Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1967/12/04 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA December 4, 1967 The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California, was held on the above date at 7 p.m., in the Council Cham- ber, Civic Center, 276 Guava Avenue, Chula Vista, California. Members present were: Stewart, York, Hyde, Gregson, Rice, Adams, and Guyer. Absent: None. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Associate Planner Manganelli, City Attorney Lindberg, Junior Planner Masciarelli, and Assistant City Engineer Gesley. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Adams-Rice) Minutes of the meeting of November 20, 1967, were approved, as mailed. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont'd) - Proposed attachment of the supplemental "D" zone to the Chula Vista Shopping Center and Sears Etore site Director of Planning Warren stated this hearing was continued to allow time to review the information submitted by a representative of the Broadway-Hale stores. Mr. Jerome Lipp presented the staff with this information and upon review, it seems to deal with the treatment of signs only. This information could perhaps be incorporated into a sign ordinance in the future. The Commission might also wish to use it in a redevelopment program of the particular property; however, the information the Commission wanted is not there. The staff, consequently, recommends that the Commission recommend to the City Council the attach- ment of the "D" zone to these properties and that the guidelines de- lineated in Sections 33.54.6, 33.54.7 and 33.54.10 be used, plus the conditions outlined in the staff's report concerning the square footage of signs. Mr. Warren remarked that it would be realistic to assume that variances for signs would be considered. This does not entirely solve the problem as delineated by Mr. Lipp at the past hearing, but they have been unable to develop standards that would not necessarily restrict new development. Mr. Warren and the Commission then discussed the type of materials used in the construction of the Center, and for the future buildings. Di- rector Warren declared that the staff received a photograph of the pro- posed building to go in at the corner, plus the sketches of their pro- posed sign. If they are restricted to the guidelines proposed for adoption, they would not be able to construct the type of building they want, and yet, they are far enough removed from the Center complex -2- itself where it would be compatible to the area. The staff would recom- mend the establishment of the "D" zone with the present standards even though they are not so well-defined as would be desirable. Member Adams commented that the "D" zone, as it presently stands in the ordinance, works quite successfully. In the past, the Commission has been able to compromise and accomplish exactly what was necessary. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was re- opened. City Attorney Lindberg stated he would like to make the comment that the Commission definitely do something about this "D" zone even though they have had no real problems with it in the past - it is truly inadequate to do the job. More study should be given to this supplemental zone and it should be made into a workable type of design control zone. Member Rice felt this would be a good subject for a workshop meeting. Chairman Stewart asked that the City Attorney's comments be shown in the minutes, and requested that this matter be taken care of as time permits. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Adams commented that the Commission has discussed this time and time again and no one has been able to come up with a set of standards, and it is for this reason that they do not have them. He added that if the City Attorney has any thoughts on this subject, he should submit them to the staff. Director Warren indicated that the staff agrees with the City Attorney - that we are becoming more aware of the inadequacy of the "D" zone. The zoning ordinance is rather vaguely written and it is weak it can be re-written and more clearly defined. Mr. Warren added that standards should be based on existing development. Chairman Stewart felt the staff should send out questionnaires to other cities to see what they have done with this problem, and then peruse this information at a workshop meeting. Director Warren declared that the staff did solicit this information from other cities two years ago and no one had an adequate solution. RESOLUTION NO. 488 Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommend- MSUC (Guyer-Adams) ing to the City Council the attachment of the Supple- mental "D" zone to the Chula Vista Shopping Center and Sears site -3- Findings and conditions be as follows: a. To insure that future additions to the Chula Vista Shopping Center and Sears site are compatible with existing development, it is necessary to attach the "D" zone to the property. b. Signs for future development should be limited to one square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of street frontage of the build- ing, and such signs shall be non-moving and non-flashing and sub- ject to the approval of the Director of Planning. PUBLIC HEARING - Prezoning from "A" to "C-2" - 3600 Edgemere - Bell, Bonnet, and Peters The application was read in which a request was made to prezone from "A" to "C-2" property located at 3600 Edgemere Avenue. Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location as the east side of Edgemere Road north of the Vista Hill Sanitarium. The property comprises 6.3 acres of land, and is vacant with the excep- tion of a single-family dwelling. The request for the C-2 zoning came about as a result of staff discus- sion as to how to accommodate a camper park; this appeared to be the only road to take. Since the filing of this application, steps have been taken to create an "Unclassified Use" section in the zoning ordi- nance. This section will permit uses such as this in any zone subject to a conditional use permit. The C-2 zoning in this area is not neces- sary or appropriate at this time. The staff is recommending "A" (agri- culture) zoning, and at some future time, there may be a better zone for it, and if the unclassified use section is adopted by the Council, the applicant's project can be accomplished. The actual frontage of this property is in the City and zoned C-2. Director Warren explained that the property would also necessitate having the F-1 and F-2 zoning attached since it will be in the path of the proposed flood control channel. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Ted Bell, one of the applicants, stated that as far as the zoning is concerned, they would be acceptable to whatever zone would be work- able for the area - they are only interested in establishing a camper park here. Mr. Bell discussed various aspects of his proposed project. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. MSUC (Adams-Rice) Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommend- RESOLUTION NO. 489 ing to the City Council the prezoning for property at 3600 Edgemere Avenue "A", "A-F-2" and "F-i" -4- Findings be as follows: a. This area is, for all practical purposes, not ready for any inten- sive development until such time as the freeway and flood control channel proposed for this area are constructed. b. The General Plan designates the area as Visitor-Commercial, a de- signation for which no zone is presently available. c. Commercial zoning would not be necessary to accommodate the use pro- posed for the area if an ordinance creating an "Unclassified Use" is adopted as recommended by the Planning Commission. d. The "A", A-F-2, and F-1 zones would be appropriate until the character of the area is established by the construction of the freeway and flood control channel, or until sufficient adjacent area is annexed to afford comprehensive land use planning for the area. Discussion - Proposed ordinance creating an "Unclassified Use" section in the zoning ordinance Director of Planning Warren stated that this matter was brought about as a result of the previous request for prezoning. This will be a recom- mendation to the City Council to establish another section - an Unclas- sified Use section - the purpose of which is to permit certain uses that do not have an appropriate place or "home" in the present ordinance. In all cases, this would be subject to a conditional use permit. There are uses, at present, that can be appropriately located in any zone if the conditions are proper, and they would be subject to a conditional use permit. The staff has suggested several uses to the Commission in their report. This section would create more flexibility in the zoning ordi- nance and it will be incorporated in our new zoning ordinance. Chairman Stewart commented that other uses could be added to this section. Member York questioned No. 5 listing colleges, universities and private schools, asking why public schools were not listed here. Director Warren indicated that he would like to see all the schools listed here, but as the Commission is aware, the City has little or no control over public schools. City Attorney Lindberg stated that although the County and State are not subject to our jurisdiction concerning schools, et cetera, that other governmental agencies submit their plans to the City and they fol- low our prescribed regulations. In this respect, the Attorney added that the Commission can indeed list elementary and secondary public schools in this category. -5- Member York questioned No. 8 excluding from the "R" zones such uses as circuses, carnivals or fairgrounds, theaters, etc. He felt they would be defeating their own purpose in setting up this section and they could well get "trapped" in this. These uses are subject to a conditional use permit over which the Commission has complete control anyway. Member Adams declared he was in favor of excluding these from the "R" zones. Member York commented that, in order to accommodate these uses, the Commission would have to rezone the land commercial not knowing what is going in. Member Rice asked about golf courses - whether this could be a recrea- tional use. City Attorney Lindberg noted that it was a permitted use in San Diego in the residential zone. Member Rice remarked that it was certainly not an objectionable use; as a matter of fact, it was a desirable one in a residential zone. Director Warren stated that the staff reviewed several different ordi- nances from different cities and this proposed ordinance is a conclu- sion of those that were reviewed. Member York commented that circuses, carnivals and fairgrounds were not permanent uses it would defeat the purpose of the ordinance if they excluded all those uses from the residential zones, as listed in the staff's report. Chairman Stewart commented that they may run into a situation for this once in five years~ that would be time enough to be concerned about it. It was better to have it in here than to wish, at some time, that it was in. Member Hyde felt this should be recommended to the Council as an emer- gency ordinance and since this is good for 90 days, the Commission can have second thoughts about some of the items during this period. This ordinance could then be changed before recommending it for a permanent ordinance. Director Warren commented that the suggested changes could be made to the Council. He then noted some changes in the wording to this section made by the City Attorney - instead of "provided these uses are speci- fically excluded from all 'R' zones" to "uses shall be deemed to be generally undesirable in the 'R' zones". Mr. Lindberg indicated this was a general policy statement of the Com- mission that they would not look favorably upon these uses in an R-1 zone. He cited the San Diego stadium in Mission Valley as an example, and added that in order for the Commission to retain control over these developments, they would grant a conditional use permit and not a re- zoning. -6- After discussion, the Commission concurred with the City Attorney's recommendations. RESOLUTION NO. 390 Resolution of the City Planning Commission recom- MSUC (Guyer-Hyde) mending to the City Council the adoption of an amend- ment to the Zoning Ordinance creating an "Unclassi- fied Use" section; such amendment to be adopted as an emergency ordinance. Findings be as follows: 1. Certain uses possess characteristics of such unique and special form as to make impractical their being included automatically in any particular zone. 2. Any special or unusual use should be reviewed by the Planning Com- mission to determine that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses. 3. The conditional use permit process should be used in Commission re- view of such uses. Report on status of Home Occupation - Silhouette Salon - 109 "E" Street Director of Planning Warren stated this was continued from the last meeting to allow the staff time to inspect the premises and report to the Commission. Mr. Kenneth Lee, from our staff, visited the site and discussed the matter with Mrs. Loria. Several of the Commissioners also visited the site on their field trip. The front room is being used exclusively for this salon, for the sale of beauty products and for a reducing salon of some sort. The only conclusion the staff can reach is that this use is not an appropriate "home occupation". Unfor- tunately, the Commission approved the use of some of the equipment and essentially approved the home occupation permit 6½ years ago. Mr. Warren read the contents of the approved resolution. There was no attempt, however, to define the number or amount of equipment used, or any attempt made to tie down specifically what is to be used. One of the things the staff points out to the applicants is that home occupa- tions are never to be considered permanent - they may be revocable if complaints are received. Director Warren declared that a petition has been received signed by 9 residents in the area (they are on the list of names to whom a notice was sent). They favor the home occupation and indicate no problems with this use. A petition was also submitted signed by 7 people who are customers of Mrs. Loria's which petition does not have any weight in this matter. Mr. Warren then indicated that the staff has received complaints in the past from some of the residents but no record has been kept of them. Member Adams declared that a complaint serves the purpose of pointing out the problems of a home occupation and that who made the complaint may not be important. -7- Mr. Warren agreed that the Commission should not be concerned with the number of complaints received or who complains, only whether the com- plaint is a valid one. He then read the definition of a Home Occupa- tion, and as it applies to the applicant's use. Member York stated he conducted an investigation of this home occupa- tion and would favor a change in the ordinance in regard to the mechani- cal equipment. This business is being conducted with the approval of the Planning Commission and for the type of equipment she is using. His investigation brought out the fact that the amount of business being done now is less than that she was doing 5 years ago - that her annual income indicates that she has an average of 15 customers a week. The amount of business for this use would not be sufficient to warrant going out and renting a place in a commercial zone. Mr. York added that his feelings in this matter were that the business should be allowed to con- tinue but that guidelines should be set up as to the conduct of this business. In one month, two, or even six months from now, if the Com- mission discovers the business is not being conducted in accordance with the guidelines established, the home occupation can be revoked. The Commission discussed the type of mechanical equipment that can be used for a home occupation. Member York stated the problem they could run into is the one before them now - where some previous Commission felt this equipment was all right for a home occupation. It certainly is not good planning, and something they should not be subjected to. Any type of equipment that would require approval of the Planning Commission is not suitable for a home occupation - it may be all right for a hobby. He felt some criteria should be set up so the applicants can be aware of what is expected of them - such as hours of operation, amount of equipment, etc. The Commission and Member York then discussed past judgments of other Commissions in regard to Home Occupations. Member Adams pointed out that the entire living room is devoted to the business and there is some storage in the garage - this adds up to more than that permitted for a home occupation. Member Hyde declared it wouldn't be fair for the Commission to revoke the applicant's license on the grounds that this was a mistake in being approved by a previous Commission. The Commission should revoke it on the grounds that it is a nuisance, or that the business has changed since it was first approved. He asked to question the applicant as to the amount of business being conducted. -6- Chairman Stewart reminded ~lr. Hycle of the complaint received. I. ieml~er Hyde questioned whetiler this was actually a vali~ complaint or a clasil of personalties. Member Adams commented that he doubted wilether the original application would have been granted if the applicant nad spelled out that she planned to use 'the entire living room for the business. Member Hyde wondered wilether this was the responsibility of tile applicant to volun- teer these statements or of the Co~,lmission. The point is she was given the permit to operate tilis business. Mrs. Loria, in answer to Member Hyde's questioning, alleged that when she originally began i/er business it was in her living room and presently is today. She bas tile same number of equipment now as she nad then. Chairman Stewart questioned wneti]er her original application stated she would sell cosmetics. Iqrs. Loria indicated that it did not - ti]at this is something that "comes and goes"; that she sells this merely for the convenience of her customers. Iqember Hyde asked if, in her original request, she was questioned by tile Commission as to tile type and number of equipment she planned to have. Mrs. Loria stated she believes she did; however, it has been so long ago, si]e doesn't remember. lqember Gregson asked her if tt~ere was any change in the building layout. Mrs. Loria declared there was none. iqem~er Guyer commen[ed treat tie has been on the Commission for the past eight years an~l could assure everyone tllat each alld every nome occupation coming before tllem for approval is examined thoroughly. In this particular case, the applicant was ques- tioned about the type of equipment she ]lanned to use, when sire originally applied for the permit. iqember Adams stated tie sat on this Commission also, at the time of this original request, and is not at all sure that all the details were brougl~t out at tire meeting. He is still concerned witt] tile living room being used for the business. ~.iember Rice felt this was because it was the easiest entrance to the house ratiler than using the patio area in the back. He added that the Conm/ission has to accept this as a nome occupation. The equipment is more than he would accept for a home occupation~ however, it is all not being used at any one time. Tile business has decreased in volume since the time she originally started, so therefore, there is rio 'traffic problem here. i'4r. Rice furtl]er added tha~ if this business was accept- able for tile last b years, it meets with his approval now. i,lrs. Lee Ramsey, 190 First Avenue, declared that the traffic on "E" Street has in- creased and this must be considered. She stated that she is surprised that the seven Commissioners, admitting ti]at a mistake was made in allowing the permit in the first place, refuse to rectify that mistake and allow it to continue. Mrs. Ramsey discussed the fact that the applicants have the one-car garage and i~ave two cars and, ti~erefore, there is no room for customer parking. Tile people who signed the petition sta~e "this service is needed" - ~irs. Ramsey asked how many, if any, of these people are actually using this service. She alleged that Member York is a close friend of tile Loria's an~ thus his support. If the figures he cited are -9- correct, it would average out to 3-1/2 customers a week. The equipmen~ she is using is definitely and admittedly not the kind you would associate with a home occupation. Mrs. Rar,lsey declared this was not a i~ardship case - the applicant should be told to operate her business in a commercial zone. If the Commission approves this operation here, then she (Mrs. Ramsey) would like to start a business in her home, sucil as a book store. Member York declared that in view of the fact that he does not intend to abstain, he wished to clarify a statement of Mrs. Ralnsey's. He alleges tilat he never met Mrs. Luria before in his life until two weeks ago. Mr. Luria was an employee of his when he was a manager of a large department store - but ti~ey have never been frienus, as suc~l. Member Aoams remarkeo that the R-1 zone is the most restrictive the City has - that it sirould be protected and kept immune from anything that is not compatible. He added that they do have to consider the businessmen also, who are on the principal commercial streets and have to pay rent - they are entitled to be protected from these home occupations. Chairman Stewart agreed, adding tt~at the intent of the ordinance was to allow part- time work an~ ti}is is a full-time operation. Fie felt the complaint made tonign~ was valid. lqr. Robert i,iiles, 39z "E" Street, spoke in favor of the permit, felt the issue here was whether one Commission approving a permit could be over-ridden by another Com- mission. Tiered of the Commissioners sitting here tonigi~t were here to consider the original request (Stewart, Adan~s and Guyer). Mr. Miles added shat wilat they ~o in the future is something else, but they should uphold the decisions made in the past. In answer to Mr. Stewart's question, Mr. Miles stated he has known the Lorias for many years out nas never been in ti~eir hor~le. Mr. Paul A. Kor,~ara, 80 E Street, discussed a recent request for a left turn in the area that was denied by the Council because of the protests received. He was unaware of this operation and especially one ti~at was so lucrative that a bookkeeper was requi red. Mr. Tony Luria, the applicant's i~usband, clarifie~ the fact ti~at they do not operate a beauty salon - they do have a reducing salon. He remarked that he recently cleaned up his garage and now puts his car into it. It was done sometime ago - before the Commissioners' visit. Member Hyde indicated that there were not enough grounds presented to terminate this permit as any result in the change of the business due to increase of clients, traffic or machinery. It has not been shown that it is a nuisance, and the permit should not be revokeu. MSUC (hyde-Arian, s) 1.~o action be taken on this matter since no special grounds were brought forth by the complaint to justify terlaination of this permit as a result in change of use of any ~nechanical equipment and ti~at no proof was substantiated that ti~is business was a nuisance in the neighborhood. -lO- Chairman Stewart directed t~le applicant to keep a record for one year of the number of clients she services and that tilis record be forwarded to the Planning Depart- ment in order that they may determine the amount of business being conducted in one year, and any increase of such. Member York discussed having the staff draw up a list of guidelines for this opera- tion, an~ an annual investigation made. ~qember Adams felt the Co~ission shoul~ not subject these people to an investigation of this sort. The Co~m~ission discussed the importance of investigating the applications more thoroughly. Report on request for waiver of zone wall requirement - Princess Manor Shoppin~ Center This mat~er involves the decision of the Co~m~ission at the meeting of November 6, 19~7, to defer the construction of a wall along the north property line of this shopping center until suci~ time as the final grade of that property to the north is established and residential construction Degins. A letter ~as now been received from the applicant requesting that the indefinite perioc~ of time involvec~ makes a bond infeasible, lqr. ~arren indicated that tile staff realizes it woulc~ be ridicu- lous to construct a wall at t~is time, and any construction of a wall between the two parties should be a coordinated effort. The prospects of getting this is some- what re,note if it is not tied up with a bond. The City Attorney, however, reminds t~e staff of tile provision in the ordinance requiring t~e correction of non-confor~ing aspects witi~in one year of the notifica- tion of suci~. City Attorney LindDerg stated the Commission could waive ti~is re- quirement by resolution. He discussed the validity of the request and indicated it was not an erroneous one, and one that is justified. ~qSUC (Guyer-Rice) Resolution of the City Planning Commission approving a waiver RESOLUTION NO. 491 of zone wall requirement for Princess Manor Shopping Center Findings be as follows: 1. The final grade of the property to the north has not been establisi~ed ano residential construction has not yet taken place. 2. C-N provisions provide that the Planning Commission may require correction of non-conforming features of shopping centers within one year after notification of the property owner (Section 33.35.12 - non-conforming centers). -Il- Request for approval of sign - Bonita Florist - Bonita Plaza Shopping Center Director of Planning Warren stated ti~is was a request from Mrs. Edna Hansen, owner of the florist shop, for approval of a sign. He submitted pictures of the proposed sign to the Commission ano remarked that the staff and Commission have had a great deal of trouble in the past with signs in this shopping center, ane cannot seem to get the message across. Mr. Warren explained that the sign was existing and is cut-out letters totaling 17 square feet. The applicant is requesting approval also to light the sign from above by protruding out 3-1/2' with a light. The staff is recommending approval witi~ the provision that the type of lighting be approved by the Planning Department. Chairman Stewart asked if they are requested to obtain a building permit before erecting their signs, iqr. Warren said he thought it was just the electric permit rIley were obligated to obtain. Member Rice felt tne Commission was getting too many of these requests for approval - after the work nas been done. Chairman Stewart suggested that the Building Department refer all requested permits for signs to the Planning Department. Member Adams declared a sketch of the sign should have been submitted to the Commis- sion for 'approval, and also that the applicant should have been present to answer any questions. MSC (Gregson-Rice) Approval of sign, as submitted, with the condition that the type of lighting device be approved oy the Planning Department prior to installation. The motion carrie~ by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Gregson, Rice, Stewart, Guyer, York, and Hyde NOES: ~4ember Adams ABSENT: i,~o ne Request for extension of time - Tentative Map - Chula Vista Gardens Subdivision Director of Planning Warren s~ated this matter involves 37 acres of land lying south of Naples Street between the proposed ~05 Freeway and ivielrose Avenue. The actual date of expiration was October 5, 1967; however, the applicant did submit a request prior to this date. Tile staff recommends approval. MSUC (Guyer-York) Recommend to the City Council approval of a one-year extension from October 5, 1967. -12- Final lqap -Mestler Manor Subdivision - Unit No. 2 DirecTor of Planning Warren stated that Unit No. 2 of this subdivision is located on the south side of East Naples Street ane east of Monserate Avenue and comprises 25 single-family lots. The staff recommends approval of the final map since it con- forms to the tentative map, subject to the recommendations of the Engineering Divi- sion and the staff. Mr. Warren reviewed the conditions, and Iqr. Howard Gesley, Assistant City Engineer explained the Conditions imposed by the Engineering Division particularly as it applies to the grading of the slopes. City Attorney Lindberg commented that the F.H.A. requires t~e property line to be at the top of the slope and discussed the problems related to level areas left outside the fence. MSUC (Adams-Rice) Recommend approval of the final map subject to the following con- ditions: 1. iqyra Court shall be renamed Leanna Court. 2. The final grading plan shall be revised to reflect: a. The top of slope shall be located at the 10' setback line along East Naples. o. The top of slope shall correspond to the lot lines on Lots 10, ll, 15, 16, any Zb and ti~ese slopes shall nave no breaks in grade. c. The proposed slope planting of iqesembryanti]emum Edule shall be revised to "Rosea". 3. The final map shall not be submitted for Council action until all fees are paid and all necessary bonds, deeds, slope rights and easements as required by the City Engineer have been delivered to the City. Settin~ date for public hearing - Presentation bs Outdoor Advertisin~ regarding_pro- posed new zonin~ oreinance uirector of Planning Warren explained that because of the urgency involved, the staff has already advertised this hearing and are now asking for Co~nmission clearance. The hearing for this presentation by a representative of the Outdoor Advertising Company should take about 1-1/2 toZ hours and is set for Wednesday, December 13, 1967. ~qember York stated he woule not be able to attend due to another commitment. Member Adams indicated he would not be able to be present due to another meeting at the Chamber of Commerce. Director Warren stateu the trouble here was to work this hearing in before Christmas in order to get this resolved - otherwise, the new proposed zoning ordinance coule go on indefinitely. Chairman Stewart announced that there will De a majority of the Commissioners present on this meeting night. MSUC (Rice-Hyde) Setting December 13, 1967, 7 p.m. as a public hearing to hear a presentation by a representative of the California Outdoor Advertising Company in regard to signs. -13- TO be set for hearing - Consideration of rezoning from R-3-B-3-D to R-3-D - quintard Annexation No. l Director of Planning Warren referred to the staff's comments concerning this item. The property owner has requested the rezoning due to permit him to rectify a drain- age problem on his property. He needs a higher density of development to offset the cost of eradicating ti~is proolem. The Council has asked the Commission to set this for hearing. MSUC (Guyer-Gregson) Public hearing be set for December 1~, 1967. Request for extension of time on variance - 53 Broadwa,v A letter from Otis Davis was read requesting a one year extension of time on their variance approved on Oecember 5, 1966. Director of Planning Warren stated tile staff sees no problem with this request and recommends approval. MSUC (York-Gregson) Approval of a one-year extension of time - subject variance to expire on Uecember 5, 1968. Workshop Meetings Director of Planning Warren stated that a matter has come up that si~ould be discussed preferably at a workshop session. This is in reference to light poles in regard to service station sites. All of these poles end up being sign poles also. Mr. Warren indicated that next ~londay night, the llth, is a free night and if the Commission so desires, it could be a dinner meeting. Member Gregson indicated he would not be able to attend. The Commissioners concurred that Monday night at 6 p.m. at the Steak Ranch would be acceptable. Mentber ~de suggested the Commission set every other Monday night as a workshop night. The Commission then discussed having an alternate Monday night as another public hearing night. Director Warren indicated that the staff will be recommending that another meeting be added to the schedule - in view of the increasing work load. However, one problem that would confront the staff would be in trying to keep up with the Commission - the workload would probably be more than they could cope with. Chairman Stewart questioned whether additional clerical help would help. Director Warren stated it would - that this was the chief problen~. The Commission agreed that more i~elp should be requested. -14- A~JOURi~MENT IqSUC (Rice-Guyer) Meeting be adjourned to the meeting of k}ecember 11, 1967, (a workshop meeting at the Sunnyside Steak Ranch, Bonita, commencing at 6:00 p.m.) to December 13, 1967, at 7:00 p.m. (public hearing to hear a presentation by a repre- sentative of ~he California Outdoor Advertising Company) anU to the next regularly scheduled meeting of December 18, 1967. Respectfully submitted, Jennie M. Fulasz Secretary