Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/18/1978' Ll` a a i. � � a..v .. . - .: C1J: •1 \L';u .'_a:v LJ / V CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7.:.30- R.M. .CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA The Planning Commission encourages applicants or their representative to be available a t -to answer -- questions so that no agenda items need be defer.red> to a -later date due - a lack of pertinent information, i PL'EDGE'ijALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG _.ROLL CALL: Comm; Balshaw Hoffman - I Horciza Lavin� Shearer Waite STAFF Ronald'.F.'Hall:- Pl'anning - L OF MINUTES: , APPROUA CORRESP,ONDENCE'c CONSENT * CALENDAR' I;tems the,-!Consent .Calendar will be considered to.be,.routine by the Planning .Commission. and:-will-be enacted ,by. motion,. _There will be.no separate ; .d scus's on of :these items:. If discussion .is' desired'',. that •item. (or items) will ,:be removed from the Consent Calendar. JEROLD.,PHILLIPS� E..I.Q.. Evaluation and Site,.Design Review for three duplexes and a house . AP 006-092 -24 (N',. Kentucky' , Street.; between West and-Cherry Streets.). .L>ORI .SLOWIK 1. Public Hearing to evaluate-the Environmental Impact Questionnaire fora Fast Food Sandwich shop' to b&-located-at 360- Petaluma Blvd .North, 2. Public Hearing to-consider a Use Permit " application for'the proposed u'se. KRAGEN'AUTO SURPLY 3.. Site D;es'ign Review of the project. Site Design Review of a proposed free- standing..sign to be located at 401 East Washington Street.. PETALUMA,ZONING ADMINISTRATOR -- 1. E. I. Q ,EUA'LUATION /P.,REZONING - FROM COUNTY' "A" TO CITY R-1 --6, 500 '2. Public; Hearing t evaluate the;Environmental Impact- Questionnaire for a proposed p;rezoning of 'AP 136- 110 -- 2'6,35,36,15;22,`21,;;7 and 8, ;the Lands of� Qthers,, located on Ely Blvd, , North. Public Hearing to consider an'app.lication to prezone the above property from County Agriculture to, City R-1-6,500., PETALUMA'_:PLANNING COMMIS`SION,.. : 18, .1978 AGENDA , APRIL a; - - JOHN A. BERNARDIL,. Hearing, to discuss aproposed' industrial develop- COUNTY REFERRAL FOR' ment to be located at the southern corner of _ A USE, : CLARIFICATION :, B' degas Avenue and Cleveland•: Lane,._ ; 4 .• 1 Hearing to evaluate. the Environmental GOLDEN WESTNGLASS CO- _Public Im pact: Questionnaire for a glass 'glazq ng Arid E.I.Q. EVALUATION /_: replac'ement: business for structures and automob -files USE 'PERMIT REQUEST/ at 10'04 Lakeville Highway. SITE. DESIGN REVIEW,:,_' 2. Public Hearing to cons dereC Use.. Permit application for the operation of the proposed business in an M ='L Zone. 3. Site Design...Revew.of the project., ROBERT HUNT= Ap:� ea1 of a recommendation by - t la he, Prnning Director APPEAL OF.COUNTY ;. . on,,a - Sonoma - County referral to , de .l ny a.ot split. REFERRAL RECOMMENDATION: proposed .for 1548 Mountain ;View -AV,enue.. -. . AMENDMEN:T,TO : ' ZONING., • 1. Public Hearing, to evaluate the :Env ro.nmenta1 Impact ORDINANCE - MASONRY Qiuestionnare' for a proposed amendment toZon'ng .SCREENI•NG ALONG; ARTERIAL Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S.. AND:. COLLECTOR STREETS:- UA E,. I. Q EVAL TION. /., 2­. .Public Hearing to consider an amendment to the ZONING ORDINANCE' / Z'oning :Ordin�dnce to provide for :masonry screening .AMENDMENT.: along arterial and collector street's. ARCHTTECTURAL AND( SITE App'oint:. one representative to the Ar ; cltecffiral. DESIGN' REVIEW COMMITTEE:. and - Site D'es! gn .Review 'Comm ttee I Planning Commission Minutes -April 18, 1978 - Correction Correspondence R.IPieracc_ini,. 52''9 -7th Street - Comm. Lavin stated it was the intention of,the Commisson. that the persimmon tree be placed.,on the plot plan and any spoken statements to that effect and to whatever,advantage should be- = referred to the City Attorney. I I RONALD F. HALL Planning Director i I C' NOT' OFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED` BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION M. M I N U "T E .S PETALUMA�CITY PLANN°ING•,COMMISSION` APRIL 18 1978 REGULAR MEETING •. 7:30 . P.M. CITY CHAMBERS; CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA K -PRES_ENT: Comm Hoffman, ,Lavin.,. Shearer; Waite ABSENT Comm. Balshaw, Horcz;a u „ STAFF:" Ronald 'F.• Hall, Planning Director 1, APPROVAL OF MINUTES %: The minutes of the meeting+ of. April :18•, 19 T8 were' appr.oved,, -as: submitted.: CORRESPONDENCE: Letter from Joyee•Shiriatovich proles -t ng the removal. of P a per':simmon• tree and shrubbery-by R: Pieraccin.,, at: F S 529.'711 '•Street It 'was' the .consensus that. even though a sp'ecifC condition had not been specified by ttie Sit e• Design Committee rel'a'ting; to the tree, a tree .o`f that diameter; should not be • removed • and that a i slm - � '• ar °t ree: -'and • ^shrubbery should •b.e replarit'ed. ` The, matter, is to be brought to the attention' of, 'sthe City Attorney for enforceable action. CONSENT.CALENDAR -It, was th& cons-ensus that�the kr Auto Supply ap- lica be • r,einoved - from, the Consent Calendar ": The °motion was made Comm. .Shearer, seconded;'by Comma Lauiri'- to. approve 'I °gems 1'rand '2 . on the Consent Cal endar. Moti=on carried unanimously-. p g g non and Site ` De "sign A enda, Item. l Jerold 'P,hilli s; . Ne atuer Declaration Re s•.. 5, 52,9::approving three dupldxes -and a .house, on N. Kentucky Street between West and Cherry Streets. . i Ag end_ a- 'Item ` -2, - •Lori :Slowik -; Negative D'eclara�tion•, Use Permit :Res; U8- 7$, Site; Design _R' 8. ,5. 532; app "roving a Fast­ Food Sandwich, Shop lb. , "be °located at 360 Petaluma , B North.. KB.AGEN AUTO,SUPPLYj' Mr Hall explained 'the request by Kragen Auto Supply SITE ;DESIWI REV'IEV: for a` ifee st'and'ing sign 1. which .measures five in hei g tbpof ht ,the. b. ten n,' sign: et in* length' with a distance to the from grade level of thirteen feet to be lbcateld- at °their future. site ',at 401. East Washington Street. The sign is not ' in." conformance •with. $'66 2 6'- ,405.,1-(4,) 'of the • Zoning - Ordinance which , maintains' ,that sati:sfactory' ,design., qualit Y, a PP ropria'teness and harmony will involye airiong- : other .things the size, location, design color;, number, lighting City :.of 'Petaluma Planniing .Commission Ninut.e.s„ April 18;, 1978 KRAGEN. AUTO' SUPPLY% and, ,mater -=ials of all signs an`d .o..utd`oor :advertis,ng • . ._ - - .. g y P - SITE DES:IGNREVIEW structures The si' n.wou:ld•vsualh com ete with"the (Continued): traffic anal ra lroad and attract the. attention of motorists traveling feast. an went on "sfiing" ' ton Street and could create °, oaent_ial traffic; haza'rds;� '- Comm. Shearer explained that, w ;t'h the: widening and underground -ing of utilities on East Washington Street; many. of the existing :free - st'andi'ng signs . w ll 'be' - removed and. replaced with",new sign " :;.' Mr. '{Hall. §tated there is a °-Iprovisi on ' the new'- s.fg•n. ordinance •which includes low profile :signs wherel a building. is set. back 15 feet :or more; There i.s a height l +mitartion orn.; low:.p,rofle signs.,­., There is :also, a prohibition the he-:ght'of larger- signs. A sign cannot exceed the .height of the main, building.; :. .._._ Gene Barbour, representing Kragen: Auto Supply -, explained that Kragen.is. owned by .Lucky' 6:mres and w -111s b'r n a" good t.tax !baser t'o.'the° City and be a good: g . neighbor in City. Kragen is_a;commercial.eiterp"•tise "arid it is es enti.al to the company that they_have.adequa e identification;'. A free standing sign is esseri i.il as it can 'be 'seen; from several :directions'. He felt they deserved a ;chance to, make •r business. succeed' and`',, that", the:'p;roposed sign -wa`s .i"n accord .with. the ordinance ,-, A `sign ordinance ;should.:be .used, as= a guide 'to regulate people. in, a;, uniform- "manner.. ..$omeled s� dera,t� "on had 'been given to the s. "ign at_ .,Sitez',Des gn;'Re-view•,,b'u"t� no. :forinal'. ac.ti_ on i ha d been_.aaken:. one ;the s gn.: n n Juiy -j 19IT. "- 'U' ther&-,is a sig ordinance ahou`ld app,ly.F: to - eVery,one:. Mr;:, •_: Hall s';ta ".ted a low- ,pro:'file :sign: of 4'O,� :feet :'11r'amed witch masonry,:mater alE - would ;be much more , �appropri'ate' .• -: Comm. Waite explYaine:d6 th'at;. Section. 2:6x 40 ; 5.,., .:' 1,(4) of the Zoning ^Ordnanc_e gives th_ e. Commission, a certain amount of flex- ibllit.P relevant to signs. Mr Hall stated normally we do .want -to deviate from ••the-' o.rd'inance ' - :The" new, ordinance ,wil-1 make e, signs more. proportion ',' ate. to the size: of the build ng Comma.; ,Lavin i. asked if' ;a s atemerit of .pol cy" could,!.be established clearly indicating -the' Planning, Comm ssion,''s intent for East, Washirig,ton: In:;�orderd: to; end the, pr-olifer,a,tion,.,c&; large signs, on East Washington.;.:andl-reduce 'the number' of ;signs' this, proposal r 'should' -be denied and a. notice of intent ,established .pr'ohib.irting free- standing- signs on 'Eas't Washing - ton Street. Comm:- Zavin z +to- ; deny. ,the proposed- f ree- ;stand ng..,s'ign, for the 'Kragen -Au`to Supply with:• the,, recommends tion;,.that,,,the +siggn.-, be r•_edes g'i ed in conformance with staff recommendations and "plans be returned to ;the•Arehi'tec -,tural, and'S "ite Design, Review Comurttee for review y ;, Tti'e, motion was ' "seconded ,by 'Comm..,. Shearer., The motion carried wi,th 4:. a- ffrmat,ive. and : 2, absentee. vo",.tes;: PETALUMA..`ZONING Mr ,Hall explained the proposal to!pre' 'z'one approxi- ADMINISTRATOR-E. I:.Q., mately 35i.,2 ac =res ;located 'on Ely R`o'ad from County- ''A" _. EVALUAT -IQN /P "REZONING ;;, (Agriculture) 'to R-,1- 6,'500 - , ; : The area contains two- FROM , COUNTY TO :> islands •of '_land.:,, 'The .first, island covers • ,T. "acres = _ , .. ;b _ CITY R�1 - 500 � .., ,. .and is developed with one moblehome ands three small , ranch homes , The second'. fk pd covers ,28.3 acres and. is ;develop,ed 'with four„ aiomes: and Palm' ,, S'addle' .Shop and is ;located ;to• :the_•south.,along, Lynch Creek „ -, All,_ parcels ar_e5 via - � -2- k City, of Petaluma 'Planning; Commission `Minutes, ' Apr T 19'T8 PETALUMA `ZONING M� Hall 'stated a -prezoning has =, - meaning until the ADMINISTRATOR E' I.Q prop:ertyis annexed, and until the property.i: "s annexed., EVALukT.IQN /,''PREZONING it_ is 'still under. j.urisdic Lion of' the County.. There_ FROM GOU1tTY`•''A" °T,0 ar,- no'actual changes with a prezon.ing as with an CLTY R -1 6.,,5:0'0 annexation.' it' would b•e be:kier to prezone the prop- (.Continued] erty R -,1 -6, 5QQ than Kb The present property uses will be.'protec,ted as some are nonconforming uses,. He gave the Pa 'Shop as an example:. He explained that after the property was prezo,ned,, annexation,. would require a por - -t -ion. of 5% or more' of the ; assesse'd valuation and' landowners', Comm iShearer questioned; if, the. ark site 'proposed .b. a•nt'as' Development was • p . Y Q P. -s;uffie ent the "size, of the develo,pinent Comm- Hoffman asked how this prezoning can .be justa:f;ied' without pr- o -more :park - lands.. The Pubha.:Hea'ring to consider the Entiir_•onmental Impact Questionnaire was _.- op:eiied; No comments. were offered from, the�..audi.ence and P-,ublic Hearing was closed . wr C �Lavrnt.moved to direct.; the 'Plann .ng Director to prepare and post `a,. Nega- t , - ive D'ec.larat- on for the pto:�ect "wi•tti the following 'change The, Motion was s'e'con.ded by Comznm,,`Ho.f;fman:.. The motion c'ar;ried with 4 affirmative: and 2 ab- -, s'entee. votes; Find ing 7. � If ahe is approved for a prezoning, these parcels !shall be .included ,in. the' p.rezoning. = The Pub'li Hearin was opened to consider the proposed R -I - 6,500 prezoniig,, Jim Palm, Palm Saddle•Shop, :asked - -if , and `lives'tock would�be permitted. Comm Waate answered in the" affrmati�e' and sta that if and when the 'prop- erty owners initiated an app - -hcat "ion f`or annexation the properties wo be y annexed Mr Halll explained that. as long as, an- inventory is taken on the friumber:of,.animals- the same•'variet and number of animals could be retained.. Comm .Waite' stated th`e `two .`'s:eparate• islands could stand `alone as far- as future annexation. Mr_'s ' A ' viland.,. 1274 Ely Road owner 61 approximately. 5' acres, 'asked if. the p were annexed would the homes be built on .these properties• Comm. wa.°ite:Mexplaned ttie, property o would Have . to initiate annexation- proce- dur-es for the prbper'ty. 'Pro;pertie•s• could, be brought into 'the'-City- without the owners. ;consent; :but' no one � c'an: `remove .the �.pro:perty ;owner from..ther homes - - The Public Hearing wa's' closed',. Comm Hoff man' asked if 'the- �Qant°as Deve:l could effect the annexation o?f. the subf'e`&t properties:' 'Comm. ` WdIte "explained no,t Qantas wanted 'the land Comm. .Lavin asked if the 'slangs would be'consdered,'as one -or two b•lockse whereas if block, .l 'has the largest amount of land., the smaller block, would -'automatically be' annexed' with "the.lafger block'. Mr.. Hall stated we are r"eally�,talki g about.one large block of land and its prezoii ng and only if the Qantas,;property is, "prezon'd.. -he prezonin °;.applicatign`wi11 basically, tie made by Qani�as.,and ,if ,I;AFC;O, does not want islands • created -LAFCO could deny, the,.. annexation under' - the.Minicipal tgan zation Act unless the islands are also 1i . ei City of Petaluma, Plant PETALUMA ZONING ADMINISTRATOR E I ,Q,. EVALUATION /PREZONING ing Commission 'Minutes April '18,, 1978 included.. The annexation will be initiated, b.y Qantas- Q g s antas can bring other people in with them to: make: ,it FROM. COUNTY A T.O.' withnpthatttotalnbcompassing 'as many pr- operty owners �� 10 ieck as they can... Comm. Waite CITY R -1- 6,,500: stated L9'F.CQ cannot intiate',,an annexation,.orily 'the (:Continued): ' property owners. or the .City can ini- tldt:e 'an anneXa- tion, Comma Hoffman stated the actions of 'Qantas would, have 'a direct effect on the involuntary annex atop of .the subj' properties .by invoking the `5 percent laic. It will end, up that the ..whole, square, , wound .be annexed, in other; words, it wi `1 guarantee annexat orio, Comm. Waite commented the; "Qantas annexation will influeftce the other parcels. Mr,. `Hall remarked tthe. Qantas °annexation will 'be heard'by LAF,CO on ,June $; 1978 Comm-. Shearer moved to recommend' `approval of the req,ues,ted. R -1 -6; 500, prezoning .0 the .City, Council of Assessor's Parcel Nos: 136- 110'' -7; 8, 15; 21, 22,, 26, 35: and 3,6. The motion was seconded by Comma Hoffman. The motion ears e.d b' 4, . affirmative and - 2 'absentee votes';' J,OHN',A. BERNARD,I- Mr. Hall explained the "request by J., ,Bernardi to con- CQUNTY FOR str;uct, two mini- warehbuse at the southeast: A USE CLARIFICATION: corner of Bodega. Avenue and "Clevelund Lane. Two 4,080 square foot; pre - engineered portable ste,el would be developed one the rear portion of the 2.38 acre site: ' y J,. Bernardi staged', he, 'had t , been urned. down b y the Count on several "proposals D fbt the property. Paul Zell is located across ,the street and.an,Oyst_er tributor behind the �pr.operty. The building b'e. hidden by and '8= f'ooit' fence :.and .an,, landsca n y p_" g requirements would b& complied with He would ,hike to keep the.pro:ject in a portable nature as far as the steei<`buildings. are concerned. These would be p:ersonal.�storage buildings: arid. all, storage would be confined' within the buildings., Comm. Shearer commented the metal buildings; ' would not blend: in with the surrounding ranches and • b"usinesses' which reflect an 'older look. 'Mr. Hall explained these 'war-ehouses could also be ;used for- the storage -..of ,small tractors in an agricultural area as there-would not; be 'any sales or' manufacturing „'',Comm. Waite.s,tated the,•300 -foot property frontage on Bodega.Avenue;is zoned. It would riot be 'have ' this dev.,elopinent with an oyster business in, 'th'e rear'.: ' Mr, Bernardi .asked i`f 'he could submit, a wooden building proposal .and 'wi'thdraw- his present ;application. for .metal buildings . Mr.: Hall explained ' tlia,t revised. plans showing wooden_ warehouse buildings together with•landscapng. plans for the, ,project - could be submitted. to the Site. Design Committee; ; reNiew. Comm,.: Hoffman stated that Bodega Avenue 'is d'es'ignated.'trans tional and ha's� :`a poten- tial = as _a very sloppy and unattra a,ive entrance to the City Comm Shearer° stated she-would - -'like,- to see ” the Bodega Avenue' ar,ea,-s�tudied,.,. Comm. :Waite stated ,that this area.is outside the,City and. 'preference•should given to study areas within the City.. Comm. Shearer. moved to recommend denial o,f.the J. Bernardi County referral. That the Planning Department -do, a ;stu'dy of . that area and a'xecommendation be.�made for rezoning,. The..motion was seconded by - Comm.. Hoffman. Tl e. motion, failed with 1 affirmative, 3` negative and` 2" absentee votes: -4= a - V' _ t A . f ' Cit- of �Petaluma�, PTannn C= ommissibn'`Minu'es, pril 1:'8 "; 197 •• `� ' JOHN A BERNARDI Comm; Lavin moved ib recommend approval of the J.' COUNTY REFERRAL FOR Bernardi application (County.referr, and that the y -- g to review • the ::Site =A USE IFICATION• it CLAR' C of 'Petal`uma reserve: •the ri ht (.Continued):, Des =ign p =lans - for the° projecf 'and if the r`ight'is n'ot " extended that certain des >gn changes be. recommended (1) . - ,that the buildings b:e `co,nstructed' of ,wood;' • and (2) ; thaw adequate' land'- seapiig be 'provided.. ' The smo.'tion was, seconded by Comm, " ,. Wa'ite The ' - mbt ion carried' with -' 3' affirmative, 1 ',negative and 2 absentee: votes AARON` MELLI'NG FOR Mr. Hall explained 'the ,re:quest. of Aaron _Melling for' GOLDEN` :WEST GLASS; CO- the ;Golden West Glass Company for' a , gllass. glazing and - Q. EVALUATION% replacement • bus.in'ess ; for structure's and autouiob'iles at Ustt .PERMIT REQUEST /` 10,04 ,Lakeville Hi.ghW4y,, The development' is proposed SITE DESIGN REVIEW 'to be, ..located in the front p'o,rtion of •a large: •ware- _- house -type building; the back 'portion is utilized by` Forman P'lumbin,g as a warehouse,: The parcel is located in, ' the ,vicinity ' • - o -f' the. Lakeville ~Highway,* /101 .int'erchange;. There 'are. 7 parking s;pace'sj along, the' front of: the building= .and °2 across 'the. driveway i:n:.front .of the tehce enclosing the property: This is °the park ing available for the +glass '­ glazing business The .Public .Hearing, to` consider' "the Environmental Impae_t' Questionnaire was ° n opee Nor comments were 'off ere - d' from the aiudience and'the„ Pub - 1 .c - Hearing was c'lo,sed Goinii.. Lavin ;moved "to, direct the Pl'a�nning D rec.,tor - to prepare and post a ^ ,Negative Declaration for the protect, The motion. was seconded -by.Comm.' Shearer.: The motion, carried with -- 4' offirma'tive -, and 2" absentee votes The, Pub, lic- 'Heafthg was; opened to .consider ;the Use Permit : , :No: comments: were o from' "the' audience and the Public Hearing was closed» Comm Shearer' moved to„ °grant; the Use. :P -erint -to. allow fore 'a glass' g "lazing and r r.eplae'ement biisiress :f.or structures. and automobiles, The motion was seconded by Coman.. Lavin. The,;motion carried with' _4 affirmative and 2 absentee votes e iG'omm , S'hearer moved tq; approve , the s "i -te design for the pr:opo'sed project. with copdit'ons of:' app;roual `as''recommended ,`by the staff. and modified 'by ttie Arch - z tecturdl- and; :'Site' Design Review ;Commit'tee,; The motion Was seconded by. Comm. Lavin:: The motion carried with `4 'affirma :tive and .2 ,abs.entee votes:. ROBERT HUNT; The ap;p,licant. requested that. due to illness in the A PEAL QF COUNTY family this item be heard .ate. a later date,. . p REF ERRAL, RE'COMMENDATION$+ , 7. 2. M r City of Petaluma Planning Commission. Minutes,, April 18, - 1.978 AMENDMENT TO "ZONING Mr. Hall explained 'that- considera "tion was toe be given ORDINANCE- MASONRY. for a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to require creen-Ing SCREENING ALONG of' residential parcels from. - arterial. and Q.1 ector ARTERIAL & COLLECTOR: streets of masonry construction; if they M-41411 on STREETS =E. I,:Q.:, those streets., An overall G;ty O;r:dinarice requiring°, . . EVALUATION /ZONINGT masonry ,materi ;l als will avoid, ong range.;pr.oble- ms ORDINANCE AMENDMENT; -and generate 'cons s,tency•among,screening of_this type., ' He stated ,that. a :masonry fence is 'more' pleasing and stable and, less likely to be - torn ;down. The City Council forwarded. to. the,'Planning: Commission a proposed'_ amendment to; the, Zoning `Ordinance, for a iecommendat "ion, and report:, ;Th_ s ordinance applies only. to subdivisions.. With a conventional- . vi.s on, a, 6 f'oOt, fence. ;is permitted and if a ,10- foot. fence 'is . needed for a isound barrier, a modifIcatio'n. to the amendment .would be .'required,. Comm. Waite explained If any.. new parcels were - created along an arterial, street,, those gar_'cels would .come under the requirement for ma's °onry fencing:. The Public , Hearing was opened, to consider' . the Environmenaal Impac,t Question- . _. , na r l e. No co' On;ts =were :of "fer.ed from.. the' audience .,and the Public Hearing was closed Comm. Shearer moved to . direct the . Planning Director to prepare -land post, a Negative Declaration for the project. The motion seconded'. ;by Comm. .Lavin,. The emotion carried with 4 affirmative and .2 absent•ee.. votes +...' The 'Public Hearing was ;opened to c'onsder he; Zoning; Ordinance Amen_dment'. Np comments were offered from the•audience and :the Public Hearing was closed. Comm. -Lav, n moved, to amend, Zoning- Ordinance No, 10- 72:N S'. to require •,screen- ing of residential parcels., -from arterial and collector streets by masonry const.ruction.by ° Section 23 -20.8 to, the:•City. Council,: The. motion was seconded y b _ . Comm.' - Hoffman. The'_ motion carried' by 4: affirmative. ;and 2 ',absentee _ vot`e$: . ARCHITECTURAL ;& S°ITE Comm. Lavin' moved that, Rogers .Hoffman ;be' appointed to DESIGN; REVIEW' the Arch , ect.ura'l and S to "Design, Comm ttee,." . The COMMITTEE:' motion ; was seconded, by Comm. Shearer:.. The motion: car -,; vied with 3; aff :irmative,,..2 ,absentee,, L vote,. ADJOURNMENT;: There, being ,no further business, the meeting adjourned, at 10.45' P. m.. Che "irman Attest '