HomeMy WebLinkAbout1966-11-15MINUTES
OF THE
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Chambers, Civic Center
Huntington Beach, California
NOTE: A TAPE RECORDING OF THIS MEETING IS ON
FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICE.
TUESDAY4 NOVEMBER 15, 1966
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Miller, Lawson, Bazil, Larkin, Tom, Royer,
Worthy.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None.
MINUTES: On motion by Worthy and seconded by Miller, the
minutes of the Huntington Beach Planning Com-
mission of October 18, and October 25, 1966,
were accepted as transcribed and mailed by the
Secretary.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP„NO. 6327
Subdivider: Huntington Harbour Corp.
The Subdivision Committee Report was read by
the Secretary.
Richard Maitland, representing the applicant,
addressed the Commission and gave his reasons for the request.
Berry Burcas, architect for the developer,
addressed the Commission and explained the reasons for the
proposed cul-de-sacs. Mr. Burcas further discussed the lot
frontages on cul-de-sacs.
The Commission held a lengthy discussion.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LAWS09 AND SECONDED BY
LARKIN TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 6327 UPON THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AS AMENDED:
1. The Tentative Map received October 28, 1966, shall be the
approved layout.
2. Approval of this Tentative Map shall be null and void
unless UV #66-61 is approved by the City Council.
3. Either Lots C, D, E and F shall be eliminated or a mainte-
nance district shall be established prior to recordation
of,the tract.
4. The property line radii shall be to City Standards.
5. All public streets shall comply with City Standards.
6. All waterways shall be deeded in fee to the City.
7. All property within Tentative Tract No. 6327 shall annex
to the Harbor Maintenance District now being formed.
8. All utilities shall be installed underground.
11/15/66.
Page No. 2
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966
9. All "Standard Conditions of Approval" for tentative tracts
that are applicable shall be complied with.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Worthy, Miller,
NOES: Bazil.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAINED: Tom.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Lawson, Larkin, Royer.
USE VARIANCE NO. 66-61
Applicant - Huntington Harbour Corp. To Permit the following:
1) "A" and "C" Streets to be less
than 60 ft. in width;
audience.
2) Waterfront lots 12 thru 25 to
be a minimum of 5000 sq. ft.
in area;
3) Knuckle lots having less than
45 ft. of frontage and less than
60 ft. of width at the 20 ft.
setback line on Lots 9 thru 25
and between cul-de-sacs on Lot 28;
4) Area of Lots 26 thru 31 to be
averaged to meet the minimum
lot requirements;
5) Lots 1 and 43 to have less than
60 ft. of frontage;
6) Minimum front yard setback of
10 ft. with a 20 ft. setback
for garages entered directly
from a street;
7) 10 ft. rear yard setback having
less than the required 900 sq.
ft. of open space.
The hearing was opened to the
Richard Maitland, representing the
applicant, addressed the Commission and gave his reasons for the
request.
There being no other comment the
hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND
SECONDED BY WORTHY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF USE VARIANCE NO.
66-61 TO THE CITY COUNCIL UPON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AS
AMENDED:
1. All streets shall comply with standards proposed by the
Department of Public Works and Approved by both the Planning
Commission (August 3, 1965) and City Council (September 7, 1965).
2. The minimum front yard shall be 10 ft. except the minimum
front yard for garages entered directly from the street
shall be 22 ft. This condition of approval is not general
in nature and a precise plan shall be submitted to the
.Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of any
building permits. Said plan shall delineate the house
location on each lot.
-2- 11/15/66.
Page No. 3
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966
3. A tree, equivalent to a 30 inch box tree, as approved
by the Park Supervisor, shall be planted in the front
yard of each lot and in the exterior side yard of each
corner lot.
4. The rear yard setback on waterfront lots may be 10 ft.
and the 900 sq. ft. of open space on waterfront lots
need not be provided.
5. Waterfront lots 12 thru 25 to be a minimum of 5000 sq.
ft. in area.
6. Knuckle lots having less than 45 ft. of frontage and
less than 60 ft. of width at the 20 ft. setback line
on lots 9 thru 25 and between cul-de-sacs on Lot 28.
'7. Area of Lots 26 thru 31 to be averaged to meet the
minimum lot requirements.
8. Lots 1 and 43 to have less than 60 ft. of frontage.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Miller, Larkin, Bazil, Worthy.
NOES: Royer, Tom, Lawson
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 6322
USE VARIANCE NO. 66-58
Applicant - Robert Raab
The Secretary read a letter
submitted by R. M. Galloway, engineer for the applicant,
requesting a continuance on Tentative Tract Map No. 6322
and Use Variance No. 66-58 to December 6, 1966.
The hearing was opened to the
audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY WORTHY
AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO CONTINUE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
NO. 6322 TO DECEMBER 6, 1966, AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Miller, Larkin, Bazil, Worthy, Royer, Tom, Lawson.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
'THE MOTION CARRIED.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY WORTHY AND
SECONDED BY MILLER TO CONTINUE THE HEARING ON USE VARIANCE
NO. 66-58 TO DECEMBER 6, 1966, AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Miller, Larkin, Bazil,.Worthy, Royer, Tom, Lawson.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 6317
Subdivider - J. Holtz
The Subdivision Committee Report
was read by the Secretary.
Robert Galloway, engineer for
the developer, addressed the Commission and stated that there
-3- 11/15/66.
Page No. 4.
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
were no objections to the conditions suggested by the Sub-
division Committee.
Don Grossen, representing the
Home Owners Association, addressed the Commission and asked
questions regarding the lot sizes, setbacks and the fence
facing Garfield Avenue.
The Secretary explained the frontage
road.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY WORTHY AND
SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 6317 UPON
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. The Tentative Map received November 14, 1966, shall be
the approved layout.
2. Approval of this Tentative Map shall be null and void
unless UV #66-57 is approved by the City Council.
3. The frontage road shall be improved to Department of
Public Works Standards and said improvements shall include
a screen wall.
4. All public streets shall comply with City Standards.
5. A 6 ft. chain link fence or equivalent shall be constructed
along the Southern California Edison Company Easement.
6. The well located on Lot 90 shall be abandoned in accord
with City Standards prior to the development of Lot 90.
7. All utilities shall be installed underground.
8. All "Standard Conditions of Approval" for tentative tracts
that are applicable shall be complied with.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Miller, Larkin, Bazil, Worthy, Royer, Tom, Lawson.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
USE VARIANCE NO. 66-57 To permit the following:
Applicant - J. Holtz
1) Front yard setbacks of 10 ft.
with side entry garages;
2) 5000 sq. ft. minimum lots
with 6000 sq. ft. lot average;
3) 50 ft. minimum lot width with
60 ft. minimum average at the
setback line;
4) Street sections as approved
by the City Council on Sept. 7, 1965.
The Staff Report was read by the
Secretary.
The hearing was opened to the
audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed.
-4- 11/15/66.
Page No. 5
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
Commissioner Royer stated that he
is in disagreement on lot sizes, setbacks of 10 ft. and suggested
that a study should be made pertaining to lot sizes of 7,200 sq.
ft. at the next study session.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LAWSON AND
SECONDED BY WORTHY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF USE VARIANCE NO.
66-57 TO THE CITY COUNCIL UPON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. All streets shall comply with standards proposed by the
Department of Public Works and approved by both the Planning
Commission (August 3, 1965) and City Council (September 7, 1965).
2. The minimum front yard shall be 10 ft. except the minimum
front yard for garages entered directly from the street
shall be 22 ft. This condition of approval is not general
in nature and a precise plan shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of any
building permits. Said plan shall delineate the house
location on each lot.
3. A tree, equivalent to a 30 inch box tree, as approved by
the Park Supervisor, shall be planted in the front yard
of each lot and in the exterior side yard of each corner
lot.
4. The minimum lot frontage shall not be less than 50 ft. wide
with 5000 sq. ft. of lot area. An average lot width of 60 ft.
of frontage with 6000 sq. ft. of lot area shall be provided
for each six contiguous lots in a block.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Lawson, Worthy, Bazil, Miller
NOES: Larkin, Royer, Tom.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 6334
Subdivider - Dutch Haven Homes
Subdivision Committee Report was
read by the Secretary.
John Horner, representing the
applicant, addressed the Commission and explained the proposal.
Commission discussion was held.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY TOM AND SECONDED
BY LAWSON TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 6334 UPON THE FOLLOW-
ING CONDITIONS:
1. The Tentative Map received October 13, 1966 shall be the
approved layout.
2. Edinger Avenue and Waikiki Lane shall be fully improved to
City Standards.
3. All utilities shall be installed underground.
4. Approval of this tentative map shall not be effective until
the City Council has approved zoning that will implement the
proposed land use.
5. All "Standard Conditions of Approval" for tentative tracts
that are applicable shall be complied with.
-5- 11/15/66.
Page No. 6
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
ROLL CALL VOTE:'
AYES: Lawson, Worthy, Bazil, Miller, Larkin, Royer, Tom.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED. -
ZONE CASE NO. 66-59 Change of zone from R-A Residential
ApRlicant - Carl Arthofer Agricultural District and C-2 Com-
munity Business District to R-5
Office Professional District and
C-2 Community Business District with
setback provisions.
The Staff Report was read by the
Secretary.
The hearing was opened to the
audience.
Horace Camp, representing the
applicant, addressed the Commission and gave his reasons for
the request.
There being no other comment the
hearing was closed.
The Commission held a lengthy
discussion.
RESOLUTION NO, 66-59 A Resolution of the City Planning
Commission Recommending Approval of
Zone Case No. 66-59 to the City Council.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LAWSON AND
SECONDED BY MILLER TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 66-59 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF ZONE CASE NO. 66-59 TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE
FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. A 2.5 acre site is too small for development of a commercial
center.
2. The property is situated on a mile intersection.
3. The R-5 is a medium density zone and it conforms to the
Master Plan of Land Use.
4. Peat conditions exist on the subject property.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Lawson, Worthy, Bazil, Miller, Larkin, Royer, Tom.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
ZONE CASE NO. 66-43 - Continued Change of zone from M-1
Applicant - Freeway Industrial Park Light Industrial District to
C-2 Community Business District
with setback provisions.
The Secretary read a letter submitted
by James Croul, representing the applicant, requesting a continuance
of Zone Case No. 66-43 to December 6, 1966.
The hearing was opened to the
audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY WORTHY AND
SECONDED BY TOM TO CONTINUE THE HEARING ON ZONE CASE NO. 66-43
TO DECEMBER 6, 1966, AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT.
-6- 11/15/66.
Page No. 7
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
ROLL CALL VOTE-::
AYES: Lawson, Worthy, Bazil, Miller, Larkin, Royer, Tom.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
USE VARIANCE NO. 66-60 To allow the construction of a
Applicant - First Baptist Church church in the M-1 Light Industrial
District.
Secretary.
audience.
for the First Baptist Church,
explained the proposal.
The Staff Report was read by the
The hearing was opened to the
Alfred Ficks, Planning Developer
addressed the Commission and
Bill Powell, Director of the First
Baptist Church, addressed the Commission and stated that this
location for the proposed Church was recommended by various
planners and church architects because of its proximity to the
Golden West College and it will serve as a buffer zone between
the shopping center and the college.
James Croul, Coldwell, Banker Co.,
addressed the Commission and stated that there was no other
property available for the proposed church. He further stated
that this would be an asset to the community.
There being no other comment
the hearing was closed.
Commission held a lengthy discussion.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY TOM AND SECONDED
BY ROYER TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 66-60 FOR THE FOLLOWING
REASONS:
1. The proposed church site is well related to the existing college.
2. The church site is a well planned facility and will serve as
a buffer between the college and the commercial center to the
east.
3. Granting of this variance will not set a precedent for other
decisions.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY TOM AND SECONDED
BY ROYER TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 66-60 WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
1. Gothard Street shall be fully improved to City Standards.
Improvements shall include street trees, street signs and
street lights.
2. The water, sewer, and fire hydrant system shall be approved
by the Department of Public Works and Fire Department.
3. The property shall participate in the local drainage assess-
ment district at the time of development.
4. Preliminary and final soil reports shall be submitted by an
approved private soils engineer to the City prior to issuance
of building permits.
-7- 11/15/66.
Page No. 8
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
5. All utilities shall be installed underground.
6. Off-street parking facilities including landscaping,
arrangement, access, paving and striping shall conform to
Article 979.
7. All provisions of Title 19 shall be complied with.
8. Fire service access shall be approved by the Fire Department.
9. A division of land shall be filed with the Board of Zoning
Adjustments.
10. The driveways shall be 30 ft. wide.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Lawson, Worthy, Bazil, Miller, Larkin, Royer, Tom.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
USE VARIANCE NO. 66-62 To permit the establishment of an
Applicant - Douglas Aircraft employee welfare store consistent
with Douglas employment practices,
for sale of general merchandise,
including but not limited to jewelry,
clothing, appliances and sporting goods.
The hearing was opened to the audience,
there being no comment the hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND
SECONDED BY WORTHY TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 66-62.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Lawson, Worthy, Bazil, Miller, Larkin, Royer, Tom.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
PRECISE PLAN NO. 66-2
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
Floyd Belsito, Associate Planner,
informed the Commission that the Resolution of Intent proposes
to precise plan the alignment of "A" and "B" Street.
The hearing was opened to the audience,
there being no comment the hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LAWSON AND
SECONDED BY MILLER TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF PRECISE PLAN NO. 66-2
BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Lawson, Worthy, Bazil, Miller, Larkin, Royer, Tom.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
-8- 11/15/66.
Page No. 9
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
ZONE CASE NO. 66-57
RESOLUTION OF INTENT Change of zone from:
1) R-2-X Two Family Residence District (County)
and C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District
to C-4 Highway Commercial District
with setback provisions;
2) C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District
to C-4 Highway Commercial District
with setback provisions;
3) A-1-X General Agricultural District to
R-5 Office -Professional District, and
R-2 Two Family Residence District;
4) R-2-X Two Family Residence District
(County) to R-2 Two Family Residence
District;
5) R-3 Limited Multiple Family Residence
District to R-2 Two Family Residence
District;
6) M-1 Light Industrial District to R-3
Limited Multiple Family Residence
District;
7) R-4-X Multiple Family Residence
District (County) to R-3 Limited
Multiple Family Residence District.
Floyd Belsito, Associate Planner,
made a presentation of the proposed zone change.
The hearing was opened to the audience.
W. L. Hamm, owner of property on Oak
Street and Warner Avenue, addressed the Commission and requested
that his property be zoned commercial rather than the proposed
R-5 zone.
There being no other comment the
hearing was closed.
RESOLUTION N0, 66-57
SECONDED BY ROYER TO ADOPT
APPROVAL OF ZONE CASE NO.
FOLLOWING REASON:
A Resolution of the City Planning
Commission Recommending Approval of
Zone Case No. 66-57 to the City Council.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LAWSON AND
RESOLUTION NO. 66-57 RECOMMENDING
66-57 TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE
1. The proposal will implement the Master Plan of Land Use.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Lawson, Worthy, Bazil, Miller, Larkin, Royer, Tom.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
PRECISE PLAN NO. 66-3
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
Floyd Belsito, Associate Planner,
addressed the Commission and informed them that the Resolution
of Intent proposes to precise plan the alignment of Ash, Elm and
-9- 11/15/66.
Page No. 10
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
Nichols Streets, Sycamore and Cypress Avenues, Jacquelyn, Keelson
and Oak Lanes and Barton Drive.
The hearing was opened to the
audience, there being no
comment the hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LAWSON AND
SECONDED BY LARKIN TO RECOMMEND
ADOPTION OF PRECISE PLAN NO. 66-3
BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Lawson, Worthy,
Bazil, Miller, Larkin, Royer, Tom.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
ZONE CASE NO. 66-58
MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT -
STUDY AREA I Change of Zone from:
A) C-4 Highway Commercial District
to R-3 Limited Multiple Family
Residence District;
B) R-5 Office -Professional District
to R-3 Limited Multiple Family
Residence District;
C) Prezone from R-1-1 Single Family
Residence District (1 acre minimum)
to R-1 Single Family Residence
District;
D) R-1 to R-5 Office -Professional
District.
Floyd Belsito, Associate Planner,
made a presentation of the proposed zone change. He further informed
the Commission that a portion of the proposed R-3 should be excluded
because there is an approved use permit for a restaurant on the
subject parcel.
The hearing was opened to the
audience.
Robert Potter addressed the Commission
and opposed the subject zone change.
Edward Illig addressed the Commission
and questioned whether the 50 ft. setback would still be required
in the R-3 Zone.
There being no other comment the
hearing was closed.
The Commission held a lengthy
discussion.
RESOLUTION NO. 66-58 A Resolution of the City Planning
Commission Recommending Approval
of Zone Case No. 66-58 As Ammended
to the City Council.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LAWSON AND
SECONDED BY TOM TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 66-58 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF ZONE CASE NO. 66-58 TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS AMENDED FOR THE
FOLLOWING REASON:
-10- 11/15/66
Page No. 11
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
1. The proposed zone change will implement the Master Plan of
Land Use.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Lawson, Tom, Bazil, Royer
NOES: Miller, Worthy, Larkin
ABSENT: None.
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 66-20
PARKING IN FRONT OF DWELLINGS
The Secretary stated that the
proposed code amendment pertains to parking in front of dwellings.
The hearing was opened to the
audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY TOM AND SECONDED
BY LAWSON TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF CODE AMENDMENT NO. 66-20 BY
THE CITY COUNCIL.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Tom, Lawson, Bazil, Miller, Royer
NOES: Larkin, Worthy
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 66-21
INOPERABLE VEHICLES PARKED OR
STORED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
The Secretary informed the Commission
that this code amendment was initiated by the City Council for
clarification of the existing ordinance.
The hearing was opened to the
audience.
Jack Ellsworth, addressed the Com-
mission and commented on the proposed code amendment.
There being no other comment the
hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LAWSON AND
SECONDED BY TOM TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF CODE AMENDMENT No. 66-21
TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Larkin, Worthy, Tom, Lawson, Bazil, Miller, Royer.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 66-22
ON -SITE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The hearing was opened to the
audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LARKIN AND
SECONDED BY LAWSON TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF CODE AMENDMENT NO.
66-22 BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Larkin, Worthy, Tom, Lawson, Bazil, Miller, Royer.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
-11- 11/15/66.
Page No. 12
Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, November 15, 1966.
ZONE CASE NO. 66-60 - REZONE OF 17th STREET
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
Change of zone from. M-2-0 Industrial
District combined with oil production
to C-4-0 Highway Commercial District
combined with oil production and
with setback provisions.
Floyd Belsito, Associate Planner,
made a presentation.
The hearing was opened to the
audience.
The following property owners
addressed the Commission and objected to the proposal: Jack
Ellsworth, and Jack O'Brien.
hearing was closed.
discussion.
RESOLUTION NO. 66-60
There being no other comment the
The Commission held a lengthy
A Resolution of the Uity Planning
Commission Recommending Approval
of Zone Case No. 66-60 to the City
Council.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND
SECONDED BY ROYER TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 66-60 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF ZONE CASE NO. 66-60 TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FOLLOWING
REASONS:
1. A C-4 Zone will be more compatible with the surrounding area
than the present M-2-0 Zone.
2. There are several existing businesses in the area.
3. The commercial use will bring additional revenue to the City.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Miller, Royer, Bazil, Lawson, Worthy
NOES: Tom, Larkin
ABSENT: None.
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RECESS CALLED Chairman Bazil called a recess at 10:55 P.M.
COMMISSION RECONVENED: The Commission was reconvened at 11:10 P.M.
INFORMATION: The Secretary informed the Commission that the
City Council requested that the Commission consider
some alternate approach to walled -in subdivisions. It was the
consensus to bring this item up for discussion at the next study
session meeting on November 29, 1966.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS,
THE MEETING ADJOURNED TO NOVEMBER 29, 1966.
G • � �Y
Kenneth A. R olds Hobert D. Bazil
Secretary Chairman
-12- 11/15/66.