Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-12-04_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, October 12, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: George Webber, Chair James Macdonald, Vice-Chairman Ruth Cook, Commissioner Thomas Osborne, Commissioner Paul Thompson, Commissioner ABSENT: Caroline Laymon, Commissioner Gary Miller, Commissioner ADVISORY STAFF PRESENT: Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director John Jaquess, Assistant Director Leslie E. Murad II, Assistant City Attorney Robert Dalquest, Principal Planner/Project Engineer Manuel Baeza, Associate Planner Alicia Heideman, Assistant Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD The meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m. by Chairman Webber. All commissioners were present except Commissioners Laymon and Miller. II. CONSENT ITEMS A. COMMISSION SIGN REVIEW NO. 271 - A request for Planning Commission consideration of one (1) freeway oriented pole sign with a total face area of 106 square feet and a height of 80 feet located at 1230 W. Colton Avenue in the EV/CG, East Valley Corridor Specific Plan General Commercial District. Request submitted by CVG HOSPITALITY INC. (Project Planner: Alicia Heideman) MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Commission Sign Review No. 271 subject to the Conditions of Approval. III. OLD BUSINESS A. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-3-D - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING on a General Plan Amendment to:a)change the land use designation from Agriculture to Very-Low-Density Residential on 41.22 gross acres located on the west side of Wabash Avenue(Assessors Parcel Number 168-132-05), Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Pagel south of San Bernardino Avenue,and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1,Agricultural District. Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Alicia Heideman) B. AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REMOVAL NO. 106-Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING for an Agricultural Preserve Removal on 41.22 gross acres located on the west side of Wabash Avenue (Assessors Parcel Number 168- 132-05), south of San Bernardino Avenue, and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Alicia Heideman) C. ZONE CHANGE NO.406-Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Zone Change from A-1,Agricultural District to R-E,Residential Estate District on one parcel totaling 41.22 gross acres located on the west side of Wabash Avenue (Assessors Parcel Number 168-132-05),south of San Bernardino Avenue,and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Alicia Heideman) D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 834 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Residential Development (PRD) on 41.22 gross acres into 93 residential lots and six (6) common lots located on the west side of Wabash Avenue(Assessors Parcel Number 168-132-05),south of San Bernardino Avenue,and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1,Agricultural District (Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Alicia Heideman) E. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16878-Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide approximately 41.22 gross acres into 93 residential lots and six (6) common lots located on the west side of Wabash Avenue(Assessors Parcel Number 168-132-05), south of San Bernardino Avenue,and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1,Agricultural District (Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Alicia Heideman) Assistant Director John Jaquess stated staff recommends the proposed project be continued to November 9th. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming,Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 2 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson,seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue General Plan Amendment No. 2004-3-D, Agricultural Preserve Removal No. 106, Zone Change No. 406, Conditional Use Permit No. 834, and Tentative Tract No. 16878 to the Planning Commission meeting of November 9, 2004. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. MINOR SUBDIVISION NO.281-PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission consideration of a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study,and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Minor Subdivision (Tentative Parcel Map No. 16729) to subdivide approximately 70.91 acres into three lots for warehouse/distribution located north of Palmetto Avenue and west of Marigold Avenue in Concept Plan 2 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by ROBERT PATILLO PROPERTIES. (Project Planner: Alicia Heideman) Project Planner Alicia Heideman gave a brief presentation on the proposed project and stated staff is recommending approval. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming,Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Osborne,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Minor Subdivision No. 281 as it has been determined that this project will not create unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services in the community, and no additional information or evaluation is needed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Minor Subdivision No.281 subject to conditions of approval, and based upon the following findings: a. The proposed map is consistent with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code. b. The design or improvement of the Minor Subdivision No. 281 is consistent with the applicable general plan. C. The site is located north of Palmetto Avenue and west of Marigold Avenue on current parcel numbers 167-681-04 and 167-631-06. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 3 d. The site is physically suitable for the development of a three-lot subdivision. e. The designs of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish orwildlife ortheir habitat. f. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. g. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; and h. That pursuant to California Government Code Section 66474.6,the discharge of waste from this subdivision will not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 of the California Water Code. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.739(REVISION 1)-PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission consideration of a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and PUBLIC HEARING for a revision to an approved Conditional Use Permit for a 6,832 square foot storage area beneath residential units and a 788 square foot addition to a pool house located at 528 Hibiscus Drive in the R-2 Multiple Family Residential Zone.Request submitted by REDLANDS CYPRESS VILLAS. (Project Planner: Alicia Heideman) Citing problems with the projector, Project Planner Alicia Heideman commenced with an oral presentation on the proposed project. The projector was repaired and Ms. Heideman continued with her PowerPoint presentation. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Gary Stegemann, architect, stated he was available to answer questions. Commissioner Macdonald asked Mr. Stegemann what change was made to the project that allowed him to provide storage. Mr. Stegemann stated a modification was made to the grading plan which lowered the elevation of the buildings and provided a room for storage. Mr. Hien Huynh, 347 E. Cypress Avenue, asked if he could comment on what was previously approved. Chairman Webber advised Mr. Huynh that he could comment on what is before the Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 4 Commission at this time. Mr. Huynh asked to be shown where his property is located in relation to the proposed project. Staff identified his property. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne,seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Conditional Use Permit No. 739, Revision No.1 as it has been determined that this project will not create unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services in the community,and no additional information or evaluation is needed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne,seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 739, Revision No.1 subject to conditions of approval, and based upon the following findings: 1. That the proposed development does not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the City. 2. That the proposed development does comply to the maximum extent feasible with the regulations of the City's General Plan, the applicable zoning district, and the City's development standards. 3. The conditions for the proposed use are reasonably related to the use to address potential effects of the proposed use, and are necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare and the best interests of the neighborhood. 4. That the proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location. Assistant Director John Jaquess advised Chairman Webber that Project Planner Bob Dalquest had not yet arrived at the meeting, and he suggested item IV-D be heard at this time. D. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 770 (REVISION NO. 2) - HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a revision to Commission Review and Approval No. 770 to construct a 2,400 square foot building containing five (5) auto service bays that would partially replace those removed by the demolition of a portion of the existing Metro Nissan and Hyundai building located on approximately 4.68 acres at 1655 Industrial Park Avenue in the General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by DAVID A. MARVIN. (Project Planner: Bob Dalquest) Assistant Director John Jaquess stated the applicant is working on revisions to the site plan for Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 5 parking and it is recommended that the proposed project be continued to October 26, 2004. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming,Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review and Approval No. 770 (Revision No. 2) to October 26, 2004. E. NORTH REDLANDS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT - Planning Commission consideration of a Preliminary Plan for the proposed North Redlands Redevelopment Project located in the northern and western areas of the City and generally bounded by Pioneer Avenue on the north, the Interstate 10 Freeway and Colton Avenue on the south, Church Street on the east, and on the west by the 210 Freeway, the existing Redlands Redevelopment Project Area,Alabama Street and Nevada Street. Request submitted by the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS. (Project Planner: Bob Dalquest) Project Planner Bob Dalquest stated Mr. Ernie Glover of GRC Consultants, who was hired to provide Plan adoption services would be giving a PowerPoint presentation later in the meeting. Mr. Dalquest stated the Redevelopment Agency is exploring the possibility of creating a new redevelopment project area in the northwest portion of the town. Mr. Dalquest stated the City Council adopted a resolution which established the boundaries for a survey area in September 2004. Mr. Dalquest stated this is generally the first step under in the plan adoption process under redevelopment law. Mr. Dalquest stated a feasibility study was completed to determine which portions of the area being studied would satisfy redevelopment law, in terms of forming a new project area. Mr. Dalquest stated the resolution adopted by the City Council directed the Planning Commission to approve the project area boundaries and formulate and approve a preliminary plan for the project area. Mr. Dalquest noted, if the Planning Commission adopts the Preliminary Plan at this time, it does not commit the City to adopting the Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Dalquest stated it is the preliminary step of a long process that is going to take 8-9 months to complete. Mr. Dalquest stated the project area boundaries include approximately 1,126 acres of primarily residential land with less than 30% of the land designated for commercial use. Mr. Ernie Glover, GRC, stated the first formal step of the redevelopment planning process is the adoption of the Preliminary Plan. Mr. Glover stated copies of his presentation are available for information purposes. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 6 Mr. Glover stated redevelopment does not involve new taxes, fees, reassessments, or changes in zoning or the General Plan. Mr. Glover stated the purpose of redevelopment is to preserve and rehabilitate neighborhoods and encourage commercial and industrial investment; not to replace or remove people. Mr. Glover stated redevelopment keeps local tax money in the community. Mr. Glover stated redevelopment money cannot be saved; it must be spent, with at least 20% of it going to fixing and improving low and moderate income households. Mr. Glover stated the redevelopment agency spends a fair amount of money on rehabilitating, modernizing and expanding businesses within the project area. Mr. Glover stated the redevelopment money is spent on attracting new businesses and help them prosper. Mr. Glover stated redevelopment money may be used for improving the appearance and image of Redlands through street scape and park improvements. Mr. Glover stated there is a five-point test for determining if there is sufficient need within the community for the additional revenues: 1. It has to be a predominantly urbanized area (80% or more) 2. There have to be conditions of physical and economic blight 3. The conditions have to be prevalent 4. There must be a serious burden on the community 5. Can private enterprise or public action without redevelopment solve the problems? Mr. Glover stated his company will be doing a very specific, detailed analysis,parcel by parcel, to answer the five questions. Mr. Glover stated they made recommendations relative to areas that should be added in or left out of the project area. Mr. Glover stated they recommend the project area be free standing and not combined with existing project areas. Mr. Glover stated they recommend that eminent domain only be used in non-residential zoned areas. Mr. Glover stated they expect to finish with the process in June 2005. Mr. Glover stated the second step in the process is the determination of conformity with the General Plan, which should occur in April. Mr. Glover stated if it is recommended that the project area boundaries be changed, the item will have to go back before the Planning Commission. Mr. Glover stated the Preliminary Plan which includes a legal description of the project area boundaries will be mailed to all taxing agencies. Mr. Glover stated the Plan will be mailed to designated environmental agencies along with the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study. Mr. Glover stated they will research the area on a parcel by parcel basis and will be looking at economic performance in the area,property values,and crime statistics. Once the research has been completed,an Environmental Impact Report,Draft Redevelopment Plan, and a Preliminary Report will be issued. Mr. Glover stated the Preliminary Report will be available for public review approximately 90 days before the public hearing. Mr.Glover continued by stating a minimum of two Town Hall meetings will be held within the community to obtain public input. Mr. Glover stated he will be meeting with the appropriate taxing agencies to explain the project's goals. Finally,notices Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 7 will be mailed out to all property owners, residents, businesses, and community organizations, advising them of the date of the final Town Hall Meeting and the public hearing. Mr. Glover stated they hope to have the full Plan adopted and in effect by late July 2005. Commissioner Thompson asked Mr. Glover how new property values are determined if there are no new reassessments. Mr. Glover stated the County Tax Assessor increases the assessed valuation up to 2%per annum, however there are no new "blanket' reassessments unless improvements are made to the property. For the benefit of the members of the audience, Commissioner Osborne clarified that the Redevelopment Agency will not be utilizing its eminent domain authority to condemn houses. Mr. Glover stated there may be a few isolated instances where houses located in commercial zones may have to be purchased. Chairman Webber asked Mr. Glover why the area on Redlands Boulevard,west of Alabama Street was included in the project area. Mr. Glover stated they are looking primarily at internal circulation and are running into problems with parcelization issues on the west side of the area. Mr. Shaw stated the area to be included is north of Redlands Boulevard, east of Nevada Street,and west of Alabama Street. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Robert Gonzalez, 835 Ohio Street, stated he was asked to speak on behalf of a number of residents in the area who have concerns on the proposed project area. Mr. Gonzalez stated they are not just a study area or a tax base, they are human beings who have deep roots in the community. Mr. Gonzalez requested the following: A. Preparation of a full and complete Environmental Report of the entire north Redlands redevelopment zone with direct participation of the residents from the area under consideration. B. An oversight committee of the proposed zone be created within 60 days to work directly with the City and its agents on design and implementation of the final proposal and future projects within the area selected for redevelopment (Mr. Gonzalez stated there is a provision in the proposal that states if eminent domain is utilized a Project Area Committee will be formed. Mr. Gonzalez stated there should be a committee from the very beginning of the process; if the City is not amenable, a citizen committee will be formed independently to keep an eye on the proceedings.) C. Critical infrastructure and public works projects recommended by an independent citizen commission for the direct benefit of all north Redlands residents should be included within the scope of planning. (Mr. Gonzalez stated too often redevelopment is done at the expense of those who can least afford Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 8 D. Full disclosure of all reports, data, documents, maps and other media used. E. Spanish language literature, and interpreters should be made available at all public hearings and meetings F. At least half of all public hearings related to the zone should be held in the evening, at locations within the proposed zone, whenever possible G. The City work with the citizens within the proposed zone in an open, sincere, and equitable manner with respect to the cultural and historical integrity of their neighborhoods and the property of its inhabitants. Mr. Gonzalez stated his organization has done extensive historical and demographic research along the I-10 Freeway corridor and in north Redlands and he would be happy to make this information available to the people conducting the studies and to give a presentation. Commissioner Thompson asked Mr. Gonzalez what he meant by his statement that redevelopment is done at the expense of those who can least afford it. Mr. Gonzalez stated currently there is proposed rezoning and redevelopment in a historic neighborhood in Riverside County and some of residents are in danger of losing their homes due to higher assessments. Mr. Gonzalez stated the City of Loma Linda recently offered property owners of older houses in the Bryn Mawr area $50k to move out so that new homes can be built. Mr. Gonzalez stated it is not about compensation; it's about keeping neighborhoods intact. Chairman Webber stated people who live within the project area will not be bothered by increased taxes unless improvements are made to their properties. Mr. Gonzalez stated he wants to ensure steps are taken to assure residents the City is doing everything it can to make sure it is a fair process. Chairman Webber stated this a way to improve the north side. Mr. Gonzalez stated he is not saying he is opposed to the project; he hopes the people will be represented and asked of their opinions. Mr. Gonzalez stated they want to be included from the beginning;he wants to see residents from the north side involved in the process. Chairman Webber asked if any meetings have been held with residents in the north side. Mr. Shaw stated to date they have not had any public meetings,but there are a number of Town Hall meetings proposed. Mr. Shaw stated he believes Mr. Gonzalez is proposing an additional committee of north side residents be formed to be made part of the process. Mr. Shaw stated their proposal would be presented to the City Council. Mr. Shaw stated from staff's perspective, it is important to keep with the time line that has been Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 9 established. Ms. Jeanette Cisneros, asked why her area was selected and why the residents were not notified of the study; they had to read about it in the newspaper. Mr. Glover stated in order to adequately inform the community, boundaries have to be identified. Mr. Glover stated they will be sending a newsletter to every address in the project area explaining what is going on in the area and when the public meetings will be held. Mr. Glover stated it is not their intention to do anything but improve the neighborhoods in the north side. Commissioner Thompson asked staff to call the City of Loma Linda to clarify the example given by Mr. Gonzalez where a resident was offered $50k for his home. Mr. Glover stated the purpose behind the plan is to create revenue for the City to make more capital improvements in the area. Mr. Glover stated one of the most successful redevelopment projects he knows of is the City of Carson, which lends money to residents at low interest rates to improve their homes. Mr. Glover stated if the home is sold immediately, the loan is paid back with interest, however the longer the resident lives in the house, more of the loan is forgiven. Ms. Jane Salazar asked if the zoning could be changed from residential to commercial during the process. Mr. Glover stated redevelopment cannot change zoning. Chairman Webber stated all changes in zoning would go through the Planning Commission. Chairman Webber noted that eminent domain on residential properties is not part of this process. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Commissioner Thompson stated he would like to see Mr. Gonzalez's list of requests enacted by the City Council. Chairman Webber concurred with Commissioner Thompson. Commissioner Osborne stated once the project area boundaries have been identified, all residents will be notified via first class mail. Chairman Webber reopened the public hearing. Mr. Gonzalez stated they would like to receive information prior to the mailing. He stated they will be having a series of informal community meetings with the residents and they would be happy to share that information with the City. Commissioner Thompson stated that rumors start when a lot of people gather who do not understand what is going on. He stated he hopes City staff would attend meetings to explain the Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 10 City's viewpoint. Mr. Gonzalez concurred. Mr. Glover recommended the residents give their names and addresses to Mr. Dalquest to ensure they receive notification of the meetings. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Commissioner Cook asked Mr. Glover when the item would go before City Council. Mr. Glover stated the Preliminary Plan would be heard by City Council on November 2"d Mr. Shaw stated Mr. Gonzalez's request could be forwarded to City Council in a separate motion. Mr. Dalquest stated most of Mr. Gonzalez's request is covered under redevelopment law. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 1048 and hereby: a). Adopt the boundaries of the North Redlands Redevelopment Project Area, as depicted on the map contained in the Preliminary Plan; b). Adopt the Preliminary Plan formulated for the Project Area; and, c). Authorize the Agency to transmit the Preliminary Plan to all affected taxing agencies,as required by the California Community Redevelopment Law. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the List of Action Items (as presented by Mr. Robert Gonzalez) be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. E. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 786 - Planning Commission consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and Planning Commission consideration of a Commission Review and Approval to develop a six building commercial center including two drive-through restaurants and a combined building area of 88,865 square feet of building area on a 7.4 acre property located on the west side of Alabama Street, the south side of Lugonia Avenue, and north side of Orange Tree Lane in the Commercial District of Specific Plan No. 33. Request submitted by RICK DEL CARLO, SILVERCREEK PROPERTIES. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) F. MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 275 - Planning Commission consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Minor Subdivision(Parcel Map No. 16742) to subdivide a 7.4 acre property into seven (7) commercial parcels located on the west side of Alabama Street, the south side of Lugonia Avenue, and Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 11 north side of Orange Tree Lane in the Commercial District of Specific Plan No. 33. Request submitted by RICK DEL CARLO, SILVERCREEK PROPERTIES. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) Assistant Director John Jaquess stated the applicant is in the process of revising their architectural drawings and site plans in order to address concerns noted by staff. Mr. Jaquess stated staff is recommending the proposed project be continued to October 26tH Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming,Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 5- 0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review and Approval No. 786 and Minor Subdivision No. 275 to October 26, 2004. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES B. September 14, 2004 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Osborne,and carried on a 4-0 vote(Commissioner Thompson abstaining)that the Planning Commission approve the Planning Commission minutes of September 14, 2004 with a correction noted. C. September 28, 2004 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 4-0 vote ( Chairman Webber abstaining) that the Planning Commission approve the Planning Commission minutes of September 28, 2004. VI. CORRESPONDENCE/COMMUNICATIONS A. City Council Report Mr. Jaquess gave a brief presentation on the City Council actions of October 5tH VII. ADJOURN TO OCTOBER 26, 2004 Chairman Osborne adjourned the meeting to October 26th at 3:45 Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 12 Respectfully submitted, Patti Ortiz, Senior Administrative Assistant Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Community Development Department Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 Page 13