HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 2002 1028 PC REGi
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 1
The Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on
October 28, 2002, in the City Council Chambers; Moorpark Civic
Center; 799 Moorpark Avenue; Moorpark, California; 93021.
1. CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chair Landis called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Commissioner Parvin let the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. ROLL CALL:
Commissioners DiCecco, Haller, Parvin, and Vice Chair
Landis were present.
Staff attending the meeting included Barry Hogan, Community
Development Director; Walter Brown, City Engineer; Paul
Porter, Principal Planner; Joseph Fiss, Principal Planner;
Scott Wolfe, Principal Planner; and Gail Rice,
Administrative Secretary.
4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
Mr. Hogan announced that staff had received Chair Otto's
official resignation which was forwarded to the City Clerk.
5. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
Vice Chair Landis took a poll to see how many people were
in attendance regarding Item 8.E. Commercial Planned
Development Permit No. 2000 -04. He then announced that the
Commission would attempt to address that item by 8:00 p.m.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Regular Meeting Minutes of October 14, 2002.
Commissioner Parvin moved and Commissioner Haller seconded
a motion that the Planning Commissioner Meeting minutes of
October 14, 2002, be approved.
Motion carried with a unanimous 4:0 voice vote.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no public speaker cards submitted.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
(next Resolution No. 2002 -432)
A. Consider Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04, for
Fifteen (15) Communication Antennas (Panels) Placed in
Three Groups of Five (5) Antennas and a 230 Square
Foot Equipment Building at the Ventura County
Waterworks District College Water Tank Reservoir
Facility, on the Application of Nextel. (Assessors
Parcel No. 500 -0 -281 -405)
Staff Recommendation: Open the public hearing, take
public testimony, and continue the public hearing
open, to the Special Meeting of November 4, 2002.
Mr. Hogan presented the staff report, recommending
that the Public Hearing be opened and continued to the
November 4, 2002, Planning Commission Special Meeting.
Vice Chair Landis opened the public hearing at 7:12
p.m.
There were no speaker cards and no written statement
cards.
MOTION: Commissioner Haller moved and Commissioner
DiCecco seconded a motion to approve staff
recommendation to continue the item, with the public
hearing open, to the Planning Commission Special
Meeting of November 4, 2002.
Motion carried with a unanimous 4:0 voice vote.
B. Consider Tentative Parcel Map No. 5371, Subdivision of
a 0.98 -acre Parcel of Land Into Three (3) Parcels of
12,379.66; 12,092.16; and 12,170.57 Net Square Feet;
Respectively (Applicant: RJR Engineering Group;
Owners: Mr. and Mrs. Culler)
Staff Recommendations: 1) Open the public hearing,
accept public testimony, and close the public hearing;
2) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2002- approving
Tentative Parcel Map 5371.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021026 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 3
Mr. Fiss presented the staff report and provided a
summary of the proposed subdivision.
The Commission had no questions of staff.
Vice Chair Landis opened the public hearing at 7:15
p.m.
Daniel Groff; owner of one of the parcels indicated
that he was available for questions. He also requested
that Condition of Approval No. 7 (page 6 of Attachment
A) be deleted because it did not apply to the project.
Mr. Hogan commented that staff concurs with the
deletion of Condition of Approval No. 7.
James O'Tousa; RJR Engineering; engineer for the
project, indicated that he was available for
questions.
The Commission had no questions of Mr. Groff or Mr.
O'Tousa.
Vice Chair Landis closed the public hearing at 7:17
p.m.
MOTION: Commissioner Parvin moved and Commissioner
Haller seconded a motion to approve Resolution No. PC-
2002 -432, approving Tentative Parcel Map 5371 with the
deletion of Condition of Approval No. 7 on page 6.
Motion carried with a unanimous 4:0 voice vote.
C. Consider Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -08, for
Construction of a Wireless Communications Facility on
an Existing Southern California Edison Power Pole
Located within the Caltrans Right -of -Way on the East
Side of Walnut Canyon Road at Approximately 7260 -1/2
Walnut Canyon Road, on the application of The
Consulting Group, Inc. for Cingular Wireless
(Adjacent and west of Assessor Parcel Number 500 -0-
240-16)
Staff Recommendations: 1) Open the public hearing,
accept public testimony and close the public hearing;
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Pacie 4
2) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2002- approving
Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -08 subject to
conditions.
Mr. Porter presented the staff report.
Mr. Porter informed the Commission that staff provided
the Commission with copies of two (2) additional
Conditions of Approval for review. He indicated that
the conditions had been accepted by the applicant.
The Commission questioned staff on the following:
Commissioner Haller:
• Distance of nearest residential unit.
• Page 3; first paragraph of the staff report,
"that maintenance will be required every 40 to 6
weeks." Typographical error. Should read 4 to 6
weeks.
• Determination of continuance of radiation at 100
watts.
• Page 3; third paragraph; correction to the words,
"..... not violate and air quality standards.
Change to read, not violate any air quality
standards. ".
Commissioner Parvin:
• The Resolution references Conditional Use Permit
No. 2000 -04 and should say Conditional Use Permit
No. 2000 -08. Requested a review of the documents
for consistency throughout.
• Page 2; Section 4.B., remove the word
"enhancement."
• Page 6; Condition of Approval No. 14., deletion
of the word "landscaping."
• Page 6; Condition of Approval No. 19; the words
"paint colors" were questioned.
• Page 7; Condition of Approval No. 22; ".... the
Developer shall obtain call necessary .....
Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paqe 5
Should read, shall obtain all necessary
• Page 7; Condition of Approval No. 27; the
statement "if any hazardous waste is encountered
during construction of this project, all work
shall be immediately stopped ... May need to
be stricken.
• If repairs are required, where will the
maintenance truck be parked to accomplish
repairs?
Vice Chair Landis:
• Page 4. Length being six (6) feet and the
Municipal Code stating three (3) feet. Staff
should state the size of the horizontal elements
are necessary to achieve the desired function.
Vice Chair Landis opened the public hearing @ 7:25
p.m.
Barry Hammond; applicant's representative, stated that
Cingular Wireless concurs with staff recommendations
and the additional two (2) Conditions of Approval.
Mr. Hammond answered Commissioner Haller's question
regarding the radiation pattern.
Commissioner Parvin questioned why Cingular had chosen
the site, rather than one of the water tanks where
other wireless communication facilities were located.
Mr. Hammond responded that the site met requirements
for existing repeater station coverage.
Commissioner Haller questioned whether the radiation
pattern had been filed with the application.
Mr. Hammond and Mr. Porter responded that the pattern
information had been included in the application.
Vice Chair Landis closed the public hearing at @ 7:28
p.m.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paqe 6
Commissioner Parvin questioned staff regarding future
access requirements and needs for this proposed site.
Commission Haller stated when the application was
filed in 2000, it was an antennae installation rather
than a microcell. He stated that there had been a
change from the original concept which changed the
radiation pattern and exposure levels.
MOTION: Commissioner Haller moved and Commissioner
DiCecco seconded a motion to adopt Resolution No. PC-
2002 -433 approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -08,
with changes to the Conditions of Approval, as noted,
and include:
• Allowing the 6 -foot length extension from the
utility pole as opposed to the 36 -inch length
permitted by the Municipal Code.
Motion carried with a unanimous 4:0 voice vote.
D. Consider Industrial Planned Development Permit No.
2001 -01, a Request to Allow Construction of an
Approximately 6,833 Square Foot Contractor's Repair
Building and a 2,194 Accessory Office Building on a
67,833 Square Foot (1.56 Acre) Parcel Located at 13840
E. Los Angeles Avenue, on the Application of Sharma
Construction, Inc. (Assessor Parcel No. 512 -0- 160 -055,
n -7 n -7'�n�
Staff Recommendations: 1) Open the public hearing,
accept public testimony and close the public hearing;
and 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2002- recommending
to the City Council Industrial Planned Development
Permit No. 2001 -01 with Conditions of Approval.
Mr. Fiss presented the staff report and commented on
the following:
• The project has a history of code enforcement
violations some of which currently exist.
• If recommendation by the Commission is to move
forward to the City Council, the Council's
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 7
approval would provide for clean up of the
violations by allowing a new development.
• The applicant is proposing tubular steel fencing,
staff is proposing a defensible block wall along
the rear property line, with a setback of five
(5) feet for future from the Arroyo Simi.
• Mr. Fiss informed the Commission that corrections
to the Conditions of Approval (4 pages) had been
provided to the Commission at the meeting.
The Commission questioned staff regarding:
• Potential for problems of truck traffic on Los
Angeles Avenue.
• Clarification of whether the fuel tanks are
considered outside storage.
• Requirements for loading zone with proposed
project, and whether a loading zone could be
accommodated for a future change in use.
• Screening fuel storage; size of tank and NPDES
requirements.
• Condition of Approval No. 80; page 20: reference
to code requirement changes "during construction"
and versus during "plan check."
• Condition of Approval No. 121, page 30: the 100 -
year flood plain.
• Condition of Approval No. 16, page 7: "granting a
one (1) year extension" and non - compliant issues.
• Block wall versus wrought iron fencing.
Vice Chair Landis opened the public hearing at 7 :45
p.m.
Tom Mogan; property owner and principle for Sharma
Contractors.
Mr. Mogan cited concerns: with staff's recommendation
for a block wall along the rear property line, stating
that wrought iron fencing would provide more security
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COKMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021026 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 8
by allowing the rear of the site to be visible. He
also expressed concern with staff's recommendation for
a five (5) foot setback from the Arroyo.
The Commission questioned the speaker regarding:
• Wrought iron fence versus a block wall for
security.
• Removal of the modular building on the property.
Vice Chair Landis and Mr. Hogan discussed with Mr.
Mogan the possibility of this item being continued to
the Planning Commission Special Meeting of November 4,
2002, to allow the applicant additional time to review
the conditions.
MOTION: Commissioner DiCecco moved and Commissioner
Haller seconded a motion to continue the item, public
hearing open, to the Planning Commission Special
Meeting of November 4, 2002.
Motion carried with a unanimous 4:0 voice vote.
Vice Chair Landis called a recess. The time was 7 :50 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 8:04 p.m.
E. Consider Commercial Planned Development Permit No.
2000 -04 for Construction of a 72,285 Square Foot
Commercial Center and Tentative Parcel Map No. 5264
for Subdivision of 6.28 Acres into Four Lots Located
at the Southwest Corner of Campus Park Drive and
Collins Drive on the Application of M &M Development.
(Assessor parcel Nos. 514 -0- 160 -015, and 04)
Staff Recommendations: 1) Open the public hearing,
accept public testimony and close the public hearing;
2) Consider the proposed Negative Declaration to
ensure that it adequately addresses the impacts of the
proposed residential project prior to approval; 3)
Adopt Resolution No. PC -2002- recommending to the
City Council conditional approval of Commercial
Planned Development Permit No. 2000 -4 and Tentative
Parcel Map No. 5264.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 9
Disclosure by the Planning Commission took place:
• Vice Chair Landis stated that he had met with
this applicant and with Mr. Haller for general
discussion.
• Commissioner DiCecco stated that had met with the
applicants on one (1) occasion and with Brian
Doherty twice. He further stated that Brian
Doherty had been his client two (2) years ago on
another residential project, but that he
currently had no projects with him.
• Commissioner Parvin stated that she met with the
applicants one and one -half (1 -1/2) months ago
for a general discussion. Also, she encountered
the applicant in front of a convenience store
about two (2) years ago but she did not know
about this project at that time.
• Commissioner Haller stated that he meet with
applicant, along with Vice Chair Landis
approximately one (1) month ago, to get a full
understanding of the project.
Mr. Porter presented the staff report. He commented
that there was additional correspondence received
after the packet was distributed to the Commission,
and that copies of these letters were provided to
Staff and the Commission at the meeting. He also
stated that he received a modification to Condition of
Approval No. 53 and seven special conditions from the
City Engineer and that those items were distributed to
the Commission and staff.
Mr. Porter presented slides of the project area and
provided an overview of the proposal:
The Commission questioned staff regarding:
• Collins Drive access and exit(s).
• Condition No. 11; page 10: Hours of operation.
• Project affected by the 100 -year flood plain.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 10
• Any signage facing residential area to the west
side.
• Campus Park ingress and egress.
• Circulation within the project.
• Increase in Transportation Systems Management
Program (TSM) fees.
• Increase in smog.
• Condition to contribute to the Los Angeles Area
of Contribution (AOC) fees. Various ingress and
egress recommendations and opportunities.
Vice Chair Landis opened the public hearing at 8:40
p.m.
Vice Chair Landis requested that Mr. Hogan summarize
the statement cards.
Mr. Hogan stated that there were a total of ninety
(90) statement cards submitted; eighteen (18) cards
stated opposition to the project for the following
reasons:
• view blockage
• additional traffic
• crime /loitering /child predators
• noise /air quality
• property values
• chemical & contaminants to the ground water
• hotel
• drive - through
• destruction of the neighborhood
• residential area, no need for more commercial
• too close to park
• no gas station open twenty -four hours
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 11
• services available within five (5) miles
Sixty -eight cards were in favor of this project for
the following reasons:
• need for proposed services in this area of
Moorpark
• increase the tax base
• well planned
• support with no hotel
• no additional housing
• one stated a Marriott Hotel would be okay
• general comments in favor of the project
• support with no fast food restaurants
Four cards were neutral on the project:
• support without motel or with a higher -end hotel
• support with gasoline and service center but
concerned about the hotel accommodations
• concern with lights at night, open on the week-
end and property maintenance after 7:00 p.m.
• gas station may be utilized, but prefers current
open space
Vice Chair Landis opened the public hearing @ 8:40
p.m.
There were thirty (30) public speaker cards submitted.
David Morehead; applicant's representative, introduced
the project consultant team and provided background
information on the proposal including community
involvement in the selection of potential uses. Mr.
Morehead discussed potential relationship to the
college for service station, fast food and restaurant
services. Mr. Morehead discussed potential for a
hotel, citing that no hotel currently exists anywhere
in the City.
S: \Comanunity Development \ADMIN \COMMISS ION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Page 12
Mr. Morehead expressed three (3) primary disagreements
with recommended conditions related to traffic and
ingress and egress to the project. Staff
recommendations with which Mr. Morehead expressed
concern include: 1) no right turns on to Collins from
the site; 2) movement of the main drive to the west;
and 3) not being able to exit left onto Campus Park
Drive.
Mr. Morehead also expressed concern with staff's
recommendation for an eight foot (8') wall along the
west side of the project due to engineering
restrictions of the existing six foot (6') high wall.
Brian Doherty, projected gas station owner and
operator for the project, provided a brief history of
his experience and his involvement with the proposed
project and community input.
Bill Morehead, marketing manager, thanked the public
for their input and, stated that the project would be
better due to that input.
Richard Pool, Traffic Engineer, stated that Mr.
Montgomery, who passed away earlier in the year, had
written the original report and that he, Mr. Pool, was
continuing with the project. Mr. Pool provided
supporting information for in and out access on
Collins drive and left turn on to Campus Drive.
Commission Haller questioned Mr. Pool concerning left
turns to Campus Park Drive from the site.
Bob Gehricke, Architect, stated he was available to
answer questions.
Joseph Toth, Skyview Engineering, stated he was
available to answer questions.
Linda Toth, Century 21 Hilltop, stated that her office
is in the area, and expressed her support in favor of
this project including a need for a gas station and
hotel.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Page 13
David Rush, applicant's leasing agent, stated he was
available for questions.
Commissioner DiCecco questioned Mr. Rush concerning
impact of access issues to leasing of units. Mr. Rush
responded that ingress and egress are the first things
reviewed by prospective tenants
Sabrina Simpson, stated that her house backs up to the
proposed service station. She added that the services
are an important criteria for the value of the homes,
and expressed concern due to the lack of services in
the area in the event of a disaster
Tim Rosevear, stated that moved to Moorpark because of
its rural nature. He expressed concerns with impacts
to the park, traffic, uses, operating 24 -hours a day,
and environmental issues associated with the gas
station and cooking odors.
Patrick Ellis, stated he
rural nature of the area.
with the proposed hotel,
restaurants, and traffic
College).
moved to Moorpark for the
He expressed major concerns
the gas station, proposed
(particularly from the
Paul Gilmartin, expressed his support for convenience
for gas and other services, and that he would rather
spend money in Moorpark than in Simi Valley.
Robert
Brunner, stated that the corner
Campus Park has been an eyesore. He
sees beauty in the project, which
promenade in Thousand Oaks.
of Collins and
stated that he
looks like the
Ted Green, expressed concern for the project and
increased cost of police protection. He cited traffic
accidents and his observations of near accidents in
the area and major concerns with traffic.
Steve Mazzuca, stated he had dealt with proposed
projects at Tierra Rejada Road and Peach Hill Road. He
expressed his concern that the community work with the
developer for the best project possible.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Page 14
Julie Szylewicz, stated that her house backs up to the
development. She indicated that although she was
initially in support of the concept, she stated
concern for the impact of uses on the neighborhood,
with traffic down Campus to Collins and the blind
corner. She cited the Mountain Meadows project as a
good example.
Michael Greywitt, stated . concerns with the potential
traffic and safety issues and alcohol sales at the gas
station.
Karen Allin, stated that she lives above the college,
and expressed concerns with traffic and safety,
particularly related to the college and class
schedules. She also expressed concerns with people
coming into the neighborhood from the freeway.
Jeff Gery, stated that although in support of
development of the property, he expressed concerns
with the applicant's representation of the proposals.
Tammy Bell, Expressed opposition to a hotel use on the
project because it will draw commuter travelers and
with 24 -hours a day operation.
James Stueck, stated issues of: 1) concern for
increased traffic, he stated that Von's center has not
generated much out of town traffic; 2) hotel, there is
currently no place for group functions and
fundraisers, such as Chamber installations and Boys
and Girls Club auction.
Sheri Risley Bonnert, cited her concern with a
hotel /motel, would prefer not to have a gas station,
need for shortened hours, keeping noise level down,
and drive - through restaurant. She cited several
acceptable uses including sit -down restaurant.
Steve Nardi, Expressed concern with proposed project,
student traffic and representations by the developer.
Claudia Marsh, supported Karen Allin's concerns with
traffic. She stated preferred uses for the proposed
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 15
project, and that there was no need for a hotel or gas
station. She added that she was not opposed to a
development in area but wanted to make it was the
right one.
James MacDonald, Indicated that he travels to LAX
daily and expressed support for a development with a
gas station to be used by residents to keep the money
in Moorpark.
Vice Chair Landis advised Mr. MacDonald to fill out a
public speaker card.
Anna Szabo, stated support for some type project on
the site, but expressed concern with traffic impact,
noise pollution, fast food, hotel and trash enclosure
locations.
Kathleen D. Blakeney, stated that she echoed last
speaker's discussion and that the project is too
aggressive. She expressed concern with transient
activity and stated opposition to the project.
Dan Shea, stated concern with impact on Princeton
Avenue commercial development. Is need for gas at the
college reason for this project? He expressed concern
with decisions based on minority of homeowner input
and representations by the developer.
Vice Chair Landis called a recess at 10:20 p.m. The
meeting reconvened at 10:31 p.m.
Vice Chair Landis
public speaker's
concerns:
• Hotel
• Circulation
provided a quick summary of the
comments, including the following
• Circulation in residential area
• Drive through restaurants
• Gas Station (selling liquor) and hours of
operation
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Paae 16
• Ingress /egress
The Commission discussed returning the matter to staff
for further review and information regarding:
• Traffic issues, including a traffic study
• Other issues raised by the public
Vice Chair Landis questioned staff's timetable for
getting this project to the City Council.
Mr. Hogan commented that had the Commission made a
decision during this meeting, the project would have
gone before the Council in January 2003. He suggested
that if the matter is continued, the second meeting in
January would be appropriate based on selection of a
new Commission and potential holiday conflicts.
Discussion ensued concerning creation of an Ad Hoc
Committee consisting of Commissioners Landis and
DiCecco, re- notification to the property owners due to
an extended continuance. Staff also informed the
Commission of Streamlining Act issues related to the
Parcel Map, and the necessity to continue the matter
to November 4, 2002, to consider the applicant's
waiver of the streamlining act.
MOTION: Commissioner Parvin moved and Commissioner Haller
seconded a motion to continue this item to the Special
Planning Commission Meeting of November 4, 2002, to resolve
the Streamlining Act issues; to assign an Ad Hoc Committee
(Vice Chair Landis and Commissioner DiCecco) to meet with
staff and the applicant to resolve the resident's concerns
and to direct staff to provide notification to the property
owners of a continued meeting to January 27, 2003.
Motion carried with a unanimous 4:0 voice vote.
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Mr. Hogan advised the audience that they could go to the
city's website at www.ci.moorpark.ca.us to stay informed on
Item 8.E. (CPD 2000 -04; M &M Development) and the residents
could also send e -mails to obtain information from Paul
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of October 28, 2002
Page 17
Porter, the Principal Planner for this project, at
pporter @ci.moorpark.ca.us.
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Commissioner Parvin reminded everyone that this weekend
(November 3rd and 4th) the Moorpark Rotary Club will sponsor
the Civil War Re- enactment; entitled the "Blue and Grey."
There will be two battles each day. Encampments to open
daily at 10:00 a.m. She provided a phone number for those
seeking additional information, 805 - 523 -3370.
11. ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: Commissioner Haller moved and Commissioner DiCecco
seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting.
Motion passed with a unanimous 4:0 voice vote.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:48 p.m.
ATTEST:
Ba *Y yH�� P
Co t ev to ment Director
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2002 Final \021028 pcm.doc