Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/17/1986Y ♦ e e CITY OF PETALUMA Planning. Commission :Public Hearings On The 1986 - 20.05' Draft General Plan and EIR MEETING SUMMARY. Meeting of September 17, 1986 (NOTE: Meeting Summary pages and .speakers are numbered b:egiining with page 1 and speaker no. 1 of the August 5 summary and continuing consecutively from there. Future summaries will pick -up from where the last page and speaker of the previous summary left off.) Commission Members Present: Absent: Staff [consultants Present: Michael Davis, Glenn Head, Fred Tarr, Patti . Hilligoss, Ross Parkerson, Chairperson Nancy Read. . Dan Lib arle Warren Salmons, Planning `Director; Michael 'Moore, Principal Planner; Naphtali Knox, Knox and Associates (General Plan. Consultant) The meeting was called to order at 7 :05 p.m. With the public hearing now closed the Commission continued its deliberations on the map - related items. Work Sheet page 12 - Southern Crossing: Lakeville /Frates. Mr. Knox described the proposed "southern crossing" shown on the draft Circulation Map and explained the rationale for its location. There was no further discussion. REQUEST, Locate a "southern crossing" (an east /west road connection over the river, south of East Washington) in the Lakeville /Frates Road area. ALTERNATIVES a. Leave the southern crossing as proposed on the draft Circulation Map. 6 .o 010 :. Change the location as requested. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative A:: ,,•.. The traffic model . calculations would not support a location that far south. i• i COMM1ISSION ACTION i Alternative Recommended- A M otion by: Tarr Seconded by: Davis - I' Vote: Favor 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Davis ' Head' I• Hilli'goss Parkerson Tarr Read Work Sheet 13 - Gray Property: Graylawn near Betty Court. Therel. was no discussion on this item. REQUEST Split the designation on property located in the vicinity of Graylawn Avenue and. Betty Court (A.P. No. 006- 431 -24) between Urban Standard and Urban Diversified. ALTERNATIVES a. Leave. the designation as proposed (Urban Standard) . I hs. Change the designation as requested. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative B. COMMISSION ACTION i Alternative Recommended: B Motion by: Parkerson i Seconded by: Hilligoss Vote: Favor: 5 Oppose: 1 Davis Head i Hilligoss Parkerson Tarr Read Abstain: None_ Absent: Libarle 62 p p f Work Sheet page 14 - Varnhagen Property Commissioner Davis stated that leaving this , property in agriculture would, alleviate concerns over increases in density in that area. Mr. Salmons responded that the designation on the proposed plan and the designation on the existing General Plan would yield approximately the same development potential; also, if the agricultural designation is applied to Varnhagen because of being ag preserve, the same should be applied to other William properties around the City. There was no further discussion. REQUEST Remove the Varnhagen property from within the Urban Limit Line. ALTERNATIVES a,. Restore the Urban Limit Line to the location shown on the existing General Plan map. b. Remove the Varnhagen property totally from. the Urban Limit Line. C. Maintain the Urban Limit Line as proposed, but change; the land use designation to Agricultural to reflect the Williamson Act status of the property. d. Leave the Urban Limit Line and designations as proposed.. STA FF RECOM MENDATION: Alternative D The designation as proposed is less intense than the existing designation even though it covers the entire property, plus it gives the City an opportunity to acquire Urban Separator all the way to Western Avenue. r COMMISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: D Motion by: Parkerson Seconded by: Tarr Vote: Favor 4 Oppose: 2 Hilligoss Davis Parkerson. Head Tarr Read .Abstain: None Absent: Libarle 1 "' rk Sheet page 15 - Conrow Property: East Washington/ Ellis Commission chose to act on the map first and then the text. 63 O no REQUEST Remove of the Public and Institutional designation and restore the commercial designation on property at the northeast corner of East Washington and Ellis Streets. ALTERNATIVES a : Leave the Public j more .clearly define of the plan, and Institutional designation as proposed and the City's intent for this property in the text b. Move the gateway designation property and, redesignate that Thoroughfare Commercial. across East Washington to City portion of the Conrow property as c: Remove the Public and Institutional designation; redesignate that portion of the property Thoroughfare Commercial; maintain the Gateway on the site but move the " designation so that it represents both sides of East Washington between 101 off -ramps and Ellis Street. i dti: Strengthen the policy guidelines in the ;text of the plan for all Gateways proposed for the City to the, clear intent and adequate direction for gateway . improvements as a condition of development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ' Alternatives C and D. Tihis would allow the property owners to retain the commercial use of the land; but with appropriate policy direction, give the City the opportunity to work with a developer of the site to create a gateway in conjunction with future improvements. A Thoroughfare Commercial designation on that site would not be typical of other "strip commercial" development along East Washington since access could not be from East Washington. i COMMISSION ACTION A lternative Recommended: C . Motion by Head Seconded by: Parker.son Vote: Favor 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent': Libarle j Parkerson Tarr f ` Read Davis Head Hilligoss Mr. Knox summarized fo.r the Commission the results of his review of the letter from Derek Simmons, the attorney representing the Conrows. Referring to pages 34 and 35 of the draft plan,, he stated that much of the confus'ion on these pages comes from mixing the discussion of arterial 64 landscaping and gateways. Mr. Know continued by saying that staff recommendation 3` -C (.Work Sheet page 39) should include both zoning, and SPARC; and that the City is trying to assure that the location is appropriately treated through design standards. He suggested.. that the statement "land 'or open space easements .could be acquired" be deleted as well as the paragraph on. page. 35 discussing the visitors center.. Finally, he recommended ,approving staff's text recommendations as presented., and that other language will be added on arterial landscaping. There was no further discussion. Alternative Recommended: D plus text changes on Recommendation Work Sheet p. 39. Motion by: ;Head Seconded by: Parkerson Vote: Favors 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent -: Libarle Davis Head Hilligoss Parkerson Tarr Read I. Subject Gateway Policies 2. Background: The recommendation, of staff regarding Gateways Recommendation Work Sheet p., 15) includes an alternative to strengthen policy and program guidelines to provide clear and specific intent for the City. 3 Proposed, Text Change A. Amend the. definition of Gateway in the Glossary (p. I`` -9) to add the following Gateway: A point along a roadway entering the City at which a motorist gains a sense of- having - -lift- the- eiwironrs -mod of having entered the City. A Gateway may be. a place having an area for motorists to pull off or park and view maps,, cather ,information andgenerally bedome oriented to Petaluma; or. it .may, through , special develo ment standards o"r g,uideliries :e . g „_ landsca, ing and signage :, mark the entry to the City. The intent of the Gateway designation on the G.ener.al, Plan Land Use Map is' to insure t a high visible location in the City be, appropriately treated B Add the following policy to the Community Character chapter of. the General Plan (in the appropriate location and format "The City will work with appropriate State and county agencies., privte organizations. (such as the Chamber of Commerce), service clubs and, property owners to develop and maintain the Gateways designated on the General Plan Map. "' 65 1 V ®; 0 C'. Amend Program ,12, p. 35 to delete the existing statement and add in its place:: 1. "Amend the Zoning Ordinance to create a. Gateway Overlay Zone and amend the Site Plan and Architectural Review Guidelines to establish requirements ' for gateway site j dimensions, landscape design standards, site design standards, signage ' (including off -site si.gnage, for non - commercial purposes such as imparting visitor , - , ,..r , +,-- +„ -.o . ; k +o_,. -+oa +I,o approved, for development) uses, development projects that would result in upgrading or creation of designated gateway sites, and other requirements as necessary". J I, D, Revise the General Plan narrative accordingly to reflect he recommendations for ;both the map and text. 4. Staff _ Response/ Recommendation Recommend to the City Council the amendments proposed above or as modified by the Commission (see vote above). I Work Sheet page 16 - Filippini: Casa Grande: /McDowell r, Commissioner Davis felt that Alternative B was the fairest since it upped the density allowed but still provided for the park ,site. After some general discussion on surrounding densities, the Commission took an action. l REQUEST Remove the Neighbor -hood Park designation and change the Urban ,Standard designation to Urban. Diversified on property located at the northeast corner of Casa Grande and North McDowell. I' ALTERNATIVES al Leave the designation as recommended by the GPCC l ( Neighborhood Park and Urban Standard) and as shown - on the draft Land Use Map. I bl Leave the park designation and redesignate • the residential portion to Urban Diversified (5.1 to 10.0 du /ac) . c1 Remove the park designation and designate the entire .property as 1: - Urban Standard. I. dI Remove the park Urban Diversified l STAFF] RECOMMENDATION ; COMMISSION ACTION designation and designate the entire property as Alternative A. Alternative Recommended:. B I' motion by: Tarr Sfeconded by: Head 30 Vote: Favor:. 5 Oppose.: 1 Davis Read Head Hilligoss Parkerson Tarr Abstain!: None Absent: Lib arle Work _Sheet: page 17 Lawrence.: Old Redwood/Goodwin Commissioner Davis stated that he would support including Mr. Lawrence',s property but not the property across Old Redwood Highway.. Mr. Salmons stated that this area : had. complicated storm drainage problems and that. staff was withdrawing its recommendation to include the Lawrence property' and especially the properties on the south side of Old Redwood. He also stated that annexation Of the property would ,include quite .a bit of roadway. Commissioner Parkerson stated that the Commission should" be careful about changing the, urban limit line that had been agreed .upon through the sub" = committee process.. - Commissioner Hilligoss felt. that had. this request been known earlier in the process it probably would have - been included within the urban limit line. There was no further discussion. REQUEST Include the property bounded by Old Redwood. Highway, Denman Road and Goodwin Avenue within the Urban Limit Line., ALTERNATIVES a. Leave the property ,outside the Urban Limit Line.. b.. Include -the property within the U "rb"an Limit Line under the Special Commercial designation and .also consider bringing in the properties between the south side of Old. Redwood Highway and the NWPRR up to Ely Road with an Industrial designation -. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative B. The proposal represents a logical extension of the. Urban Limit Line to Ely Road while staying north of the railroad, Properties in this area are not covered by the Penngroye Specific Plan; but -Penngrove, residents may object ,(as one has already done) . Including properties south of Old Redwood might also result in needed improvements. to. the' Ely Road and .Old. Redwood Highway crossings of Willow Brook. COMMISSION ACTION: Alternative Recommended: A Motion by: Parkerson Seconded by: Head 1 67 VA R f Vote: Favor: 3 Oppose: 3 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle j Head Davis Parkerson Hillgoss Tarr Read Work 'Sheet page 18 - Scott Property: Corona / NWPRR is Since the situation with the Scott property is similar to that of the Lawrence property (i.e., a request to be included, within the urban limit line) , ' 'there was continued discussion by the Commission on changing the urban limit line. REQUEST Include property north of Corona Road and east :of the NWPRR right = -way within the Urban Limit Line and the Corona /Ely Specific Plan Area. ALTERNATIVES d. Leave the properties outside the Urban Limit Line as proposed. b. Move the Urban Limit Line to include the Scott properties. i STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative A The timing of including the Scott property within the Urban Limit Line now, based on public discussions and, recommendations that have come from the sub- committees and the GPCC, is not appropriate. Mr. Scott's property may represent the next logical step in City's growth and could be considered at some future General Plan update. COMMISSION ACTION A lternative Recommended: A Motion by: Tarr Seconded by: Head Vote: Favor: b Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent:: Libarle Davis Head j Hilligoss i Parkerson Tarr Read Work Sheet page 19 - Petaluma School District On this item Mr. Salmons suggested Alternative C be 'the staff recommendation if further study bears out the need. Mr. Knox presented new wording in the form of .Alternative E which the Commission then took actioni on. .: Y oQUO�o� REQUEST Establish an elementary school. site (10 -15 acres) in the vicinity of "I" Street Extension. REQUESTED BY :, Petaluma School District B.ACI;GRO:UND The school district anticipates a need for an additional elementary school site on the west side, centrally located in the southwest corner of the City. Presently, the draft hand Use Map does not show a site in the area. ALTERNATIVES a. Leave the draft Land Use Map as proposed with no school site shown. b. Request that the school district justify the need for new . site, with additional data, and select several alternative sites for consideration by the 'Commission and Council. c. Amend the, General Plan text to express the need for a new site in the southwest corner of the City. d. Select a centrally located site in the "I" Street extension area. e. Request data from : Petaluma. School .District regarding the need. for a new school. site in the southwest corner of the. City. If the data so justifies, amend the General Plan text accordingly. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Alternative B. Without knowing 'the districts needs beyond a parcel size and general location, it 'is difficult to ask the Planning Commission to select a site on behalf of the district. In the 'It" Street area there are only two or three properties large enough to accommodate the District's needs. Staff will be happy to work with the district to develop site alternatives that can be considered for the General Plan Land. Use Map. 6. COMMISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: E Motion by: Tarr Seconded by: Hilligoss Vote: Favor: 6 Davis Head HilligoSs Parkerson Tarr Read Oppose:: 0 Abstain: None Absent,: Libarle 1 1. .• t: Work Sheet page 20 - Rebizzo Property: Oak /Kentucky The discussion focused on the nature of mixed use and the kind of uses that might. be allowed. The Commission again stressed the need to clarify the definition in the General Plan as much as possible. I i_ REQUEST Change the Public and Institutional designation on the property at Oak and Kentucky Streets. (Department of Motor Vehicle site, A. P. No. 006-162'-1). ALTERNATIVES : aa. Leave the property as Public and Institutional until such time as j the current use changes. b . Change the designation to Mixed Use which would permit specified, commercial or office uses and could also include residential. c,. Change the designation to a strictly commercial designation based on a review of the surrounding area (this will .mean changing i other designations, as well) . I STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative B Since the property is privately owned and does not fit the Public and Tnstitutional definition as stated in the text of the General Plan, the Mixed Use designation might better apply on this site and would offer commercial opportunities (to be further defined through the Zoning Ordinance) as well as residential. . COMMISSION ACTION X. lternative Recommended: B Motion by: Davis , Seconded by: Parkerson I Vote: Favor: 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Tarr Read Davis j H- il'ligoss I Head f Parkerson i Work jSheet page 21 - Cunico Property: Keller near "A" Street There was no discussion on this item. REQUsEST : Change Urban. Diversified designation on property on Keller near "A" Street (A.P. No. 008- 041 -07) to Office Commercial 1 i i 70 ALTERNATIVES: a. Leave property as designated. b. „ Change the designation to Office 'Commercial. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative B COMMISSION :ACTION Alternative Recommended: B Motion by: Tarr Seconded by: Hiiligoss Vote,: Favor: 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Davis Head Hilligoss Parkerson Read Tarr Work Sheet page.22 - Catenacei Property: East Washington ,near Airport The Commission asked for clarification between Alternatives D and E and then took action . REQUEST Change the Open Space designation on properties located east; of the, Alderwood Subdivision (vicinity of northeast corner of. East Washington and Ely) to Urban Standard (A.P. No. 149 - 180 -15, 16.). ALTERNATIVES a. Leave properties as designated (.Open Space) . b. Designate7 properties as Urban Standard (2.1 to 5.0 du /'ac) . C. Designate properties as Suburban ('0.6 to 2.0 .du /ac) . d. Designate the. easternmost property as Urban. Separator and the property below it Urban Standard. e. Using Washington Creek as the divider, designate land.':south of the creek (.along, East Washington Street) as Urban Standard and land North of the creek as Urban Separator (leaving the creek as Open Space). STAFF RECOMMENDATION Either Alternative D or E. Either alternative would provide. some development potential but still leave the-opportunity to acquire Urban Separator if need 'be. 71 COARAI'SSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: E Motion by: Parkerson Seconded by: Head i Voter Favor: 5 Oppose: 1 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Davis Hilligoss Head j Parkerson Tarr Read Work Sheet page 23 - Sovel Property- Petaluma Boulevard North i There! was no discussion on this item. i REQUEST Include entire property on Petaluma, Boulevard North (A.P. No. 048- 180 -1) within Urban Limit Line and change the designation on the west side off Petaluma Boulevard North from Rural Residential to Suburban. f' ALTERNATIVES a,. Leave the Urban Limit Line and Rural Residential, designation as proposed. b. Adjust the Urban Limit Line and Specific Plan area boundary to take in all of` the subject property. c. Change the designation on the west side of Petaluma Boulevard North now proposed as Rural Residential to Suburban (0.6 to I ' 2.0 du /ac). STAFF' RECOMMENDATION Alternative A. The Rural Residential designation has been placed on the properties along the west side of Petaluma_ Boulevard North in an attempt to hold new development to a minimum until a 'Specific Plan can be prepared for the area. It is the least intensive residential designation. Also the boundary lines may be adjusted as part of the Specific Plan when the provision of City services can be analyzed in greater detail. i COMMISSION ACTTON I' Alternative Recommended: A 1 lotion by: Tarr Seconded by: Parkerson Vote: Favor: 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Davis _ Head Hilligoss 72 P,arkerson Tarr Read Work Sheet page: 24 - Neighborhood Park near Oak Creek Apartments Commissioner Tarr stated that he was looking for an actual park site in the area. not just access to the Floodway. Commissioner Davis also felt a• park was' needed in this area because existing parks were quite far away. Commissioner Hilligoss expressed; her opposition to Floodway access. Mr. Salmons explained that in this I area the City has acquired a public access easement near Oak Creek apartments.. Chairperson Read' stated that there -needs to be further clarification of the kind of park it will be since a neighborhood park implies having certain types of amenities that. would not be permitted in the Floodway,: Mr: Salmons ,proposed that the could straddle the ,park flood-way area so portions would be out of the floodway and able to accommodate park equipment and furniture. Mr. Knox recommended .that, the :reference to neighborhood park be amended to read public park to provide some flexibility in how the !area is treated. REQUEST A .neighborhood park on property near the intersection of the , Petaluma River and the NWPRR (.vicinity of Oak Creek Apartments and Rainier overcrossing) . ALTERNATIVES a. Provide,, through policy and program statements in the text of the plan, for 'recreational. uses in Floodway areas and allow public access, at designated points along the Floodway. b. Designate a portion of the property in question as 46gbbor}TOarl Public ,Park. C. Leave as proposed on the draft land use Map and in the text. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative A The portion of the properties already designated Floodway represent a sizeable amount of land that is now undevelopable under present regulations, and must remain open. COMMISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: A and B, include land on both sides of the river, plus some land outside the Floodway and text changes on Recommendation Work Sheet p. 48. Motion by: Parkerson Seconded by: Tarr Vote: Favor': 5 Davis Head Oppose: 1 Hilligoss Abstain: None Absent: Libarle 73 Parker.son Tarr i Read . i 1. Subject Access and recreational uses in the Floodway. 2. Background In response to a request for a park in the vicinity of e. the Petaluma River, Oak Creek Apartments and thNorthwestern Pacific Railroad ( Recommendation Work Sheet,, p. 24) , staff recommended that policy and /or program statements in the plan provide for recreational uses and public access to Floodwav designated areas along the river. The plan already proposes a policy requiring public I ccess to the river. i 3. Proposed Text Change A. Add a policy to the Petaluma River chapter (in the appropriate location and format) as follows: i f The City shall permit limited, recreational uses in Floodway designated areas along the Petaluma River where the City has acquired the land, 'or an open space easement as long as the proposed activities do not interfere with flood handling capacities of the floodway. . " j 4. Staff. Response /Recommendation: Recommend to the City Council the proposed text change see vote above) . Work !Sheet page 25 - Holmberg Property: Petaluma River near Lakeville Staff le,xplained that this item was really a "clean -up" item because the park designation was put on the entire property rather than leaving the portion that is currently designated as Service Commercial.. There being no further discussion, the Commission acted. i REQUEST Restore portion of. property that had been designated Service Commercial on existing General Plan map but is now shown entirely as park on the proposed General Plan map. ALTERNATIVES a. Restore that portion of the site now designated as Service Commercial to the Mixed Use designation while keeping the 1 remainder as Neighborhood Park. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative A. i COMMISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended.: A i !Motion by: Tarr 74 11 006 0 5 Seconded by: Davis Vote: Favor: 6 Davis Head Hilli`goss Parkerson Tarr Read Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Work Sheet page 26 - Old Adobe School District Property: Caulfield I Crinella This item was continued pending review by the City Attorney. Pork Sheet. page 27 - Reynaud Property: ' End of English Street Sta' reviewed background of the request and stated that topography was a critical factor in its. designation as Suburban. Commissioner Parkerson commented that he was quite familiar with the property and that the ' topography is quite steep and there are potential access and 1 slide problems. There was no further discussion. REQUEST Redesignate . the lower portion of the property :located at the end of English Street (A.P. No. 008 - 073 -01) from Suburban to Urban Standard. ALTERNATIVES: a. Redesignate the lower portion of the property Urban Standard (to a depth of approximately 20'0 feet) with the remainder as Suburban. b. Leave the property as designated. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative B. The site has better development Potential under Suburban because it will be easier to solve. access, drainage., slope stability and site design problems with a larger lot designation- than with the denser Urban Standard category. COMMISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: B Motion: by Parkerson Seconded by: Head Voter Favor: 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None .Absent: Libarle Davis L J 75 " . , f., ...7 ^.. Head Hilligoss �. Par.kerson Read Tarr. Work 'Sheet page 28 - Hagopian, Anderson Properties: Mixed Use to Full Depth of Property i There was no discussion on this item. REQUEST Extend the depth of the Mixed Use designation on properties on Petaluma Boulevard South near " K" Street (A.P. Nos. '008- 281 -35 and 48) . i ALTERNATIVES 1 a Leave designations on the property . (D:.Iixed Use and Urban i Standard) as proposed. b Extend the Mixed. Use designation over the entire property. i STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative B. Since the Mixed Use includes residential uses,, extending it the full depth of both properties could' provide an easier transition from commercial to residential.. Also, by placing the designation over the entire property, a project for the site would have to- consider overall integration of uses,. A split designation, as is the case now, would njot necessarily* require that integration and could create compatibility problems. The Commission should consider a similar change to all properties now split between Mixed Use and a residential designation. i' COMMISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: B !;lotion by: Davis Seconded by: 'Head Vote: Favor: 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Davis Head' ' Hilligoss Parkerson Tarr Read Work !Sheet page 29 PG &E Properties Staff ;reviewed. the proposed changes in designation on the PG &E properties, then the Commission took action . REQUEST Redesignate various properties owned by PG &E. i 76 ALTERNATIVES a.. Leave the designations as proposed. b. Remove the :Public and Institutional designation on the Lakeville Substation but add a Gateway designation on Frate's Road in the vicinity of the substation; change the retail center designation on the property on Corona to Public and Institutional; leave other properties as designated. c.. Change the designations as requested. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative B The definition of Public. and Institutional will also be clarified to accommodate the PG. &E properties'.. - COMM °ISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: B Motion by: Tarr Seconded by: Parkerson Vote: Favor: 5 Oppose: 0 Davis Hilligoss Parkerson Tarr Read Abstain Head Absent: Libarle Work Sheet page 30 Properties on Northside of Bodega Avenue The Commission took action on this item without d- iscussion. REQUEST Change the designation of residential properties on the north side of Bodega Avenue (,between Webster and Paula)' to Urban Standard (2.1 to 5.0 du /ac) to be consistent with .properties on the south side. ALTERNATIVES a. Leave designations in the area as proposed (Suburban). b. Change the designation on the north side properties to Urban Standard as requested. STAFF RECOMMENDA'TION:, Alternative A. The Suburban - . designation is applied in this area. because of topography (the land rises steeply from Bodega), the unusual dimensions of the properties (long' and narrow)- and lack of access other than to Bodega Avenue. For these reasons, these properties cannot support a higher density designation.. By contrast, all of the 77 i nn (r�l properties on the south side of Bodega (between Webster and Bantam) have been subdivided to„ the maximum extent, the land is comparatively flat, and all have access to Bode, from an existing street network. Hence the higher density designatn. 1 COMMISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: A Motion by: Hilligoss Seconded by: Tarr Vote: Favor: 6 Oppose: 0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Davis Head Hilligoss Parke_rson Tarr Read Work Sheet page 31 - Miller Property: Ely /Casa Grande Staff explained how the urban separator would be adjusted on this property following removal of the East side By -Pass from the map. The Commission then acted on this item. REQUEST Move the Urban Separator across the eastern property line of "the ±90 acre Ron sheimer /Miller property located at the northeast corner of Ely and Casa Grander and the Agricultural designation, r, ALTERNATIVES a. Leave the designations as shown on the proposed Land Use Map. b. Move the Urban Separator across the eastern property line and change the Agricultural designation to, a designation consistent with Airport Land Use Commission and City policy for the Inner Approach Zone ('Rural Residential) . C1. Remove the angled portion of the Urban Separator (`that following the Eastside By- Pass.) from the Miller property; adjust the Urban Separator and Urban Limit Line so that it runs straight across the Miller property at a width of 300 feet. i_ COMMISSION ACTION Alternati Recommended: C as amended. Motion by: Davis 78 o0o� Seconded °by,: Parkerson Vote; Favor: 6 Davis Head Hilligoss Parkerson Tarr' Read Oppose,: "0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Work Sheet page 32 - Gow Property: Corona/ McDowell/ NWPRR Mr Salmons, explained, in response to Mr. Parkinson''s letter, that the Public and Institutional/ Transit designation does, not constitute a "taking" of the property. There was no further discussion on this item. REQUEST Remove the Public and Institutional (Transit) designation. ;from the Gow property at McDowell, Corona and the NWPRR. ALTERNATIVES a. i Leave the 'designation as, proposed. b.. Change the designation to correspond with, the County designation of 'Agricultural. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Alternative A. COMMISSION ACTION Alternative Recommended: A Motion by': Tarr Seconded by: Parkerson Vote: Favor: 6 Opposer 0 Abstain: None Absent: Libarle Davis Head Hilligoss Parkerson Read Tarr At 10:20 p,m.., the meeting was continued to September A, 1986 when the Commission would proceed with its deliberations on the draft General Plan map and text and the draft EIR.. 79