Month 1999.08 August.


Day 1999.08.17PC


PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Planning Commission - Regular Meeting
City of Vacaville
7:30 p.m. - Council Chambers    August 17, 1999

CALL TO ORDER:
The regular meeting of the Vacaville Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Wilkins at 7:30 p.m.

A.    ROLL CALL:
Present:    Chairman Wilkins, Vice-Chairman Minkler, Commissioner Aldrich, Commissioner Dimmick, Commissioner Drake, and Commissioner Williams.
Absent:    Commissioner Turpen.
Also Present:    Community Development Director Rowland, City Planner Emerson, Senior Planner McDowell, Associate Planner Trippi, Director of Public Works Pfeiffer, Assistant Engineer Casey, Associate Civil Engineer Cunningham, Assistant Engineer Hilton.

C.    COMMUNICATIONS:
1.    Proposed revision to Item G.2, 1999 Miscellaneous Land Use & Development Code Amendments.

D.    APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA:
Commissioner Drake moved, Commissioner Aldrich seconded to approve the agenda.  Motion approved  6-0.

E.    APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Dimmick moved, Vice-Chairman Minkler seconded to approve the minutes of August 3, 1999.  Motion approved 6-0.

F.    BUSINESS FROM FLOOR:
Vince Langdon, 505 Pecan, stated that he lives near the Park and Ride lot on Davis Street.  He noted that the lot is often full and people have started parking on the residential streets, preventing area residents from parking in front of their homes.  He suggested that an additional parking lot be installed on the opposite side of the freeway at Hume Way.  City Planner Emerson noted that he would research the situation and report back to the Commission.

G.    PUBLIC HEARING:

1.    ALLIED FRAMERS –  Allied Framers Inc., applicant
File No. 99-160
a.    Planned Development
b.    Draft Negative Declaration

Associate Planner Trippi reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the record, noting that this is a proposal to construct two office/warehouse buildings on 2.0 acres in the Vacaville-Golden Hills Business Park, located on the west side of Allison Parkway, approximately 500 ft. south of Edenderry Drive.  Building A is 12,600 sq. ft., and Building B is 6,175 square feet.  Both buildings feature concrete tilt-up construction with glass storefront entry areas.  The project includes an outdoor storage area, a recreational vehicle storage area and 33 parking spaces.  The proposal also includes a request to reduce the required separation between residential and industrial uses from 180 ft. to 153 feet.

    Commissioner Williams stated that he had visited the site and spoken to staff regarding the project.  He noted that there is a history of problems with industrial uses locating next to residential and questioned if another user besides Allied Framers were to occupy Building B, could it cause a conflict with the adjoining residences.  Mr. Trippi noted that there are conditions of approval that run with the property, so a subsequent use would be required to comply with the conditions of approval for Allied Framers.
    Commissioner Drake stated that he was concerned about an industrial use locating next to residential, and the potential for problems in the future.  He also noted concern about the request for a reduced setback.
    Commissioner Dimmick questioned how far outdoor storage would be from the adjoining residences.  Mr. Trippi clarified that the storage area would be 70 feet from the residential property.  He noted that the storage area would be used for vehicle storage.  He stated that no lumber is stored on site and the framing construction does not occur on site.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
Jakki Kutz, President, Allied Framers, stated that she and her partners live in Vacaville and are active in the community.  She clarified that their operations at this site would consist of bookkeeping and a warehouse for servicing small tools.  She noted that the storage yard would be used for temporary storage of materials, which would not create any noise.  She clarified that their hours would be 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and no manufacturing would occur on-site.  Ms. Kutz noted that they  held a neighborhood meeting and received positive input.
Don Theile, Premier Commercial, stated that it is difficult to find a small parcel for this type of use.  He provided pictures of the site and reviewed how trees will be provided to help buffer the residents. He clarified for the Commission the on-site parking, adding that they have removed some of the RV parking to accommodate tenant parking.
Mike Hurrell, Allied Framers, reviewed the available parking on the site for employees and patrons.
Public hearing closed.

COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Drake wished them well in their business, adding that if area residents raise concerns, they will be notified.
Commissioner Williams noted concern about an industrial use being next to residential and the request for a reduced setback.  He noted possible changes to the site that would not necessitate a setback reduction.  He commented that he was in favor of the project because the roll-up doors don’ t face residents and there will be less noise because of the RV parking.  He felt that this is an appropriate use for the site.
Vice-Chairman Minkler agreed that compliance with the conditions of approval should alleviate any problems.
Commissioner Dimmick questioned why a 6 ft. wall was proposed, instead of 8 ft., which has been required for other RV parking.  He felt that it is important to be consistent with previous approvals.  Mr. Trippi clarified that the most recent approval for RV storage only provided a 5 ft. landscape buffer, which would not be sufficient for large trees.  He noted that this site has a 10-foot landscape area on-site plus a 60-foot wide city right-of-way area and should provide a sufficient buffer.

COMMISSION ACTION:

Vice-Chairman Minkler moved, Commissioner Williams seconded that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 99-160 approving the Negative Declaration and Planned Development Permit application for Allied Framers.  Motion approved 6-0.

2.    1999 MISCELLANEOUS LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS - City of Vacaville, applicant
File No. 99-181
a.    Land Use and Development Code Ordinance Amendment
b.    Draft Negative Declaration

City Planner Emerson reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the record, noting that this City-initiated project proposal includes three amendments to the Vacaville Land Use and Development Code to: 1)  permit limited agricultural uses on an interim basis within the Cherry Glen/Interstate 80 Special Standards Overlay District; 2) update and clarify the density bonus standards; and 3) conditionally permit vehicle rental businesses within the General Commercial (CG) and Service Commercial (CS) zoning districts.  These Code revisions result from recent development requests that could not be accommodated under the current regulations.

Vice-Chairman Minkler asked if there is any comparison about the type of traffic generated and if repairs occur on site at auto rental businesses.  Mr. Emerson reviewed the anticipated traffic generated, adding that the use would be conditional, which would require the discretion of the Commission and findings of compatibility with the surrounding areas.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
    No comments, public hearing closed.

COMMISSION ACTION:

Commissioner Williams moved, Commissioner Aldrich seconded that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 99-181 recommending to the City Council approval of the Negative Declaration and Land Use and Development Code Amendments.  Motion approved 6-0.

3.    SUNDERMAN RESIDENCE –  Rob Sesar, RSA Architecture, applicant
File No. 99-171
a.    Design Review
b.    Modification
A proposal to construct a custom designed single family home on Lots 5 and 6 in the Spring Lane Subdivision located on the north side of Spring Lane near the end of the cul-de-sac, and west of Alamo Drive.  The proposed single-story home is 4,200 sq. ft., and includes a request to allow a private water pump to serve water to the home.  The proposal also includes a request to modify a condition of approval for the subdivision to allow the pad elevation of the home to exceed the maximum building elevation served by the City’ s Zone 1 water system.  This item was continued to the next regular meeting of September 7, 1999.

H.    STUDY SESSION:

1.    LEISURE TOWN BRIDGE WIDENINGS/SAFETY PROJECT –  City of Vacaville, applicant
File No. 99-182
a.    Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration

Senior Planner McDowell reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the record, noting that this is a proposal to widen three bridges on Leisure Town Road, located between Ulatis Drive and Interstate 80, from two lanes to four lanes, and to construct transition lanes back into the existing two and three lane roadway.  The bridges are: 1) Horse Creek Bridge –  located between Orange Drive and Gilley Way adjoining Vaca Self Storage and Casa Grande Mobile Home Park; 2) Old Ulatis Creek Bridge –  located north of Vaca Valley Christian Life Center and south of Green Tree Golf Course; 3) Realigned Ulatis Creek Bridge –  located south of Vaca Valley Christian Life Center and north of Stonegate Estates Subdivision.  Pursuant to Sections 15063 and 15073 of the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study of potential environmental impacts has been prepared and circulated for this project. Based on the findings of the Initial Study, adoption of a Negative Declaration is recommended. Mitigation measures have been identified in the Draft Negative Declaration, and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring Program is also recommended.

Assistant Engineer Casey reviewed the purpose of the project, which is to 1) reduce potential accidents, 2) provide bridges to meet current standards, and 3) provide safe flow of traffic.  Mr. Casey provided a typical bridge cross section.  He also reviewed the Jepson Parkway Reliever Route proposal, noting that the bridge project is a separate funding mechanism.  He noted that the Reliever Route is intended to help residential traffic travel from city to city.  He also reviewed the truck traffic data that was collected on Leisure Town Road, adding that traffic increases by 7% each year and at least four lanes will be needed in the future to accommodate the traffic.  Mr. Casey provided a comparison of Leisure Town Road to Browns Valley Parkway, noting that the number of accidents on Leisure Town Road is significantly higher.

Senior Planner McDowell reviewed the General Plan documentation that has indicated for the past 30 years that Leisure Town Road was planned to be widened.  He added that the current General Plan indicates there will be additional residential development on the east side of Leisure Town Road, which will increase traffic in the area.   He reviewed the neighborhood meeting at which the main concern was that the current project is part of the I-80 Reliever Route.  He noted that area residents consider traffic to be heavy on Leisure Town Road and added lanes will increase noise and allow faster driving speeds.  There was also the concern that property values will decrease and the intent of this project is to facilitate growth.

    Commissioner Williams questioned what the funding source was for this project and what would happen if the project were denied.  Mr. Casey noted that it would be funded by both impact fees and federal funds, adding that the funding would be lost if the project does not move forward.
    Chairman Wilkins questioned if truck traffic could be restricted to local trucks only. Associate Civil Engineer Cunningham noted that the volume of truck traffic is relatively low, and it would be difficult to restrict the area to local truck traffic.
    Commissioner Williams suggested that the possibility of restricting truck traffic be researched prior to the City Council meeting.
    Commissioner Dimmick noted that there are ways to calm traffic and make truck traffic non-friendly, adding that alternatives should be researched.  Mr. Cunningham noted that traffic signals will be installed when the widening occurs and traffic increases.
    Vice-Chairman Minkler suggested that a truck traffic survey be conducted for a 24-hour period.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
Dr. LouAnn Vidmar, 673 Forest Ridge Lane, stated that she has lived in the area for 9 years.  She noted that she had lived in both Orange County and Woodland and experienced highways being built close to her home.  She stated that prior to moving to the Meadowlands, she visited with City staff who indicated that it would remain a rural area.  She felt that if the project is approved, there will be an increase in noise levels, smog, etc. which will ruin her lifestyle.  She requested that the beautiful area she lives in be maintained.  She stated that she agrees that safety is important, but does not want the road to become a reliever route.
Ted Bynam, 155 Fox Hollow Circle, stated that he purchased his home four years ago and his backyard borders Leisure Town Road.  He noted that his comments would be on behalf of a group of citizens in the area.  He stated that their goal is not to combat safety, but they recognize that this is not the overriding issue.  He felt that it is impossible to separate the bridge-widening project from the I-80 Reliever Route, adding that the EIR is insufficient for such a project.  He noted concern about this project being developer friendly and felt that there needs to be a commitment to the property owners in the area.  He felt that the theory that this has been planned for years and the homeowners should have known about it is irrelevant.  He felt that there are viable alternatives that need to be reviewed.   Mr. Bynam noted that they are not an anti-growth group, but requested that this issue be postponed until further alternatives are studied, and the General Plan is reviewed.  He felt that there have been misleading implications about the number of accidents in the area, noting that in the past several years there have been only four in the area, none directly related to the bridges.  He felt that widening of the bridges will create other problems, such as a four-lane bridge adjoining a two-lane road.  He noted that there is not minimal truck traffic in the area, and it will increase if the road is widened along with noise and pollution.  He felt that the EIR process was flawed because it did not include data on a six-lane road, and there needs to be a study to review the impacts on property values.  Mr. Bynam stated that they made a commitment to the community when they purchased their homes, and most landowners were not aware of this project when they purchased their homes.  He felt that they need to mitigate what they now have to experience, and regulate developers as to where they can build homes, so they are not so close to major roadways.  He felt that they should not be tied to a plan that was approved 30 years ago if it is no longer relevant.  He noted that one of the alternatives would be to use the old ABAG route, which would direct traffic away from residents, or there could be several routes to Fairfield rather than just one.  He felt that the City owes homeowners the consideration of looking at other alternatives.  He added that he was in favor of minimizing accidents, but could not support a major roadway.
Stan Lewis, area resident stated that you can’ t discuss the widening of the bridges without considering it part of the Reliever Route.  He felt that an 80-foot road width indicates that 6 lanes will be the ultimate width and felt that it is also important to consider what Fairfield’ s ultimate plans are.  He felt that 6 lanes from I-80 through residential areas to Fairfield and back to I-80 are not appropriate.  He questioned what this project will do to enhance the quality of life for the residents of Vacaville and is it truly needed.  He noted that if the Reliever Route is going to be referred to as the Jepson Reliever Route, it should be moved closer to Jepson Prairie.
Ellie Bush, 236 Fallen Leaf Drive, stated that she has been a Vacaville resident for the past 16 years and operates a business in town.  She noted that she was in favor of safety, but was concerned about the additional pollution and noise that would occur in the area.  She felt that alternatives need to be considered that won’ t be such an extreme expansion.  She added that she would be willing to serve on a citizen’ s advisory panel if one were organized.
Joseph Bush, 236 Fallen Leaf Drive, stated that when he was petitioning neighbors in the area, many people indicated that they felt that this project was a “ done deal”  and one of the Council members had indicated that they would vote in favor the project even before hearing the recommendation from the Commission.  He felt that the City has provided half-truths and exaggerations, and that the project is not just for the bridges.  He questioned why residents were not made aware that residential development will occur across from Leisure Town Road.  He was not in favor of a soundwall as a buffer, adding that he does not want to live behind a wall.  He felt that the traffic could be improved by widening to three lanes, with two through lanes and one turn lane in the center.  He also suggested that truck traffic be eliminated on Leisure Town and that it should remain a neighborhood road.  He questioned why houses were built so close to the road if they were always planning to widen the road.  He added that house values need to be considered and that the General Plan needs to be changed to establish a route further to the east.
Bill McCulloch, 1081 Fallen Leaf Court, stated that he is a ten-year resident and he has been impressed with development in Vacaville in the past.  He felt that this project is concerned about endangered habitat such as fish and plants, but they also need to consider the residents who live in the area and how they will be affected.  He felt that residents were not aware of a six-lane Reliever Route and that more residents along Leisure Town Road should have been notified.  He noted that just because it has been in the General Plan for 30 years, it is no longer appropriate, and that they should fight for the rights of the residents, and not the interests of the developers.
Tom Hopkins, 1013 Fallen Leaf Place, stated that he has lived in the area for four years. He felt that the issue is about more than just widening the bridges and that the traffic volume and environmental concerns will increase.  He questioned how the Council will address these issues. He noted that they are all residents of Vacaville and this is not a “ done deal” .
Manjit Purewal, 213 Fallen Leaf Drive, stated that the statistics have been manipulated and questioned how many accidents are due to poor lighting.  He felt that it would be more important to improve existing conditions in the area.  He felt that the bridge widening will create a highway.  He suggested narrowing the road to two lanes rather than expanding the bridge.  He felt that the statistics about truck traffic are inaccurate, and the area should be kept scenic, not commercialized.
Barbara Talley, 137 Fallen Leaf Drive, stated that she was opposed to the widening of the road and bridges.  She noted that the existing road provides a buffer for cars going in and out of the Church.  She felt that a wider road will promote higher speeds.  She also felt that bike lanes should be provided.  She noted that the area is poorly lit and it is often difficult to see streets at night.  She suggested that more money be put into lighting the area or adding reflective marks to the road, adding that the situation needs to be studied further.
Michael Hacket, 502 Harvest Circle, stated that he was in attendance with his neighbors to speak to the Commission who he also considers his neighbors.  He asked the Commission to consider if this would be a concern to them if they lived in the area.  He noted that he is not opposed to the road being safer, but alternatives need to be considered.  He commented that travel does not have to be by vehicle, and that everyone needs to do their part to be part of the long-term solution.  He encouraged everyone to make an investment in the community with their time and energy to provide a creative solution.  He felt that Leisure Town Road should not be part of a Reliever Route.
Ernie Tufft, 161 Fox Hollow Circle, read from a report from the Solano Transportation Commission in 1997, which indicates that the Reliever Route should be switched from Peabody to Leisure Town Road.  He felt that the General Plan should be reconsidered.  He thanked the Commission for listening patiently to those who spoke.  He felt that the Planning for Vacaville is magnificent and is proud to live here, and requested that the same intense effort be considered for Leisure Town Road.
Carl Bourne, 218 Fallen Leaf Drive, noted that he moved to Vacaville in 1981 because of the airforce, and it is a unique family-oriented community.  He stated that he moved to the Meadowlands nine years ago.  He noted that there have been many good points raised, but they need to review the risks versus the benefits.  He felt that the risks involved will affect the quality of life for area residents with added traffic, noise and pollution.  He also felt that the economic impacts to residents and property value need to be considered.  He noted that the focus on the meeting was the bridge widening, but it is clear that the bridges and the Reliever Route are connected.  He noted that he lives in a nice community and feels that many people will leave the area because of the project.  He agreed that the benefit to the project is safety at the bridges, but felt that it can be addressed in other ways.
Sharon Douglas, 190 Sandalwood, noted that she owns properties in town and her intent is to retire here, but she may leave the area if the Reliever Route is placed on Leisure Town Road.
Kathleen Rhone, 770 Leisure Town Road, stated that she was never told when she purchased her property that the road will be widened.  She noted concern about having five lanes of traffic in front of her house, which will be 14 feet closer to her home.  She added that there will be no aesthetic improvements made to the area such as sidewalks.  She noted that a soundwall will be installed at the trailer park, but nothing will be provided for her property.  She noted concern that she would not be able to sell her property and get back her investment.  She commented that duel turn lanes are referred to as suicide lanes and will not help the situation.
Bob Cheli, 712 Fox Hollow Way, noted concern about the safety for his young daughter. He noted that he is pro-growth, but does not want a highway through his backyard.  He stated that if Leisure Town Road becomes the Reliever Route, it will be just like Air Base Parkway.  He questioned how many lights will be installed, noting that you can’ t put one at each road intersecting off of Leisure Town Road.
Jay Dougherty, 119 Fox Hollow Circle, felt that the bridge widenings are in conjunction with the Reliever Route.  He referred to a document that states that funding for the Reliever Route includes a portion for bridge widening.
Tim Waller, 2037 Fallen Leaf Circle, noted that the fastest route to Travis Air Force Base is Leisure Town Road.  He noted that the truck traffic on Leisure Town Road is no longer farm trucks.
Larry Greenslate, 242 Fallen Leaf Drive, stated that the quality of planning in Vacaville is high, but the widening of the bridges is not for him as a local resident, but to accommodate traffic coming from the freeway.  He felt that Leisure Town Road is adequate at its current width. He noted that there are many pinch points that could be improved.  He felt that federal money should be used to install streetlights and traffic signals and that they should consider the investment of the residents and not provide a road for I-80 traffic.  He stated that this Reliever Route doesn’ t make sense with homes 20-30 feet from the road.  He felt that this is a low quality road and it should be more important to finish the bike lanes and sidewalks in the area.  He agreed that it would be helpful to have truck traffic removed from the area.
Ena Botello, 749 Fox Hollow, stated that she moved to the area from Vallejo, and chose Vacaville because it is a pleasant community and she enjoys the rural area.  She thanked the Commission for listening to their comments.
Tim Wamble, 750 Colmanite Circle, stated that he does not live near Leisure Town Road, but agrees with the concerns of area residents.  He stated that no one is opposed to safety, and work on the road does need to be done, but he is opposed to having a Reliever Route so close to residents.  He felt that legitimate alternatives are available.  He stated that the Commission was appointed by the Council and rarely does the Council override a Commission recommendation.
Bruce Dorworth, 761 Oakmeade, noted that his second story bedroom is 20 feet from Leisure Town Road, adding that a soundwall will not help the noise.  He felt that traffic lights are necessary because it is often difficult to turn onto Leisure Town Road.  He questioned how safe the road will be when the bridges are widened to four lanes, and a portion of the road is still two lanes.  He suggested removing the outside lanes that dead end.
Larry Christensen, 1000 Fallen Leaf Court, felt that a smaller amount of money could be spent to improve the bridges without widening them and that a better alternative would be to move the Reliever Route away from existing houses.
Public hearing closed.

COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Chairman Wilkins thanked those who came out to voice their opinions and concerns.
Commissioner Dimmick questioned the current plan for a landscape buffer along Leisure Town Road.  Mr. McDowell noted that the current project would not change the landscaping.  Mr. Casey noted that along the existing roadway, most of the residents are on the west side of Leisure Town Road and there will be landscaping planted on the east side where the road will be widened.  Mr. Dimmick questioned how much of Leisure Town Road is currently in the County.  Mr. McDowell noted that all the property west of Leisure Town Road is within the City and is maintained by the City.  He noted that the bridge widenings would require some areas to be annexed.  He provided a map illustrating the existing City limits.  Mr. Dimmick thanked those who spoke, adding that the Commission are all Vacaville residents and they take the citizens concerns to heart.  He noted that the road is in poor condition and does need to be improved, adding that it has always been planned for four lanes.  He felt that a median strip with landscaping would be appropriate.  He also suggested that the Council look at traffic calming measures such as signals.  He noted that the bridge widening is a good idea, and they do need a four-lane road to move people around the City.  He felt that 40-mph speed limit should be maintained and traffic signals installed.  He recommended that the Council go back and consider other alternatives for the Reliever Route such as the ABAG route.  He felt that there has been a poor job of planning along Leisure Town Road and that a 10-ft. landscape buffer is not adequate.
Commissioner Williams noted that he has lived in the City and watched the residential development on the south side of the freeway.  He added that Leisure Town Road is designated as a needed arterial and many reviews over the years have indicated the need for an arterial.  He acknowledged that the residents desire a quality of life that includes being able to move easily around the City.  He added that they need to have a circulation system that meets the needs of its citizens and that the Commission needs to look at the long-range needs of the City, which includes infrastructure.  He noted that he would recommend to the Council to approve the widening of the bridges, but has concerns about Leisure Town Road as a Reliever Route.  He supported Commissioner Dimmick’ s recommendation to the Council to research alternate locations for the Reliever Route.  He noted that there should be different truck routes or limitations on the truck traffic on Leisure Town Road.
 Commissioner Drake noted his support regarding the comments on the location of the Reliever Route, and thanked those who spoke.
Commissioner Aldrich also thanked those who attended the meeting.  She noted that many changes have occurred in the area she lives, which have improved circulation.  She agreed that something needs to be done with Leisure Town Road, but it should not be a Reliever Route. She agreed that a buffer strip down the center with trees could be helpful.  She noted that she would recommend to the Council that an alternate location for the Reliever Route be chosen.
Vice-Chairman Minkler noted that the road does need to be improved, but it should not be a Reliever Route.
Chairman Wilkins noted concern about Leisure Town Road becoming an expressway, adding that alternatives need to be evaluated.  He questioned if a bike lane would be included on Leisure Town Road.  Mr. Casey reviewed the alternatives if the area is kept as a four-lane arterial.  Mr. Wilkins agreed that the bridges should be improved to enhance the flow of existing traffic, but should not be a Reliever Route.  He requested that staff research truck usage on the road.  He noted that traffic lights can sometimes cause problems and should be researched further.  He recommended that the Council look further at alternate locations for the Reliever Route.

COMMISSION ACTION:
No action required for this item.

Chairman Wilkins called a 10-minute recess and resumed the meeting at 11:00 p.m.

I.    DIRECTOR’ S REPORT:
1.    Community Development Director Rowland reported on City Council actions pertaining to Planning Commission items and reviewed the tentative schedule of future Planning Commission items and select items under staff review.

J.    COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Williams asked for clarification of when they would review the Vacaville Auto Center Policy Plan.  Staff noted that it is tentatively scheduled for September 21. Regarding the issue of the Travis Credit Union street sign.  Mr. Williams asked if it would be corrected.  Mr. Rowland noted that they have been in contact with Public Works and it will be corrected.  Mr. Williams asked for the status of the Reliever Route and the EIR, and what the Commission’ s involvement would be.  Mr. Rowland noted that the EIR has not been started yet, and reviewed the series of meetings that will be held this fall with affected parties and responsible agencies.  He noted that the Commission will have the opportunity to comment on the EIR.
Commissioner Dimmick stated that when a development backs up to a four lane arterial, they need to work with the developer to provide a wider buffer and disclose to new home buyers that they will back up to a four lane road.  He felt that it is important to consider future homeowners, and force developers to mitigate.  Mr. Emerson noted that the current standards require 15-25 feet between the curb and fence line.  He noted that it is difficult to require a new developer to provide more landscape setback when they adjoin existing development that has a small buffer.  He also clarified that there is a greater building setback required along arterials. Mr. Rowland also noted that backup landscape is maintained by the City, and it may be helpful to have a discussion at a future meeting to discuss where City funds are best spent.
Chairman Wilkins expressed on behalf of the Commission, their sorrow to Jan Aldrich for the recent loss of Mac McDeavit.  He added that funeral services would be held at Travis Air Force Base on Monday August 23, 1999 at 2:00 p.m.

K.    ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business to discuss at this regular meeting of the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,


Mary Page
Recording Secretary