanish influence with Spanish the roofs, heavy stucco finish and blue tile trim. Windows will be accented with stucco pop-outs and balconies with a stucco finish. In conformance with the California Environmental Equality Act, an Initial Study/ Environmental Review of the project was completed by Staff. It concluded that this project-qualified for a Negative Declaration-and-that-it will-not have a negative-impact on the environment. The property has been zoned R3 for approximately 20-years, and is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code. The project has been designed by the Applicant to be compatible with adjacent single-family area; and the applicant has tried to be sensitive to the one-story nature of the neighborhood by restricting the two buildings to the immediate south as single story and pulling back the second story of the townhouse units on Reed Street. Based on this analysis, Staff is recommending that the Commission approve the 69- unit multi-family development as called for by the Resolution of Approval. Chair Wilson asked the Commission if they had any questions of Staff. - - Vice Chair Addington asked with regard to the fence area along the property. What y will the fencing be along the northerly boundary. 6 Associate Planner Lampe replied that there is an existing high wooden fence that separates the site from the retirement hotel to the north. A block wall at the location would be considered somewhat redundant. Vice Chair Addington asked if the developer was proposing to sell off the town home style projects. Associate Planner Lampe replied that it would be strictly an apartment complex for rental purposes only. Vice Chair Addington asked if there was an underground storm drain system that would be able to carry off the storm water. Planning Director Koontz replied that further to the west of the subject site is a 60 inch storm drain.that would be available to collect the storm water. Vice Chair Addington asked how the project was proposing to clean their storm water before it is discharged. Planning Director Koontz replied that a condition has been made to perform a hydrology study as part of the grading analysis of the project. There is also a standard condition calling for NPDES Compliance. Commissioner Bidney asked with regard to the residence that will remain on the property, will the proposed curb and gutter be cut to where it will align the street out rather than curving slightly as it is at present. Associate Planner Lampe replied that the City's Building Official is asking for an additional eight feet of dedication to the lot for straightening the street, but there will be a slight curve in the center line of the street. Commissioner Comstock asked if the Traffic Engineer had proposed any further studies from DeBerry and Michigan Avenue. Planning Director Koontz replied that Michigan Avenue is an issue onto itself. The Traffic Engineer did not do a study including Michigan Avenue, but it is apparent that Michigan Avenue does need to be improved whether this project get approved or not. Vice Chair Addington asked if the Applicant is being conditioned to retain the difference between the existing and proposed flows as far as the storm water is concerned. Planning Director Koontz replied that the Staff is not conditioning it, and it will be dependant upon the hydrology study and what the City Engineer's finding will be contain. Commissioner Whitley asked with regard to the property where the single-family _ residence will remain. The set-back on the rear of the property will be a 20-foot setback or will further approval be necessary? Will a block wall surround that residence. 7 Associate Planner Lampe replied that the R3 Zone does require a minimum 20 foot _ rear yard setback. There will be a block wall proposed to surround the existing residence to separate it from the project. Chair Wilson opened up the Public Hearing. Barry McMasters 12345 Willett Court Mr. McMasters feels that the proposed project will decrease the property values of their homes. Mr. McMasters claims that his son was assaulted by young men who lived in The Crest Apartments and feels that an apartment complex will invite more violent people to live in the area. Mr. McMasters also feels that parking for the complex will propose a problem with those residences adjacent to the complex and may inhibit mail from being delivered due to people parking in front of the surrounding residences mail boxes. Alison Ault 12247 Pascal Ms. Ault commented that she lives on the street immediately to the-west of Reed Street. Ms. Ault stated that The Crest Apartments poses a traffic hazard to DeBerry Street. If Reed were to become a through street, would the emergency access be opened up as a throughway. Ms. Ault is worried about the security.of the elderly residents at the retirement hotel because building more apartment complexes invites more transitory residents within the area. Keith Sagar 12330 Willett Court Mr. Sagar reported that he lives on the corner of De Berry and Willett Court. His concerns are- with regard- to the traffic the new apartment complex will-generate. Other concerns are parking issues that will be imposed upon at DeBerry and Reed Street from the residents at the proposed project. Mr. Sagar also feels that this apartment complex will also aid in overcrowding the classrooms in Grand Terrace. Chair Wilson asked if there was any suggestion from the Traffic Engineer with regard to a no parking zone along Reed Street on the west side of the project? Also, what response was received from the School District with regard to the proposed project? Associate Planner Lampe replied that the Traffic Engineer did not talk about a no parking zone in his letter. The school district was sent two packages for review and comment. The facilities planner replied that an additional classroom will be require for the Grand Terrace Elementary School and for the Terrace Hills Middle School should this project go through. The developer would have to pay a school mitigation fee in the order of$3.05 per square foot equaling about $200,000 for the project. Mary Brady 12333 Willett Court 8 Ms. Brady has lived in Grand Terrace for 17 years. She is happy to see that the piece of property will be improved but feels that one bedroom apartments should not be allowed at the project. Ms. Brady feels that one bedroom apartment are not considered to be family friendly, which she feels that Grand Terrace is known for. Ms. Brady feels that if this project goes through, there should be more policing involved. Should this project go through, she feels that two and three bedroom condominium style residences should be built. Ms. Brady also feels that if more block walls will be built, graffiti will also pose as a big problem. Cindy Bidney 12219 Pascal Mrs. Bidney lives just around the corner from Reed Street. Mrs. Bidney is concerned with the thefts within the,area. Mr. Bidney's tools were stolen from their garage and feels that the apartments are to blame for the thefts and crime within the City. Norman Ault 12247 Pascal Avenue Mr. Ault had a concern with the constant helicopter traffic above the existing apartment complexes nearby. Mr. Ault feels that it is not good for the area to add more apartments and to possibly add more problems with crime. Mr. Ault feels that if additional classrooms must be added meaning adding more portable type classrooms to children, it would be a second class type of classroom that effect the children. Chair Wilson agreed with Mr. Ault with regard to adding portable classrooms; it is unfortunate that it is a situation is controlled by the state, and would be considered out of the City's hands. Ginna Slocum 12274 Reed Ms. Slocum echoed her concerns with regard to the traffic and loud stereos in vehicles. She is concerned with the crimes that occur to the parked cars along DeBerry Street. She is hoping that the Commission condition the project to have parking restrictions for the project. Should the project get approved and the school district add another portable classroom to the Grand Terrace Middle School, it will impose upon parking for the faculty as well as impose upon the playgrounds of the school. Bonnie Landa 12323 Willett Court Ms. Landa has lived in her residence for 20 years. She has stated that her property taxes has gone up once again. She feels that property values should go up instead of property taxes. She feels that if this apartment complex is built it will drop their property values. Ms. Landa claims that she picks up trash on a daily basis from the existing apartment complex. 9 Paul Robles 12264 Reed Street Mr. Robles has lived at his address for 10 years. Mr. Robles has had two weed eaters stolen from his garage because of the surrounding apartment complexes is the reason that there is criminal activity in the area. Mr. Robles works for the County Sheriffs Department and understands that there are two Deputies contracted for the City. Should the application be approved, there would be more criminal activity that would take place, and the City would need to have more deputies contracted. Mr. Robles also mentioned that the applicant had come door to door within the neighborhood and proposed condominiums or town homes, and not apartments. Sharon Pizaka 12246 Pascal Ms. Pizaka has concerns with the safety of her children. She feels that the proposed project would invite more crime into the community. Ms. Pizaka asked if the neighborhood would have a right to petition the project. Chair Wilson replied that there is always an opportunity to petition against the project, but the Public Hearing is specifically designed for the process of stating your opinion for a project. Chair Wilson then invited the Applicant to speak to the Commission and to the General Public with regard to his project. ' Tim_Wilson -Architect/Civil Engineer GTS Associates - Redlands Mr. Wilson reported that the proposed project is an infill project. Unfortunately, infill projects are difficult to get approved. The project is being designed with the utmost consideration to the surrounding areas. The single-story units have been planned to be placed fronting DeBerry Street. Reed Street has been proposed to restrict vehicular access throughout the entire length of the street. Ample parking will be planned within the project to keep residents and their guests from parking outside of the apartment project. The project is providing a substantial recreational area such as a pool, spa and exercise/weight room adjacent to the manager's living quarters. Mr. Wilson reports that DeBerry seems to have a good access to the proposed apartment project, and although there are some problems at the intersections, those problems will be addressed as far as adding signals and whatever there is a need for to allay these types of traffic problems. Vice Chair Addington asked Mr. Wilson if they have analyzed the drainage issues on DeBerry Street. 10 Mr. Wilson replied that there was a prior apartment development on this site. Drainage on the project would be directed towards the street in which it has always been a dual use facility for drainage and traffic. The City system will eventually collect the water from the streets and into the existing storm drains. Vice Chair Addington asked how the storm water is being proposed to be cleaned to comply with the NPDES Standards. Mr. Wilson replied that when development of the project is occurring, the construction water will be retained and filtered on site. Once the project is completely developed, the property will be fully landscaped and will not create any additional pollution problems that the current streets carry. The NPDES Laws are designed to prevent development from impacting the systems and not the completed project. Mr. Wilson informed a citizen in the audience that with regard to pedestrian access in to the complex, all pedestrian access will be through the main entrance gates. Chair Wilson asked Staff what the percent of apartments on the average are located here in the City. Associate Planner Lampe replied that according to the information obtained by the State of California Department of Finance approved by the Commission last year, 28% of the housing stock consists of multi-family residences. A breakdown for the County of San Bernardino is at 20%. Chair.Wilson asked the Applicant what they thought about putting time limits for the parking areas surrounding the project at Reed Street, and what was the guest parking percentage for the project? Mr. Wilson replied that restrictive parking is difficult to do. Pedestrian access at DeBerry Street would hinder anyone to park at Reed Street. The guest parking percentage is-at 1-2% of-the-overall-project-which-meets the-City Ordinance. Chair Wilson voiced his concern with regard to-the traffic on DeBerry Street. He is in disagreement,with the Mitigated Negative Declaration because he does not believe that the traffic examination is correct, and would like to see calculations with regard to the traffic impact in that particular area. Chair Wilson asked Mr. Wilson if they had done a report with relation to the traffic impact., Mr. Wilson replied that for a project this size, a traffic report would not normally be done. -Planning Director Koontz replied that if Craig Neustedter had asked for a traffic report, one would have been required from the Staff. Chair Wilson asked-where was the entrance to the prior project that had existed on the site? Mr. Wilson replied that the prior entrance was located on Reed Street. 11 Chair Wilson asked a question with regard to the density bonus based upon the amenities. What is the understanding of the Applicant with regard being awarded - the density bonus? Mr. Wilson replied that there is no requirement to provide any amenities at all to an apartment project. The amenities are provided as a benefit to the residents. Chair Wilson asked Staff that in order to qualify for a density bonus, isn't it customary or code to have some type of amenities in exchange? Associate Planner Lampe replied that there is no specified number of amenities that have to be provided. The Ordinance indicates that to get a 20% density bonus, there is a need to provide for additional amenities to the project. Chair Wilson asked the Applicant how graffiti will be prevented. Mr. Wilson replied that those areas should be patrolled, and the other option that has been proposed to densely landscape the property to deter the graffiti. Commissioner Comstock asked if the project would also include affordable housing. Mr. Wilson answered that the proposed project was not intended to become an affordable housing type of apartment complex. Chair Wilson asked if anyone else wanted to speak with regard to the project. Frank Heyming Heyming & Johnson .7130 Magnolia Avenue Mr. Heyming reported that the cost of building the apartments will average out to about $90,000 per door. Because of the cost, the rents of the apartments will range from-$875.00 to $1,1-50 per month. In addition, there-will--be two full time employees residing at the apartments so that the residents will be closely monitored. Mr. Heyming went throughout the neighborhood and asked what they would think with regard to the vehicular and pedestrian traffic onto Reed Street. Some of the comments that Mr. Heyming received from the neighbors was with regard to the termite infested trees that exist on the site currently, and the kids that loiter on the property as well. Vice Chair Addington asked Mr. Heyming if he had considered reducing the density of the project. Mr. Heyming replied that because of the cost of how much it will be to build the apartments, that he does not see reducing the density feasible. He indicated that the density that they are proposing is medium density apartments and not high density apartments. 12 Commissioner Whitley asked with regard to the development review process, was consideration given to construct the project as town homes that people can purchase rather than rent? Mr. Heyming replied that when the research was performed to evaluate the cost of building town homes for ownership, the price difference per unit would be an additional $10,000 per door. Linda Barton 12220 Reed Street Ms. Barton reported that when Mr. Heyming came around the neighborhood, he claimed that the project would be town homes or condominiums, and did not mention anything with regard to apartments. Ms. Barton also claims that the emergency access door will be right in front of her residence, and feels that the door . will be covered with graffiti and will drive the property value of her home down. Chair Wilson asked Staff if apartments are a permitted use in an R3 Zone. Associate Planner Lampe replied that they are permitted and require a Site and Architectural Review. Alfredo Perez 12274 Mirado Mr. Perez states that he is representing the citizens on his street who are also against the property. Mr. Perez has had experiences in the past where people under the influence of drugs or alcohol have parked in front of his home and have knocked on his door. He feels that putting in such a complex will invite such people in the neighborhood. Chair Wilson closed the Public Hearing and brought the item back to the Commission-for discussion and action. Vice Chair Addington feels that there is not enough coordination on the conditions of approval; and does not think the project has been sufficiently conditioned. Commissioner Comstock feels that traffic study should be done, and also that the density should be lowered for the project. He also commented that if a red zone is used for the west,side of the street, residents of the apartments will park on the east side of the street. Commissioner Comstock feels that a red zone should be placed on Reed Street to keep cars from parking there in front of the surrounding single- family resident's homes. MOTION PC-31-03: Motion was made by Chair Wilson to deny CUP-03-05, and E-03-06. _- Motion was seconded by Commissioner Comstock 13 Planning Director Koontz interjected and advised the Commission that according to the City Attorney, should the Commission decide to deny the project, there would have to be specific findings as to why the project would be denied. Chair Wilson replied that the Planning Commission finds that the Zoning is correct, the project is in compliance, the proposed housing is in compliance. However, the traffic study is inadequate along with the justification of the density bonus. Vice Chair Addington added that the Applicant has not addressed the post construction management practices of the Clean Water Act. Planning Director Koontz replied that as far as the traffic situation is concerned, there needs to be a more detailed study performed. If the Commission believes that a traffic study needs to be performed, they can require it along with a hydrology study for the storm drainage issue. They can also request that the Applicant reconsider the density of the project. Commissioner Comstock asked that if they deny the project, wouldn't the denial give the Applicant a chance to go back and re-do the project? Planning Director Koontz replied that the Applicant would have to start the application over again. Chair Wilson withdrew his vote for denial. MOTION PC-31-2003 Chair Wilson made a motion to continue the Item based on the request of revisiting some of the considerations with regard to a traffic study, hydrology study, and the density of the project. Commissioner Comstock elected to withdraw his second from-the previous motion. MOTION VOTE Failed 1-4-0-0 PC-31-2003: Commissioner Comstock voting yes MOTION PC-32-2003: Chair Wilson made a motion for a two month continuance on the Item based on the request of revisiting some of the considerations with regard to a traffic study, hydrology study, and the density of the project. Vice Chair Addington seconded the motion. MOTION VOTE PC-32-2003: Approved 3-1-0-1 Commissioner Comstock voting no ` Commissioner Bidney abstained 14 CONVENE PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION, • Information to Commissioners Outdoor Adventures Center is moving along. A special Public Hearing will be held specifically for the project on February 5, 2004. Workshop for the RV Ordinance will be held on November 20, 2003. The houses proposed to be built on Van Buren and Reed will break ground at the beginning of next week. Keystone Schools has withdrawn their application to add more students to their school. • Information from Commissioners ADJOURN PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION 9:40 PM NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 20„ 2003" Respectfully Submitted, Approved By, Gary Koontz, Pranning Director Doug Wilson, Chairman Planning-Commission- 15