Loading...
06/05/1990GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JUNE 5, 1990 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on June 5, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Jerry Hawkinson. PRESENT: Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Herman Hilkey, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Jim Sims, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner David R. Sawyer, Community Development Director Maria C. Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Secretary ABSENT: Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner PLEDGE: Ray Munson, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M. Information from staff to Planning Commissioners. Information from Planning Commissioners to staff. Correction to minutes of 5-1-90 Planning Commission Meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None. ITEM #1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - MAY 19 1990 MOTION PCM-90-60 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - MAY 19 1990 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-60 Commissioner Munson made a motion to approve the May 1, 1990 minutes. Commissioner Sims second. Motion carries. 4-0-3-0. Commissioners Buchanan, Hargrave and Hilkey absent. ITEM #2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - MAY 15, 1990 MOTION PCM-90-61 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - MAY 15, 1990 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-61 Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion to approve the May 15, 1990 minutes. Commissioner Sims second. Motion carries. 4-0-3-0. Commissioners Buchanan, Hargrave and Hilkey absent. ITEM #3 Z-90-01; E-90-02 REPEAL OF TITLE 18 OF THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE (THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE) AND ADOPTION OF A REVISED TITLE 18; A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROPOSED REVISION OF TITLE 18 The Community Development Director presented the staff report and stated that this item is a continuation from the last Planning Commission Meeting. 2 He stated that they had gone through the Barton Road Specific Plan portion of the ordinance, and would continue pointing out some of the changes they have included, and that a lot of the changes were format changes. He stated that the old Title 18 had been an adoption of the county code and had been amended from time to time throughout its history. The Community Development Director stated that the first chapter that they are looking at is the Administrative Professional District. He stated that this one and the C2 zoning actually had permitted uses and conditionally permitted uses. He stated that with a conditional use permit, they would have to come before the Planning Commission and apply for the permit, which the commission would consider. He stated that sections in the existing code have been combined into one section in the revision under "Site Development Standards". He presented the permitted and conditionally permitted uses. He stated that if someone comes in and their business doesn't fit anything directly that is listed, they can apply for a Determination of Use, which would come to the Planning Commission. The Community Development Director stated that the next district was the C2 District, with the same type of format changes, but the overall chapter is basically the same. He stated that the permitted uses were expanded to include more a detailed listing of different permitted uses. He presented permitted and conditionally permitted uses, and stated that the Site Development Standards are the same. The Community Development Director stated that City Council has directed staff to create a retail -manufacturing mixed zone for the area between De Berry and Van Buren Street, west of Michigan and east of the freeway. He stated that there is one retail district (C2) other than the Barton Road Specific Plan area and two manufacturing districts: the MR zone which is restricted manufacturing (light manufacturing), and a M2 zone, which is slightly heavier than what is allowed in the MR district. He stated that the City doesn't haven't anything to be termed a heavy industrial zone. He stated that previously in their manufacturing districts, everything required a Conditional Use Permit, but they have changed this beginning with the CM district. He presented the definitions for light, medium and heavy manufacturing. He stated that creation of products in a light manufacturing zone would not really bother anyone else. He stated that medium manufacturing is basically the same, but there will typically not be a finished product, but rather components that would be put together later, and they may create a nuisance, odor or noise for other tenants on the same site. He stated that heavy manufacturing may do that and may affect surrounding properties. He stated that, in the City's zoning, there are provisions for light and medium manufacturing, but none for heavy manufacturing, which would 3 require applying for a Conditional Use Permit. The Community Development Director stated that the CM zone starts off with permitted uses, which he listed. He stated that anything permitted under the permitted uses of the C2 zone can go in the CM district as a permitted use. He stated that if it needs a CUP in the C2 zone, it is not permitted in the CM district. He listed the conditionally permitted uses. Commissioner Sims asked if the Community Development Director was going over everything for the record or for the Commissioners purposes. The Community Development Director stated it was for their purposes so that everyone understands the differences between the manufacturing districts. He stated that they are looking at the CM zone as a combination of the C2 zone and the MR zone. He stated that the manufacturing uses that are allowed in the CM zone are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. The Community Development Director stated that the MR district is different than the existing MR district in that they have the format changes. He stated that it actually specifies different permitted uses. He stated that they have similar uses to the CM with a Conditional Use Permit. He stated that they have been a little bit more particular as to what has to come in for a Conditional Use Permit as there are homes in the general vicinity. He stated that the Site Development Standards are basically the same. The Community Development Director presented the permitted and conditionally permitted uses of the M2 district. He stated that in other zones, the Conditional Use Permit is looking at heavier uses or uses that may be a burden to the permitted uses. He stated that the heavier uses are the permitted uses as this is the zone for it, but they are conditionally permitting the lighter uses, as they need to recognize that they are going into the heavier zone. Commissioner Munson asked if the lot areas, widths and depths are minimum standards. The Community Development Director stated that they are minimum standards, but they should keep in mind that any lot that is a legal lot will be able to develop. He stated that the only other pure district they have is the Public Facilities District, for which he listed the permitted uses. He stated that they are not creating any new area or changing any zoning on this. He stated that the remaining districts are the Flood Plain Overlay and Agricultural Overlay Districts. He stated that these two districts will sit down on top of the underlying districts, and all of the regulations still apply for the 4 underlying districts, with the addition of whatever restrictions, regulations or provisions that are included in the overlay district. He stated that in our situation, there are no overlapping, overlay districts. He said that the Flood Plain District is dictated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, who comes out with a mapping of where the different flood plain areas are in town, and Grand Terrace has only one area in the flood plain, which is on the far northwest portion of town by the river bottom and next to the railroad tracks. He stated that the Agricultural Overlay District is the same as the one adopted a year and a half ago. The Community Development Director stated that the next chapter is Parking, with one minor change, being that the light standards should not exceed 18 feet in height measured from the finished grade of the parking surface. Commissioner Munson stated that there is a residence on Miriam Way, where they are parking approximately 5 vehicles between their driveway and property line. He asked how to control this. The Community Development Director stated that residential parking regulations are not addressed in the Parking Ordinance, and he can answer the question by going into Site and Architectural Review. Commissioner Sims stated that in the older version there was a diagram, which the Community Development Director said would be included. Commissioner Munson stated that two or three years ago they had the insulation people parking their trucks across the street from the Community Center, and there didn't seem to be anything they could do keep them from parking those trucks there, and he is concerned this will happen again. The Community Development Director stated that there were some nonconforming use rights in that particular instance. He stated that in the General Regulations section, there is a section defining yards. Commissioner Munson stated that on Canal Street, there was a May Co. truck that sat there for two and a half years, and it was an eyesore. He asked how this would be addressed. The Community Development Director stated that in the General Regulations section under yards, it says, "All yards as required by this Title shall be subject to the following regulations: A) All front, side and rear yards shall be open and unobstructed 5 from the ground to the sky unless otherwise provided for in this Title. B) All portions of any front yard or side yard, which is adjacent to a street, accept for driveways and walks, shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs, flowers or other decorative plant materials and shall be permanently maintained in a neat, attractive and weed -free manner. In no case shall boats, trailers, commercial vehicles, recreational vehicles or any miscellaneous material be stored or parked in any required front yard or side yard which is adjacent to a street. He stated that they do have the ability to park on the driveway, but it has to be an operative, licensed vehicle, and they must park on the pavement and the property, but not overlapping the sidewalk. The Community Development Director stated that the Site and Architectural Review section has some changes. He stated that the major change is that single family additions will need to go through Site and Architectural Review. He stated that anything that extends over 10 feet in height will have to go through Site and Architectural Review, as opposed to anything over 8 feet, as it is now. He stated that any remodeling or renovation which results in either a change of use, increase of size or increased capacity will require Site and Architectural Review, which would include adding a room to a home. He stated that additional site access, for example, driveway cuts, will also require Site and Architectural Review. He stated that they reformatted the entire section to establish guidelines for the review board and for the applicant. He stated that the 10 foot rule comes into play with a patio cover or an accessory structure, but they will see any size addition. The Community Development Director requested a recess, which Chairman Hawkinson granted. 7:50 P.M. - 8:00 P.M.: RECESS Chairman Hawkinson called the meeting back to order. The Community Development Director stated that he prepared an alternative section for Site and Architectural Review Board, which makes Site and Architectural Review a formal public hearing process. He stated that staff recommends this alternative version. He stated that the down side is that this includes a 300 foot mailing list and property owners' map. He stated that the individual homeowner who is doing a patio deck which is over 10 feet will 6 have to provide these things, and the layperson who comes in off the street can either have a title company do it or do it himself. He stated that this is the only burden staff foresees. Commissioner Van Gelder asked what the time frame is required for public hearing. The Community Development Director stated that it has to be published in the newspaper and must be deposited in the mail 10 days prior to the public hearing. Commissioner Van Gelder asked if they are mailed certified, as then staff would be sure to know if the notices were sent to the correct names and addresses. The Community Development Director stated that they do not, as they are not required to do so. He stated that even if someone doesn't receive it, that doesn't nullify the public hearing. He said that staff would disagree, as it is not staff's responsibility to make sure that the applicant is putting their project together correctly, and the mailing list is part of the application. He stated that the applicant signs a mailing list affidavit saying that the assessor's map was used and it is the most current data and that it is correct and true, and this signature releases staffs responsibility. The Community Development Director stated that other changes on the Site and Architectural Review chapter include more specifications as far as how the building permit process works. He stated that expiration of a Site and Architectural Review approval will expire one year from the date of the approval, and the Planning Director may extend that up to a period of one year. He stated that this is the responsibility of the applicant. The Community Development Director stated that the Manufactured Housing chapter was slightly changed as they have included the definition and have reworded it in accordance with the state guidelines, but otherwise it is the same as the previous chapter. He stated that Second Family Units is basically the same, but the state law had changed slightly since the time that the original ordinance had been written. He stated that it is almost entirely the same with the exception that there was a little bit more definition as to who could use it. He stated that when they had those determinations, they had combined the City and the State Ordinance regarding the occupants having to be 65 years of age, and these types of issues. He stated that this ordinance has been revised to include these issues as well as the standard condition for an agreement to be recorded at the County Recorder's office. He stated that they have established special regulations for the second family unit: The 7 second family unit shall be used for the sole occupancy for one adult or two adult persons who are 60 years of age or over; the floor area of the second family unit shall not exceed 640 square feet or 25% of the main residence's living area, whichever is lesser; the applicant must be the owner/occupant of the main residence. Commissioner Sims asked if a manufactured house was allowed to go into an area of residential, conventionally built homes. The Community Development Director stated that the section on Manufactured Homes allows this, which is dictated by state law. He stated that state law does allow that it come in for Site and Architectural Review. Chairman Hawkinson asked if it is permitted as a commercial structure. The Community Development Director stated that it is permitted as a commercial structure if it passes through Site and Architectural Review, but the intent of this ordinance is written toward residential use. The Community Development Director stated that the General Regulations chapter has substantial changes, as they have taken out some of the repetitive areas, for example, street setbacks, which is in the residential zone. He stated that they expanded other regulations and added swimming pool regulations. He stated that any body of water that holds more than 18 inches of water requires a permit and has to be fenced. He stated that he would like to add a #4 under "Location and Setbacks", that all swimming pools, etc., be setback from any building a distance of at least 5 feet. He stated that this is a public health and safety code requirement. He stated that attention should be paid to #2 under "Locations and Setbacks", which states that no bodies of water with a depth in excess of 18 inches shall be permitted in a required front yard. He stated that the next section was on Temporary Manufactured Housing Installations, which states that the Planning Director can approve modular homes for construction offices, for example. Commissioner Sims asked if it would be appropriate to put verbiage in to give guidance on the type of quality of fencing. The Community Development Director stated it would be too project specific to include it in the code itself, and they have that discretion at Site and Architectural Review. He stated that the section on Visual Screening and Unsightly Uses states that, "All open storage of motor vehicles, boats, trailers, building materials, appliances and similar materials shall be screened from view from all other properties and public streets by a six foot high, solid block wall, unless otherwise approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board 8 or City Council", which gives them some flexibility. He stated that if the use was being operated prior to this code, they have nonconforming rights to continue as it is, but if they come in and start the use up without the proper permits after that date, even if they are already operating, they can require it. Commissioner Hilkey stated that this came up a year ago when they were looking at the zoning. The Community Development Director stated that they had a separate section on recreational vehicles, and they had to be screened from view. He stated that the General Regulations section states that in no case shall boats, trailers, commercial vehicles, recreational vehicles or any miscellaneous materials be stored or parked in any required front or side yard adjacent to a street. He stated that they would need a fence and may park this type of vehicle in a side yard if it is not a street side. He drew a picture indicating what is required. Commissioner Hilkey asked that it be reworded. Chairman Hawkinson asked if staff had attempted to define the difference between parking and storage. The Community Development Director stated that this might be part of the answer. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that storage really means "using less often", but how often is often. The Community Development Director stated that they can look into defining parking and storage and reword these two sections. Commissioner Sims stated that the way it is written is the way it should be. The Community Development Director stated that they need to be careful not to get into a discussion until the public hearing. Commissioner Munson asked where satellite dishes fall into all of this. The Community Development Director stated that they don't; it is exactly the same as before. He stated that he anticipates coming back to the commission with a separate chapter on satellite dishes and has left room for it. The Community Development Director stated that the Nonconforming Uses 9 chapter is the same as before except for the Department Policy, which used to state that if anything had been vacant for a year, it would lose its nonconforming status or use status as far as Site and Architectural Review goes. He stated that this has been changed to 6 months. He stated that it is incorporated into Section 18.67.030, Nonconforming Use of Buildings. The Community Development Director stated that the Unlisted Uses chapter is the same as the existing chapter, which just states when a Determination of Use or Conditional Use Permit would come in. He stated that the Conditional Use Permit section establishes the different policies in the same manner as the Site and Architectural Review. He stated that the section on Variances does the same thing. He stated that the Minor Deviations section is done in the same manner, and is much the same as the existing chapter, except that it is more specific as to application procedures and building permit processes and appeal processes. He stated that the Amendments section is very much the same, but it is more specific on the processes. He stated that the Enforcement section is the same as it had been previously. The Community Development Director stated that the existing section on Signs is full of definitions and tables. He stated that in the revision, they revised the commercial portions of it basically in accordance with the Barton Road Specific Plan sign restrictions. He stated that the changes added into the sign ordinance include the establishment of a freeway sign, which is permitted in the C2, CM, MR and M2 districts within 250 feet of the freeway; outside of 250 feet, a freeway sign or pole sign would not be allowed and you would be looking at wall and monument signs. He stated the document states that if you change your sign, you must come into compliance. He stated that if a tenant leaves a property and another tenant comes in, the sign can be used if the tenant gets a business license and opens up for operation prior to 60 days from the last tenant; if it is over 60 days, it must be brought up to code. He stated that the definitions are the same as in the Definitions section, and are included just for convenience. He stated that the Submittal Process talks about how you apply for sign permit and what is required. He stated that the Planning Director approves sign permits, and if it is appealed, it goes to the Planning Commission. The Building Permit Process states that if the Planning Department approves a sign application, then it is sent over to the Building Department who will prepare a permit when needed. He stated that Enforcement talks about the City's Code Enforcement Officer enforcing all the provisions of this chapter. He stated that Architectural Compatibility states that the design of a sign should match the design of a building; Construction and Maintenance states that it should be built according to the U.B.C. and shall be maintained to look nice. He stated that the next section is the General Standards section, which he read through. This section states that there can be no moving parts. 10 Commissioner Hilkey asked about the Union 76 ball The Community Development Director stated that this would be nonconforming because he was already there, but if he wanted to change it, it could no longer rotate. He stated that the Site and Architectural Review Board may approve a sign which does not strictly adhere to the provisions of this chapter. Chairman Hawkinson stated that this body grants variances The Community Development Director stated that this body grants variances to the Title 18 on normal variances, but the findings have to be made. He stated that this is difficult for a sign. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that they will have to look up every sign in town and see when they put it up. The Community Development Director stated that when they go into enforcement of the Sign Ordinance, they will do a property -by -property inspection/inventory, then check the records to see which have permits and which don't, and those that don't will receive letters, and if in fact no permits were issued, they will have to be brought up to code. Commissioner Hilkey asked if the landscaping has to appear near the sign. The Community Development Director stated that landscaping will be around the base of the sign. Commissioner Hilkey asked if the ratios are acceptable someplace else. The Community Development Director stated that the monument and directory sign are based on other ordinances (Rancho Cucamonga). Commissioner Hilkey asked about political signs. The Community Development Director stated that the Political Sign section states the requirements, but there is very little that can be done about them, as enforcement is very difficult. He stated that they try to set a guideline for getting a permit, but there is no charge for one. The Community Development Director stated that the On -Site and Off -Site Subdivision sections are the same as the existing sections. Commissioner Van Gelder asked about apartment signs 11 The Community Development Director stated that this probably falls under the Prohibited or Illegal Sign portion. He stated that there are provisions for apartment signs and temporary signs, but if it becomes a permanent sign, they can go out and enforce the Sign Ordinance. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that there is a difference between a wooden sign and a fabric sign. The Community Development Director stated that banners are covered in this section. He stated that the next section is Specific Standards, and they have changed the format of the tables to make it more convenient readable and handout manner. He proceeded to present the tables. Commissioner Hilkey asked if it would be sent to the Chamber of Commerce for their input. The Community Development Director stated that they have not commented in the past except to City Council. He suggested opening the public hearing on the entire document and at that point make their decisions. He stated that they could either close the public hearing entirely and go on to discussions or close the public hearing on all chapters but the sign ordinance, and continue it until the next meeting so the Chamber and anyone else can make their Ocomments. Chairman Hawkinson declared a recess. 9:32 P.M. - 9:42 P.M.: RECESS Chairman Hawkinson called the meeting back to order and opened the public hearing. 9:42 P.M.: PUBLIC HEARING RUBEN LUNA Mr. Luna stated that he owns the piece of property on Barton Road by the railroad tracks. He stated that he has a machine that recycles aluminum, but with the current zoning, he doesn't think he could do it; however, he feels this is the best site for this machine as there are no houses in the area. He stated that they spent $8 million to build the machine, and it creates no pollution. He stated that he is trying to get permission for this machine. Chairman Hawkinson stated that they couldn't speak to that tonight, other than saying whether or not it is a permitted use. 12 Mr. Luna stated that his operation would be quieter and cleaner than lumber yards, so he can't understand why he can't be fitted into that type of use. Commissioner Sims asked what zone he is in. Mr. Luna stated that he is in MR, and he was never notified it was switched. The Community Development Director stated that he could come before the Planning Commission under Determination of Use. He stated that they would consider this medium manufacturing, which is a Conditional Use Permit item in the M2 zone. He stated that in the MR zone, he would have to convince the Commission under Determination of Use that it is a light manufacturing use. Mr. Luna stated that it is quieter than a lumber yard and would be a benefit to Grand Terrace, as they would manufacture the machine for worldwide distribution, and Grand Terrace would be on the map, as Washington D.C. has already contacted him. GENE MCMEANS RIVERSIDE HIGHLAND WATER COMPANY 1450 WASHINGTON STREET COLTON Mr. McMeans stated that he would like to relocate to Grand Terrace, being that is their major service area. He stated that he was encouraged to here about the CM zone, which fits their needs. He stated that the C2 zone fit their needs from the office standpoint, but pipe and fittings are quite large, and C2 did not allow for outside storage, which the CM zone does, so he would like to see it put into effect and in the locations that the Community Development Director has outlined. He stated that when he moved to Grand Terrace and got his R.V., the first thing he did was rent a space to put the R.V., as he did not feel that he should have something hanging out into the street. Chairman Hawkinson closed the public hearing with the exception of the Sign Ordinance. The Community Development Director stated that this would be all chapters but 18.80. 9:53 P.M.: PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Chairman Hawkinson brought it back to Commission. He stated that he 13 would like to adopt the Site and Architectural Review portion that includes the public hearing portion. MOTION PCM-90-62 Z-90-01, E-90-02 Commissioner Van Gelder made the motion to repeal the existing Title 18 and adopt the proposed revision and recommend the Negative Declaration for approval to the City Council. Commissioner Sims second. Chairman Hawkinson stated that he would like to see the public hearing portion to be included with Site and Architectural Review. Commissioners Van Gelder and Sims concurred. Commissioner Hilkey asked about the boats and what the intent is. The Community Development Director stated that it was as he explained it, with an R.V. not allowed to be parked in front yard or side yard adjacent to a street, whether fenced or not, and if it is in a rear yard or side yard not adjacent to a street, it can be stored, but it must be fenced. Commissioner Sims stated that in the Visual Screening section, it says that it must be screened by a 6 foot high solid block wall unless otherwise approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board. The Community Development Director stated that on the fencing, this is the case, but on whether or not you can park it in the front yard or side yard adjacent to a street, there is not. He stated that Section 18.73.200, Visual Screening of Unsightly Uses gives them the flexibility, as Site and Architectural Review Board and City Council can vary the 6 foot high block wall requirement. He stated that Yards, a separate section, states that all portions of any front or side yard adjacent to a street, except for driveways and walks, shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs or other decorative plant materials and shall be maintained, and in no case shall boats, trailers, R.Ws, etc. be stored or parked in any required front or side yard adjacent to a street. The Community Development Director stated that it can be changed to, "...parked in any required front yard (fenced or unfenced) or unfenced side yard which is adjacent to a street". Commissioner Van Gelder stated that parking in the side yard could be unpleasant for the neighbors on an inside lot. 14 Commissioner Sims stated that normally there is a fence in between the two. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that this is only 6 feet high, and R.Ws are higher. Commissioner Hilkey stated that he has a problem with 18.73.200. The Community Development Director stated that they can restrict the intent of this section to commercial properties or non-residential properties. He stated that the major intent was for open storage yard facilities, but technically it does apply to residential districts also. Commissioner Sims stated that they should address commercial uses as requiring the block wall, and set something for non-commercial uses. Commissioner Hilkey asked if it could be changed to reference a 6 foot high block wall for commercial applications and an appropriate wall for residential applications. The Community Development Director stated that they can reword it to say, "...from all other properties on public streets by six foot high, solid block wall for non-residential properties, and a six foot high, solid fence for residential properties, unless otherwise approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board". Chairman Hawkinson suggested revising the motion. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that she included any changes in her motion. The Community Development Director suggested noting any changes and then revising the motion. Commissioner Sims also asked for the changes in 18.73.210, stating, "...a front yard (fenced or unfenced) and an unfenced side yard". The Community Development Director stated that this is Section 18.73.210 (B), "In no case shall boats, trailers, commercial vehicles, recreational vehicles or any miscellaneous materials be stored or parked in any required front yard (fenced of unfenced) of unfenced side yard which is adjacent to a street". Commissioner Van Gelder stated that this is included in the motion. 15 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-62 Motion carries. 5-0-2-0. Commissioners Buchanan and Hargrave absent. Chairman Hawkinson stated that E-90-02, the Negative Declaration for the proposed revision of Title 18 was the next item. The Community Development Director stated that the motion included the recommendation of the Negative Declaration to the Council. ADJOURNED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 10:20 P.M. CONVENED SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AT 10:20 P.M. No items scheduled. ADJOURNED SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AT 10:20 P.M. NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD JUNE 19, 1990. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, r David R. Sawyer er aw {' on Community Development Director Ch ' an, Planning Commission 06-15-90 16