PC Minutes 1976-06-01244
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
June 1, 1976
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice
Chairman Moots presiding. Present were Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Mathews,
Pope, and Ries; there is one vacancy existing on the Commission. Also present
were Planning Director Gallop, City Administrator Butch, and Councilman Spierling.
MINUTE APPROVAL
The minutes of the joint meeting of May 17 and the regular meeting of May 18,
1976 were approved by the Vice Chairman after hearing no additions or corrections.
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS: LOT SPLIT CASE NOS, 76 -246, 76 -247; ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW CASE NOS. 76-118, 76 -120, 76 -121.
Director Gallop reviewed each of the Committee Actions for the Commission.
He noted that Architectural Review Case No. 76 -120, for a condominium on South
Halcyon, had been tabled for additional information. After discussion, Vice
Chairman Moots ordered the reports filed.
REQUEST FOR USE OF "OPTIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS" FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 599 (MILLER)
Director Gallop noted that the request for use of "Optional Design Standards"
is for the second unit of Loomis Heights, which will be located behind Loomis
Heights, and which will consist of approximately 12.75 acres. The use of "Optional
Design Standards" would allow the developer to vary the size of the lots so long as
the density requirements of the zone are met. The Commission had been given a
request for Negative Declaration status which should be considered along with the
request for "Optional Design ".
William Langworthy, Printz Road, asked if this was the same development as
Loomis Heights. The Planning Director explained it is a second unit.
Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, asked if this development would have the
same condition from the Soil Conservation Office that the first unit had had.
Director Gallop stated that the map would probably be considered at the next
regular meeting and that she could request at that time that the original letter
from the Soil Conservation Office also be applied to this tract map.
On motion by Commissioner Mathews, seconded by Commissioner Gerrish, and
unanimously carried, the Commission found the requested "Optional Design Standards"
to be in conformance with the General Plan and the existing zoning of the property.
After further discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 76 -446 EIR
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION.
On motion by Commissioner Mathews, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Mathews, Pope, Ries, and Vice
Chairman Moots
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 1st day of June 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 76 -447 O.D.
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE GRANTING "OPTIONAL DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS"
TO TRACT 599.
On motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Mathews, Pope, Ries, and Vice
Chairman Moots
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 1st day of June 1976.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -1 -76 Page 2
SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 598
(FILER ET AL)
COMMISSIONER RIES EXCUSED HIMSELF DUE TO A POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF
INTEREST AND IS NOW ABSENT.
Director Gallop noted that this is the first condominium planned for
Arroyo Grande. The property is adjacent to the Arroyo Grande Hospital, on
South Halcyon, The Tentative Map is a one -lot map consisting of 21 parcels,
which includes one common area. The property is sold by description of any
one of the dwelling units and 1/20 of the common area, all open spaces, and
two parking spaces. A Tentative Map is required because the units are sold
individually. He added that the Map does meet the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance and conforms to the Land Use Plan.
The Planning Director reviewed all conditions placed on the Map by
the Subdivision Review Board. He noted that the Commission had the option
of granting a 12 ft. front yard setback rather than the normal 15 ft., pri-
marily because there is adequate sight distance from either direction.
The Commission put aside a decision until after the public hearing on
the attendant Use Permit request, which follows.
PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 76 -243, 21 LOT CONDOMINIUM, 327 SOUTH
HALCYON (FILER ET AL)
Upon being assured by Director Gallop that public hearing for the
proposed Use Permit had been duly published, posted - , and property owners
notified, Vice Chairman Moots declared the public hearing open.
Jack Ghormley, 1197 Highland, Grover City, engineer for the developer,
stated he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission or audience
might have.
Fred Wolf, 540 Gaynfair, stated he believed this was a good location
for a condominium and that the developer would put together a good-looking
building.
Bill Langworthy, Printz Road, asked how much land is involved. Direc-
tor Gallop replied that the lot is 155 ft. x 253.5 ft. He added that in the
"P -C" District, the number of units'is based on percentage of coverage, not
any set number of units. The proposed condominium had 67% coverage; the
District allowed 70 %.
There being no further comment for or against the proposed Use Permit,
Vice Chairman Moots declared the public hearing closed.
On motion by Commissioner Mathews, seconded by Commissioner Gerrish,
and unanimously carried, the Commission found the proposed use and subdivision
map to be in conformance with the Land Use Plan and the Zoning Ordinance.
After a brief discussion, the following actions were taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 76 -448 EIR
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
DECLARATION.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Mathews,
and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Mathews, Pope, and
Vice Chairman Moots
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Ries
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 1st day of June 1976.
246
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -1 -76 Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 76-449
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
TRACT NO. 598, A CONDOMINIUM, AND REFERRAL TO THE
CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Mathews, Pope, and Vice Chairman
Moots
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Ries
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 1st day of June 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 76 -450 U
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 76 -243.
On motion by Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Mathews, Pope, and Vice Chairman
Moots
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Ries
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 1st day of June 1976.
COMMISSIONER RIES IS NOW PRESENT.
PUBLIC HEARING - LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
Director Gallop noted that this Public Hearing would be the second of
the three changes that the City can make to the Land Use Plan in one year.
He added that the City Council, at their last regular meeting, had changed
the land use designation on the Lawler property from light industrial to
light residential. The Director then reviewed each of the recommended
changes from the City Council, as well as some recommendations he had.
Upon being assured by the Planning Director that public hearing for
proposed changes to the Land Use Element of the General Plan had been duly
published, Vice Chairman Moots ordered the public hearing open.
Lawler Matter - Andy Johnson, 1279 Poplar, stated he believed the
Land Use Plan should remain in conformity with the way the land is presently
zoned. Elsie Laycock, 110 Longview, Pismo Beach, asked for clarification
of what light residential meant. The Planning Director explained that it
included zoning from "R- A -B -3" through "R -1 ", which would be lots from 40,000
sq. ft. to 6,000 sq. ft. Miss Laycock pointed out that part of the property
was not suitable for "R- A -B -3" because the parcels were not large enough.
Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, asked to Commission not to feel that they
had to change the Land Use Plan simply because the City could be sued. She
asked that they make a decision for the good of the City, not for the good of
an individual.
Commissioner Mathews stated he did not believe "R-A -B -3" zoning was
the right use for this property. Commissioner Gerrish said he believed that
light industrial was the best land use for the area.
On motion by Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and
unanimously carried, the Commission decided to get all the public input on all
of the Land Use Plan matters before making any decisions about changes.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6- 1- 76,<.., = Page 4
Reference to Planned Development - Director Gallop stated that he had
prepared a recommendation for wording on the "P -D" section, which he hoped
would be a complete clarification of the procedure in "P -D" zoning on large
tracts of land and where the City would have full controls.
Madeleine Steele, 1598 Hillcrest, asked for clarification of what the
recommendation was. The Planning Director reviewed the recommendation for
the audience's benefit, Vice chairman Moots clarified his recommendation from
the joint meeting of May 17; he stated he was referring to dwelling unit density;
not people density.
William Langworthy, Printz Road, stated that when you apply this concept
to large tracts of land, you are forced to make decisions about the use of
each parcel in such a preliminary form that it becomes very difficult, in spite
of all the carefully worded language, to have a real control over what actually
happens. He felt that the "P -D" language in the original version of the Land
Use Plan was better. He felt the new version invites this kind of considera-
tion when the City should be doing advance planning themselves on this land.
He agreed with Vice Chairman Moots, specifically insofar as his understanding
of CC &Rs. Director Gallop stated that CC &Rs are a legal tool which have been
used for many years very successfully.
Commissioner Mathews stated he felt the zoning was the place for re-
strictions on density. Andy Johnson, 1279 Poplar, expressed concern over
the City losing controls to the courts.
Vice'Chairman Moots stated he would agree t`o`'saying "people" density,
rather than dwelling unit density. Director Gallop suggested saying "...poten-
tial number of persons occupying the development." on line 3 of the last para-
graph. Vice Chairman Moots agreed this would acceptable. Commissioner
Gerrish stated he would like to have the last sentence of the first paragraph
on the second page changed to stop at the word "indicated ", as well as de-
leting the second paragraph of the same page.
holes.
Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, warned against leaving legal loop-
School Section - The Commission reviewed suggested changes made by
the City Council and a suggested rewrite from Fred Wolf. Mr. Wolf, 540
Gaynfair, urged the Commission to favorably consider Mr. Spierling's recom-
mended change. He added that he and other interested persons were working
in other areas of the Lucia Mar School District to get those areas to recog-
nize the school problem and to do something about the problems. Commissioner
Ries stated he believed the statement should say "... further citizens, planners,
and all other governing bodies..." Councilman Spierling replied that he had
intended "all entities" to cover this. On motion by Commissioner Pope, seconded
by Commissioner Mathews, and unanimously carried, the Commission approved the
suggested change made by Councilman Spierling.
Light Industrial Zoning Between St. Patrick's Parochial School and the
Seventh Day Adventist School - Fred Wolf, 540 Gaynfair, stated he was in favor,
as a whole, of the City Council's recommended changes to the Land Use Plan.
Andy Johnson, 1279 Poplar, stated he was in opposition to light industrial
land use on this particular piece of property because of its proximity to
schools. Marie Cattoir, 195 Orcutt Way, stated she was in opposition to
light industrial land use on this property for the same reasons as Mr. Johnson.
Industrial Zoning on Saruwatari Property - Andy Johnson, 1279 Poplar,
stated he was against industrial land use on the Saruwatari property.
Greenwood - VICE CHAIRMAN MOOTS AND COMMISSIONER MATHEWS EXCUSED THEM -
DUE TO A POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND ARE NOW ABSENT. COMMISSIONER RIES
WAS APPOINTED AS ACTING CHAIRMAN.
Bill McCann, 428 Tanner Lane, and Roger Smith, 129 South Alpine, both
spoke for the suggested change to agricultural land use; both felt that this
is prime agricultural land. Commissioner Gerrish pointed out that agricul-
tural land use designation doesn't prevent anyone from developing 12 acre
home sites. Ella Honecutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, stated that the Land Use Plan
and the Zoning Ordinance were not in conformance. The Land Use Plan allows
1 unit per 5 acres; the Zoning Ordinance allows 1 unit per 12 acres.
24'7
248
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -1 -76 Page 5
Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fairview, suggested using whether or not the
land is producing to determine if it is prime agricultural land.
COMMISSIONER MATHEWS AND VICE CHAIRMAN MOOTS ARE NOW PRESENT.
Northwest of Fair Oaks and Halcyon Intersection - Fred Wolf, 540
Gaynfair, spoke in favor of changing this to office - professional on the
Land Use Map.
Flower Fields, Huasna Road - Fred Wolf, 540 Gaynfair, spoke in favor
of changing this to medium; he felt that, although he would prefer light
density, this was a good compromise. William Langworthy, Printz Road, and
Bill McCann, 428 Tanner Lane, disagreed; they felt it should be changed to
agricultural to protect the farm land.
Old Sunset Building - Upon the Commission's request, the Planning
Director stated he would attempt to meet with the property owner prior to the
next meeting to see if he would like to see the land use on his property
changed to light industrial.
Councilman Spierling's Recommendation on Class I and II Soils - Director
Gallop noted that one of the problems staff has been facing is the lack of
policy statements for them to use in talking to property owners and developers.
Fred Wolf, 540 Gaynfair, spoke in favor; however, he would like to have both
Class I and II excluded from development. Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road,
and Bill McCann, 428 Tanner Lane, spoke against granting density transfers on
agricultural lands. Mrs. Honeycutt asked if the City could be sued because a
person with just Class I land is being discriminated against. Madeleine
Steele, 1598 Hillcrest, also expressed concern over density transfers on
agricultural lands. Councilman Spierling explained his reasoning for not
excluding both Class I and II soils from development. He felt that if the
City became too restrictive, it may place itself in a position whereby it is
faced with a law suit. He felt that in order to save the prime soils, some
of the lesser class soils should support development on others. Roger Smith,
129 South Alpine, felt that a developer who owned land which contained both
Class I and II soils would try to develop the whole thing. William Langworthy,
Printz Road, was concerned over the deletion of Class II soils from the por-
tion pertaining to exclusion from development, and also over allowing density
transfer from the Class I soils.
Director Gallop suggested recommending that the City Council adopt
this as a policy statement by resolution outside of the General Plan; as a
policy statement, it can be changed without affecting the General Plan,
but has the same weight. On motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by Com-
missioner Mathews, and carried, the Commission recommended to the City Council
that Councilman Spierling's recommendation regarding the Class I and II soils
be adopted as a policy statement. Vice Chairman Moots voted no because he
believed the Class II soils should also be excluded from development.
Industrial Land Use Areas - Director Gallop noted that with the changes
the Commission is considering, two major potential industrial areas have been
removed. He felt the Commission should consider replacing these areas.
Density of AR Zoning - The Planning Director stated that the Land Use
Plan and Zoning Ordinance had always been in conflict over the density allowed
on agriculturally zoned lands. He felt the Commission should consider changing
one so that they will conform. William Langworthy, Printz Road, and Fred Wolf,
540 Gaynfair, and Roger Smith, 129 South Alpine, spoke in favor of the lower
density so that ag lands can be saved. Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road,
stated that the City should preserve prime agricultural lands. She suggested
:us,ing subzoning. Al Browne, 327 Corona del Terra, questioned preventing
development on ag lands which are on the hillsides. William Langworthy,
Prntz Road, stated it was his understanding that the hill land currently
zoned "A" Agriculture is designated as low density use on the Land Use Map,
which would allow eventual development. However, he felt that the prime
ag land should be .2 units per acre. Fred Wolf, 540 Gaynfair, suggested
not using the same symbol to represent both a holding zone and Agricultural
zoning, to avoid confusion. Carolyn Moffatt, Noyes Road, suggested having
2 -3 other classes between low density and agricultural. The Planning Director
stated it would be almost impossible to administer this fine a determination.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6-1-76 Page 6
There being no further discussion concerning proposed changes to
the Land Use Element of the General Plan, Vice Chairman Moots declared
the Public Hearing closed.
249
On motion by Commissioner Pope, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and
unanimously carried, that the public hearing remained closed, a draft of all
comments and agreements made be prepared and at the next meeting they will
be considered for adoption.
PUBLIC HEARING (CONTINUATION) - REZONING CASE NO. 75 -84, OAK PARK ACRES (KVIDT)
The Planning Director stated that a written development plan had been
distributed prior to the meeting. The Commission had previously approved an
Environmental Impact Report for this proposed rezoning and development. The
development plan had some revisions from the original one in answer to input
from the Public Hearing and the E.I.R., as well as staff recommendations.
Reuben Kvidt, general partner in the development, stated that his
partnership consisted of friends and neighbors from a Lutheran church in
Tustin, California. Mr. Kvidt then reviewed in detail the development plan
and differences between the new one and the original. He noted that the
development plan calls for minimizing grading to home sites only; the lots
would not be fully graded. Carolyn Moffatt, Noyes Road, expressed concern .
over grading around the oak trees; Mr. Kvidt stated this should be no problem
as they would be doing minimum grading and they did wish to save all the trees
they could.
Vice Chairman Moots asked about what they planned for the commercial
areas and how they planned to grade it. Mr. Kvidt replied that they had no
grading plan yet; this would be up to whoever,: developed this portion. Direc-
tor Gallop added this was the purpose of the development plan; this would
have to be prepared and approved by the Commission prior to any, development
of this area. Doris Olsen, representing the Santa Maria Times, asked how
many people this would generate. Mr. Kvidt stated it would be 848, or just
under 3 persons an acre. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fairview, asked about the
time element in developing. Mr. Kvidt stated it would probably take 4 -5 years.
His organization planned to develop parcel 5 themselves, hopefully parcel 8,
and possibly one or two of the frontage road parcels. Vice Chairman Moots
questioned whether or not 848 persons could support this much commercial.
Mr. Kvidt replied that "H -S" Highway Service is designed for attracting
business from persons on the freeway, not from just the people in the
surrounding development.
Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, asked if the developers will pay
for additional City personnel and equipment necessary for this development
Mr. Kvidt replied that they were already paying with every tax bill.. Mrs.
Honeycutt also expressed concern over too rapid a development. Mr. Kvidt
stated that every parcel must come in with a separate subdivision map; he
could not envision the area developing before 4 -5 years.
Bart Stryker, engineer and planner for the development, reviewed some of
the engineering aspects of the proposed development. He stated that basically the
drainage aspects are to use a lake as a retarding basin to take care of the
restricted flow caused by the culvert at the freeway. They also planned for some
type of culvert under James Way. As far as the road concept, they planned to mini-
mize cut and fills. Carolyn Moffatt, Noyes Road, expressed concern over the means
of getting the water under James Way. She suggested using a bridge.
Roger Smith, 129 South Alpine, asked for clarification of how the developers
planned to proceed. Madeleine Steele, 1598 Hillcrest, asked about the floating
bog.
Peggy Langworthy, Printz Road, asked who will maintain James Way when it
is completed; Director Gallop replied that the City does. He added that any•engineer-
ing proposed by the developers must be approved first by the City, and secondly
the flows must be accepted by the Department of Transportation. The engineering
of any of the work on Oak Park, Frontage Way, drainage of entire Project, etc.
must be approved by the City and developed accordingly. All costs of the
development will be borne by the developers.
Dave Carter, Printz, asked how James Way will be developed. Bart Stryker
replied that probably it will develop as the parcels do. Director Gallop added
that the City will require adequate road to be to take care of any traffic
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -1 -76 Page 7
generated. However, James Way may deadend at Mr. Browne's property until such a time
as it develops. He added that the development plan omitted the additional right of
way that will be required on Oak Park Boulevard and probably on the frontage road;
therefore, the 4.4 acres shown for roads will be increased. Madeleine Steele
asked about the narrow bridges on Oak Park Boulevard and Noyes Road. Director
Gallop replied that all improvements on all right of ways must be paid for by the
developer.
Bruce Dodson, a professional planner from SDW and Associates, representing
the County of San Luis Obispo, reviewed a County proposal to put a county citizen
center on the property being considered at this public hearing. They were proposing
putting the center on 25 acres, and also obtaining 31 acres to maintain as greenbelt.
Carolyn Moffatt spoke in favor of the proposal.
William Langworthy, Printz Road, stated he was uncertain as to what impact
the County proposal would have. He still felt the amount of commercial was too large.
He would like to see the "H -S" and /or commercial areas reduced. He was also resistent
to apartment buildings. He did not like the lake because in order to be effective
when it rained, it would have to be empty to begin with. He also was opposed to
septic tanks. He expressed concern over the lack of mention of water because the
City can't deliver water higher than 200 ft. He added he would like to see the
open space permanently dedicated as open space, rather than put in Ag Preserve.
He asked that the Commission give serious thought to what is wanted for this area
before approving any development. He also asked that the public hearing not be
closed so that he could have additional input at the next meeting if he wished, in
answer to the staff report. He added that he didn't oppose this in total, but
opposed the present plan because too many apartments and too much commercial.
Reuben Kvidt stated that the lake is designed to be a holding basin to control
water runoff. However, the whole general area will be a holding basin, not just
the lake. He felt that the density was extremely low, 3 persons per acre. He stated
that economics did not permit lower density development because of the extension of
sewer and water lines. With regard to the septic tanks, the Development Plan
states that they must be examined and approved by the Health Department to be
perfectly safe and operational. He stated that a pump station would be required for
water above 200 ft; however, this was an engineering problem and the cost would be
borne by the developer. He added that this was one reason development would not
be very rapid. If septic tanks were not feasible, they planned on asking for a
higher density to cover the cost of extending the sewer lines. He also pointed
out the development has 35% open space. With regard to the commercial, he did not
feel it was too extreme when you consider that a typical motel requires 5 acres.
If the County took the three parcels they were considering, this would leave only
7 acres of "H -S" and 5.7 acres of "C -N ". Madeleine Steele asked if 800 persons
could support a "C -N" development. Mr. Kvidt replied that this was not a full -
fledged "C -N" district. They normally comprise 10 -12 acres; this one is only
5.7 acres.
Ella Honeycutt asked if reports could be furnished from the Fire
Department and Police Department for extra costs. Director Gallop stated that
these were already in the E.I.R. Both stated this development would not in it-
self create a need. He added that the minutes of the meeting as well as a staff
report based on the input tonight, the E.I.R., and any engineering consideration
proposed by the City will be prepared prior to the next Commission meeting.
There being no further discussion for or against the proposed rezoning,
Vice Chairman Moots declared the public hearing closed.
The Vice Chairman carried over discussion until the next Commission meeting
so that they can fully review all the materials and input.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Park Fees - Vice Chairman Moots recommended that the ordinance section in
the Subdivision Ordinance pertaining to parks be removed and a separate ordinance
be enacted to base park fees on new building permits, irrespective of the zoning.
Director Gallop stated that at the present time the City has a provision in the
Subdivision Ordinance which bases park monies and dedications on the concept of
land assessments, land valuations. This is no longer an equitable method because
land valuations fluctuate considerably throughout the City.
However, if this was done, the subdivisions which had alr.endy paid would be
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -1 -76
Page 8
exempt. This would accumulate more money. On subdivisions over 50 units, the
City would still have the right to require land rather than monies. Would suggest
$100 /house and $75 /apartment unit, be considered. Also, the money collected would
have to be spent in the same park neighborhood in which it was collected. Upon
request of the Vice Chairman, the Planning Director stated he would prepare an
ordinance and set up public hearing on the matter for the first meeting in July.
Request to be Absent From Meeting - Vice Chairman Moots requested permission
to be absent from the next regular Planning Coumiission meeting on June 15. On
motion by Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and unanimously
carried, the Commission granted permission for his absence. Director Gallop
noted that the Commission would have to elect a temporary Chairman at the
beginning of the next meeting.
Study Session Request - Commissioner Gerrish requested a study session
on the Comparative Cost Analysis to be held within the next three meetings.
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE
Director Gallop noted that the Commission had received a letter of re-
signation from Commissioner Sandoval, who was resigning because of a promotion which
would take him out of town frequently.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, on motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by
Commissioner Gerrish, and unanimously carried, the Commission adjourned at 00:12 a.m.
ATTEST: ,
XIAJA-1A-c olp4=>6.
Secretary Vice Chairman
25