PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #11.A
SUBJECT/TITLE:
GENERAL PLAN/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH LAND USE ELEMENT PLANNING AREA ‘E’ (ST. ANDREWS TRACT) TO ELIMINATE DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY POLICIES LU-E-1 ‘A’ AND ‘B’; AND ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution adopting a General Plan/Local Coastal Program Amendment to the City of Pismo Beach Land Use Element Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract) to eliminate development restrictions imposed by Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’; and adopting a Negative Declaration.
BACKGROUND:
On March 22, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted resolution PC-R-2022-008 (Attachment 3) recommending that the City Council adopt an amendment to the General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) to eliminate Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’ of the Land Use Element for Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract), a diagram of which is provided as Attachment 2.
Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’ (Policies) were originally adopted as part of an update to the GP/LCP in 2012. During this update, and prior to the Planning Commission’s review of updates to the City’s different planning area standards, a constituent requested the inclusion of Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’ in the St. Andrews Tract to require redevelopment or new development throughout the neighborhood to remain at the same front yard setback as existed on January 1, 2012. This request was incorporated into the update, which was subsequently adopted by the City Council on March 20, 2012. The GP/LCP update was publicly noticed in accordance with all legal requirements; however, based on review of the public record, it is unclear how thoroughly the policies and their effect on the neighborhood were discussed in 2012. The existing policies, as adopted in 2012, read as follows:
LU-E-1 Concept: The St. Andrews Tract Planning Area shall be retained as a residential neighborhood with Low and High Density residential uses. The focus is on conserving the existing housing stock and assuring that home additions and replacements are compatible with the scale and character of the existing development. This will be achieved by:
LU-E-1 a. Limiting the front yard setback for additions and reconstruction of existing homes or construction of a new home to the front yard setback in place on the existing home as of January 1, 2012. The front yard setback for the single undeveloped lot in this area, APN 010-500-003, shall comply with the implementing ordinance;
11.A-1Council Agenda 4-19-2022
LU-E-1 b. For additions or reconstruction of existing homes and the construction of new homes. A front elevation minimum 10’ building stepback from the first floor to the second floor.
The Policies require that new and redeveloped structures be set back from the front property line to the same extent that the structures were constructed as of January 1, 2012, and in a pattern that is similar to adjacent homes. Because the St. Andrews Tract was already largely built out at the time the Policies were enacted, the Policies affected new structures as they were being built or as properties were redeveloped.
However, these Policies had unintended consequences that surfaced with the recent application of Richard E. Mittry, Mittry Family Trust (Applicant) for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) and Architectural Review Permit (ARP) (Project P21-000015) for a new single-family residence at 171 Naomi Avenue. The Applicant’s request for the CDP could not be accommodated under the Policies. The unique shape of the lot and the location of the existing structure result in a setback requirement of 51 feet from the front property line. This is far greater than the R-1 zoning standard front setback of 20 feet, and the design of the home proposes a front setback of 24 feet. Additionally, the project proposed a second story with variable stepbacks from the first floor, whereas a 10-foot stepback along the entirety of the front elevation is required by Policy LU-E-1 ‘b’, regardless of overall structural design. As such, the proposed design requires a GP/LCP amendment.
Amending the General Plan/Local Coastal Program
A General Plan or Local Coastal Program amendment may include revisions to text, goals, policies, actions, or land use designations. The Planning Commission is required to make a written recommendation to the City Council on whether to approve, approve in modified form, or disapprove, the proposed amendment. The 1983 Zoning Code does not contain specific findings for approval of legislative actions. In order to help guide the Planning Commission’s recommendation, the Planning Commission based its findings on the following findings taken from Section 17.56.070 of the 1998 Non-Coastal Zoning Code, which requires findings for GP/LCP amendments outside the Coastal Zone:
17.56.070 Findings
A. Findings for General Plan Amendments. An amendment to the general plan may be approved only if all of the following findings of fact can be made in a positive manner:
1. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the general plan;
2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the city;
3. The site is physically suitable (including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of physical constraints) for the requested/anticipated land use development(s); and
4. The proposed amendment is in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
11.A-2Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Additionally, an amendment to the GP/LCP will not take effect until the amendment has been certified by the California Coastal Commission, in compliance with the Coastal Act.
It should be noted that this proposed amendment will not impact or delay the comprehensive GP/LCP Update.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On March 22, 2022, following consideration of staff analysis and testimony by members of the public and the applicant, including extensive review of the previous GP/LCP update from 2012, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council eliminate Land Use Element Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’. An excerpt from the minutes of this meeting is provided as Attachment 4. The Planning Commission found that the Policies had resulted in unintended consequences by imposing development restrictions on a majority of the single-family residences within the St. Andrews Tract. The Planning Commission indicated that such specific design language is more appropriately placed within the zoning code and should not be included in a General Plan, which is to be “general” by its very definition. As such, the scale of future development within the St. Andrews Tract is limited and elimination of the policies would require new development and reconstruction of residences to be built in compliance with the R-1 development standards and design guidelines of the 1983 Zoning Code, consistent with the surrounding subdivisions and land uses. The amended GP/LCP policy would read as follows:
LU-E-1 Concept: The St. Andrews Tract Planning Area shall be retained as a residential neighborhood with Low and High Density residential uses. The focus is on conserving the existing housing stock and assuring that home additions and replacements are compatible with the scale and character of the existing development. This will be achieved by:
LU-E-1 a. Limiting the front yard setback for additions and reconstruction of existing homes or construction of a new home to the front yard setback in place on the existing home as of January 1, 2012. The front yard setback for the single undeveloped lot in this area, APN 010-500-003, shall comply with the implementing ordinance;
LU-E-1 b. For additions or reconstruction of existing homes and the construction of new homes. A front elevation minimum 10’ building stepback from the first floor to the second floor.
Neighborhood Analysis
Staff conducted a survey of the St. Andrews Tract and counted an estimated 112 single- family residences with front setbacks that range between 8 feet and 51 feet. The average setback ranges between 20 and 25 feet, consistent with the 1983 Zoning Code. Nine of the 112 homes have setbacks on the outlier of the range; they are located at the northern and southern edges of Seacliff Drive, on the corner of Seacliff Drive and Naomi Avenue, and the street cul-de-sac of Naomi Avenue. These properties are disproportionately affected by Policy LU-E-1 ‘a’ compared to others in the same neighborhood. Of the 112
11.A-3Council Agenda 4-19-2022
homes, 29 are two-story, of which 25 (86%) were made legal non-conforming for second story stepbacks due to the adoption of land use policy LU-E-1 ‘b’ in 2012.
Cumulative Effects of the Request
If the City Council approves the GP/LCP amendment as recommended by the Planning Commission, and if the amendment is certified by the California Coastal Commission, future development and/or redevelopment of properties in the St. Andrews Tract will comply with the 1983 Zoning Code as it relates to development standards, including setbacks, lot coverage, height, and building area. For the R-1 District, residences must be set back a minimum of 20 feet from the front property line and must comply with the development and design standards applicable to single-family dwellings pursuant to Section 17.105.135 of the 1983 Zoning Code, which include standards related to attaining compatibility with the existing scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood including but not limited to building form and mass, façade articulation, exterior materials, roof form and style, and window shape and style. Specifically, Section 17.105.135(A) requires second floors to be limited to 80% of the first-floor area.
Furthermore, eliminating Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’ would afford residents in the St.
Andrews Tract the opportunity to apply for a Variance from specific development standards in the 1983 Zoning Code instead of a General Plan Amendment, which is consistent with the process followed and allowed in other neighborhoods in the city. A Variance allows a property owner, under special circumstances, to develop a property in a manner that varies from zoning regulation requirements when strict enforcement of the regulations would make it difficult to develop the parcel, cause unnecessary hardship, or result in inconsistency with the intent of zoning regulations. In the absence of Policies LU- E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’, the project applicant would not have needed to request a variance for the property, as the proposed setback is consistent with the zoning district requirements.
A General Plan is a fundamental tool in guiding a city through change and growth. It addresses the physical development of a city and, when used in conjunction with a larger body of City Council policies, provides direction for decision-making relating to City services and resources. As community needs and values change, a city will periodically review and update its General Plan so that it remains a realistic document to achieve the community’s vision. While it is not uncommon for private property owners to apply for General Plan Amendments, it is uncommon that objective or specific development restrictions like those in Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’ are in a General Plan in the first place.
Approval of the Planning Commission’s recommendation to eliminate the policies will allow homes a consistent process for varying from specific development standards instead of having to undergo an extensive and costly General Plan amendment process.
Environmental Determination
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff prepared an Initial Study for the project. After completion of the initial study, staff found that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, that the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not necessary, and no mitigation is required. Therefore, a Negative Declaration (pursuant to
11.A-4Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., and CA Code of Regulations Title 14 Section 15000 et seq.) was prepared for the project (Attachment 5). Adoption of the Resolution provided as Attachment 1 would effect the Council’s adoption of this Negative Declaration.
Conclusion and Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommends the elimination of Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’ from the General Plan Land Use Element Planning Area ‘E’, on the basis that the change would be internally consistent with the General Plan, would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the city, and is in compliance with CEQA. Staff recommends that the Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the amendment and adopting the Negative Declaration.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact as a result of staff’s recommended action. The cost of the process to amend the General Plan is accounted for by the application fees received from the Applicant.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Modify the Planning Commission’s recommendation, and then approve the GP/LCP Amendment.
2. Do not accept the Planning Commission recommendation; deny the GP/LCP Amendment. Should the Council act to deny the General Plan Amendment, any future development in the St. Andrews Tract would continue to be required to comply with Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’.
3. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
1.A. Exhibit A to Resolution: Modified General Plan Policy Exhibit
2. St. Andrews Tract Diagram
3. March 22, 2022 Planning Commission Resolution PC-R-2022-008
4. March 22, 2022 Planning Commission Minutes
5.Initial Study/Negative Declaration (online attachment only; available in the Access Pismo public records portal at www.pismobeach.org/accesspismo1) Prepared by: Meeting Date: April 19, 2022
Megan Martin, Planning Manager
Submitted by: Matthew Downing, Community Development Director Assistant City Manager Approval:
1 Full URL:
https://accesspismo.pismobeach.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=421689&dbid=0&repo=Laserfiche
11.A-5Council Agenda 4-19-2022
RESOLUTION NO. R-2022-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH,
CALIFORNIA APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH LAND USE ELEMENT PLANNING AREA ‘E’ (ST. ANDREWS TRACT) TO ELIMINATE DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY POLICIES LU-E-1 ‘A’ AND ‘B’; AND ADOPTING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2022, the Planning Commission duly considered the application of Richard E. Mittry, Mittry Family Trust, for a General Plan/Local Coastal Program Amendment (Project P21-000054) to modify the St. Andrews Tract Policies LU- E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’ to allow a new single-family residence to be constructed at 171 Naomi Avenue; and
WHEREAS, following consideration of staff analysis and testimony by the applicant and members of the public, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve a General Plan/Local Coastal Program Amendment to eliminate Land Use Element Planning Area ‘E’ Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing on April 19, 2022 on the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Amendment, at which all interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation, and public hearing that, the following circumstances exist:
A. FINDINGS FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM:
1. Policy LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’ of the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Land Use Element, Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract) were adopted in 2012 with limited public dialogue and resulted in several existing two-story single-family residences within the tract becoming legal non-conforming with the second-story stepback requirements of Policy LU-E-1 ‘b’.
2. The proposed amendments are internally consistent with the remainder of the General Plan and Local Coastal Program. The modifications will allow for single- family residences to be developed in conformance with the implementing ordinance (Section 17.102.020 of the 1983 Zoning Code) which implements the goals and policies of the General Plan and Land Use Element. The modifications will also allow for the two-story single-family residences to be developed with second-story stepbacks consistent with the implementing ordinance and existing pattern of development in the St. Andrews Tract. As such, the language change will not alter the residential character of the St. Andrews Tract, and the Tract will Attachment 1
11.A-6Council Agenda 4-19-2022
continue to be developed in a manner consistent with the density standards of the General Plan and the neighborhood.
3. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the city. The amendment would defer land use limitations in the St. Andrews Tract to the implementing ordinance. This change would allow residences within the tract to be constructed with front setbacks in compliance with the implementing ordinance (Section 17.102.020 of the 1983 Zoning Code), and will allow for two-story residences in the tract to be developed with second-story stepbacks consistent with the implementing ordinance and existing development in the St. Andrews Tract. The change would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the city as properties will be developed or redeveloped consistent with the 1983 Zoning Code, Building Code, and other applicable state and federal laws to ensure protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood and city’s residents and conform to the existing pattern and character of development in the St. Andrews Tract.
4. The St. Andrews Tract is physically suitable (including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of physical constraints) for the anticipated land use development and is largely built out. The proposed amendment would not result in any land use limitations or cause an effect of land use in the Tract as the Tract will remain a single-family neighborhood. Right-of- way, public access, and all improvements in the neighborhood are established.
5. With adoption of the Negative Declaration, the proposed amendment is in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach hereby adopts the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Amendment P21-000054 to eliminate Planning Area ‘E’ Policies LU-E-1 ‘a’ and ‘b’, as depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach hereby adopts the Negative Declaration with the above findings, which is incorporated herein by this reference.
UPON MOTION OF Council Member , seconded by Council Member , the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach this 19th day of April 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
Attachment 1
11.A-7Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Approved: Attest:
________________________ ________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Attachment 1
11.A-8Council Agenda 4-19-2022
St. Andrews Tract
Planning Area E
Background
The St. Andrews Planning Area is almost completely developed with single-family homes, apartments and a city fire station.
The ocean frontage consists of single family residences and Memory Park. These homes are adjacent to highly erodible cliffs, with rocky shoreline and small pocket beaches below. During low tide there are small beaches accessible to the public.
There is a bluff top access from Naomi Avenue dedicated to the city and connected to a city easement south of the planning area in the Spindrift Planning Area. This access leads to a spectacular viewpoint, which is under private ownership. There is a public access easement from Seacliff to Spyglass Park in the adjacent Spyglass Planning area.
Policies
LU- Concept
E-1
The St. Andrews Tract Planning Area shall be retained as a residential neighborhood with Low and High Density residential uses. The focus is on conserving the existing housing stock and assuring that home additions and replacements are compatible with the scale and character of the existing development.
Attachment 1.A
11.A-9Council Agenda 4-19-2022
LU- Bluff Setback and Protection
E-2
The bluff top setback for development shall exceed the Policy S-3 and Coastal Zone Code Section 17.078.050 requirement for a 100 year bluff retreat with the addition of a 10’ buffer . The minimum bluff top setback shall be no less than 25 feet from the top of the bluff. A geology study and report shall be required for any development near the top of the bluff and a greater setback may be required based on the findings of the report. Appropriate erosion control measures shall be required for any project along the blufftops and shall specify methods for maintenance.
LU- Viewpoint Marking
E-3
The bluff-top access from Naomi Street and the Memory Park area should be clearly signed for public coastal viewing access.
LU- Seacliff Drive Access
E-4
The sign marked "Public Pedestrian and Bicycle Access - No Vehicles" directing bicyclists and pedestrians to a narrow road behind Coburn shall be maintained. The existing sign shall be revised to note beach viewing access and Spyglass Park. When beach access from Spyglass park is completed, a beach access sign shall also be added to this location.
LU- Sidewalk Improvements
E-5
The sidewalk on Shell Beach Road between Seacliff and Coburn shall be improved for a minimum width of 5’ for safe pedestrian and handicapped access.
LU- Beach access to Memory Park
E-6
The City shall consider opportunities for beach access to Memory Park.
Attachment 1.A
11.A-10Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract)
Attachment 2
11.A-11Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-12Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-13Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-14Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-15Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-16Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-17Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-18Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-19Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-20Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-21Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-22Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-23Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-24Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-25Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Attachment 3
11.A-26Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Pismo Beach Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2022
Adopt a Resolution approving Project P21-000055 for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for the demolition of an existing residence, construction of a new 3,728 square-foot two-story single-family residence and adopting Categorical Exemption No. 2021-024.
Presenting Staff:
Michael Gruver, Associate Planner
Public Hearing/Call for Public Comment:
Public comment received via email from the following: Effie McDermott The following commented:
Scott Martin, RRM / Applicant Representative, commented (in-person) Craig Cummings, commented (via zoom)
Action:Adopt a Resolution approving Project P21-000055 for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for the demolition of an existing residence, construction of a new 3,728 square-foot two-story single- family residence and adopting Categorical Exemption No. 2021-024.
Motion: Van Rozeboom
Second: Wills
Vote:The motion passed on the following vote:
Ayes: 5 Van Rozeboom, Wills, Oberhelman, Malone Prichard, Jones.
Noes: 0 None
Absent: 0 None
Abstain: 0 None
Recused: 0 None
LEGISLATIVE RECORD:Resolution No. PC-R-2022-007 adopted.
Item 8.B: CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN/LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH LAND USE
ELEMENT PLANNING AREA ‘E’ (ST. ANDREWS TRACT) TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY POLICY LU-E-1 'A' AND 'B' ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 171 NAOMI AVENUE;
AND, A REQUEST FOR A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE DEMOLITION
OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND CONSTRUCTION OF
A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE, ORNAMENTAL LANDSCAPING,
DECKING, AND LAP POOL; AND CONSIDERATION OF A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ST. ANDREWS TRACT PLANNING AREA AND R-1 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, 1983 CODE) ZONING DISTRICT. THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE COASTAL Attachment 4
11.A-27Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Pismo Beach Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2022
ZONE AND IS APPEALABLE TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL
COMMISSION. APN 010-501-005. (MARTIN).
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution recommending approval to the City Council of amendments to the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Land Use Element Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract) to modify Policy LU-E-1 'a' and 'b' for the subject property at 171 Naomi Avenue (P21-000054), and approving Project P21-000015 for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for the demolition of an existing residence, construction of a new 3,648- square-foot two-story single-family residence; and adopting a Negative Declaration.
Presenting Staff:
Megan Marin, Planning Manager
Matthew Downing, Community Development Director
Public Hearing / Call for Public Comment:
Public comment received via email from the following: Adam Werner, Brian Kreowski, David Jewell, Effie McDermott, John Frady, Jennifer McGettigan, Keone Kauo,Loch Soderquist,Mark Burnes,Michelle Benson, Michael Moore, Frances Romero, Richard Loughead, Ron Penir, Scott Newton.
The following commented:
Frances Romero, Applicant Representative, commented (in-person).
Keone Kauo commented (in person).
Adam Werner commented (in-person).
Commissioner Malone Prichard disclosed ex-parte communications with the owner.
Commissioner Wills disclosed ex-parte communications with the property owner.
Action:Adopt a Resolution recommending approval to the City Council of Amendments to the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Land Use Element Planning Area ‘E’ (St. Andrews Tract) by eliminating Policy LU-E-1 'a' and Policy LU-E-1 'b' (Project No. P21—000054); and approving Project No. P21- 000015, for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for the demolition of an existing residence, construction of a new 3,648- square-foot two-story single-family residence; and adopting a Negative Declaration.
Motion: Malone Prichard
Second: Wills
Attachment 4
11.A-28Council Agenda 4-19-2022
Pismo Beach Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2022
Vote:The motion passed on the following vote:
Ayes: 5 Malone Prichard, Wills, Oberhelman, Van Rozeboom, Jones Noes: 0 None
Absent: 0 None
Abstain: 0 None
Recused: 0 None
LEGISLATIVE RECORD:Resolution No. PC-R-2022-008 adopted.
9. BUSINESS ITEMS May be reordered and heard prior to Public Hearings None.
10. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
The Commission welcomed Commissioner Oberhelman to the Planning Commission.
11. ADJOURNMENT
At 8:18p.m.
MINUTES APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 12, 2022.
ATTEST:
____________________
Elsa Perez, CMC
Planning Commission Secretary
Attachment 4
11.A-29Council Agenda 4-19-2022