PL 05/19/1982 - 30576CI7Y OF FRIDLEY
� ..
, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 7982
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairwoman Schnabel cal]ed the May 19, 1982, Planning.Commission meeting to
order at 7:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Svanda, Mr. Kondrick,
Ms, van Dan, Mr. Saba
Members Absent: None
Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner
� Gary Wellner, 6221 Sunrise Drive
Micbae7 Larson, 6390 Starlite Blvd. •
Joy & Scott Anderson, 7921 Riverview Terrace
Kenyon Blunt, 7th & Marquette, Mp7s.
Wil7iam Weber, BRW, Inc., 2829 Unfv. Ave. S.E.
Curt Saunders, 320 - 7th St. S.E.
Mr. & Mrs. Rod Brannon, Solar Wash, Inc.
^ APPROVAL OF MAY 5, ]982, PLANNIt�G COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY 1�2. SABA� SECONDED BY r9S. GABF.L� TO APPROVE THE MAY 5� 1982� PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIR�IOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
]. CONTINUED: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A RROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT
P:S:; #82=01,�D Tlf� L ER DD TION, B1���:'G:�D �'A D'GARY� E� ER: e ng
a rep a o a par o oc s an , owe � ion, ying ou of
the North line of Sylvan Hills Plat 8, extended in a Westerly direction to
the West boundary of said Block 8, and lying Westerly of the Plat of Sylvan
Hil]s,Plat 8, together with the Easterly one-ha7f of vacated Elm Street,
and that part of Lots 1 and 2, B7ock 7, Lowe]1 Addition to Fridley Park,
]ying Southerly of the Westerly extension of the North line of the p]at of
Sylvan Hills Plat 8, together with the Westerly half of vacated Elm Street,
to be developed as three R-1 lots (single fami7y dwelling areas) and 5
R-2 lots (two family dwelling areas), generaliy�located South of Mi'ssissippi
St. N.E., East of the Burlington Northern right-of-way.
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
Mr. Boardman stated the Planning Commission has now received the,preliminary
plat. As was discussed at the �ast Plannin Commission meeting, Lots 1, 7,
^ and 8 will be zoned R-1 (single family 7ots�, and Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19; 1982 � PAGE 2
�''1
will be zoned R-2 (duptex or.double lots). He stated Mr. Wellner was in
the audience to ansvrer any questions on the proposed plat.
Ms. Schnabel stated she had more questions�with the�zoning part of it.
She asked if Staff had deveioped a new ordinance for twin homes yet.
Mr. Boardman stated Staff was still working on it. He stated Staff had
actually decided against going with a new zone. They are going to try to
allow zero lot line with a special use permit or through the platting or-
dinance, to stay within the same zones. What they could do was amend a
portion of R-2 and R-3 with a provision that would allow zero lot line with
special use permit approval. He stated he thought they woul.d have a]ot
of problems in setting up a new zone specifically for zero lot line. In
this situation, it would still be zoned R-2 and R-3, and at some point in
time, if the owner wanted to go through a lot split, they would have to
obtain a special use permit for zero lot'�line.
Ms. Schnabel stated where she saw some problems in this whole concept was in
the area of maintenance--the exterior maintenance of a dwelling as we]1 as
yard oaintenance. She felt a]ittle uncomfortable with this whole thing
unless it was really defined as to what they are going to do.
Mr. Boardman stated they could all be required with a special use permit.
They could put covenants or restrictions on the lot splits that would be �
placed on the deed.
Ms, van Dan stated she just could not visualize how, at some point in the
future, these lots could be split and owned by two separate individuals.
Mr. Boardman stated duplexes are allowed by�certain densities. By split-
ting the ownership of a duplex, they do not change the density, and that is
why Staff felt the best way to go was with zero lot line. Developers can
to to zero lot lines right now with duplexes, but they have to go through
about 5-6 variances.
Ms. Gabe] stated Mr. Boardman had just given another argument in favor of
having a separate "twin home" zone. Mr. Boardman had s�tated they could go
with zero lot line now, but they have to go through all kinds of variance
procedures. She felt that in the future, there are going to be a lot of
requests for this kind of concept in order for people to afford housing,
and it seemed to her that the City shoul.d just write a zoning ordinance to
apply to it. Otherwise, every time there is a request for zero lot 7ine,
they are going to have to go through both a lot sp]it and special use permit
process. It was a lot of red tape for everyone.
Mr. Boardman stated zoning codes should control densities, not situations
within those densities. If they are going to allow zero lot line, then it
should be allowed in that kind of density, and it should be allowed for
existing units in that type of density as well as for new developments. Then,
every time an existing unit is sp]it, the owner has to go through a rezoning, �
and the question comes back: Is this spot rezoning? _
� PLANNING GOMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 1982 PAGE 3
Mr. Oquist asked what difference it made whether they had to come in for
a request for rezoning or a request for a special use permit? •
Ms. Gabel stated some kind of provision could be written into the code to
eliminate some of the red tape procedures. .
Mr. Boardman stated the only other thing is to eliminate the special use
permit and allow zero lot lines with.lot splits within the platting ordinance.
Mr. Schnabel stated there may be cases where they will not want to permit
the zero lot line concept or the split, except on new development, because
they may be creating some other problems they haven't looked at yet.
Mr. Boardman stated if a petitioner meets all the conditions that are laid
out in whatever process is set up, he felt they would have a hard time
restricting a person from splitting a lo� just because it was an existing
unit.
Ms. Schnabel .sai� some of these zoning questions may be a little premature,
but she would like these concern•s in the record so the City Council can see
some of the Planning Comnission's concerns and also for future discussion
when the ordinance is rewritten and brought back to the Planning Commission.
^ Ms. Schnabel stated that she wondered if the City Council had understood
and if Mr. Larson and the neighbors had understood that these units would be
owner-occupied from the start or did they see it as something down the line?
Mr. Larson stated the original proposal �hat was presented called for the
entire area to be zoned R-2. The neig�borhood opposed that and reached a
campromise that called for the front three lots to be R-1 and the five rear
lots to be R-2 with zero 7ot lines. He s�ated that was a provision of their
compromise. The reason for that was they felt it increased the likelihood
that, as the properties change hands over the years, there wi]1 be more
owner-occupied units than if the lots did not have zero lot 7ines.
Nr. Wellner stated he would like to speak against any stipulaticn forcing
zerc lct line becasue that was not the intent of the compromise. In order
to construct, it necessitates them getting two difference mortgages on
the building which puts them in a different situation in terms of financing.
He felt that when they want to sell a unit off, that is the time to consider
zero lot line. Their compromise and understanding with the Mayor and City
Counci] was that a provision would be provided for zero lot line, but they
would not be compelled to do it. The reason for the zero lot line was that
with the financing and with the housing situation and econorr�y, it makes it
a more affordable unit.
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, �AY 19, 1982 PAGE 4
Mr. 8oardman asked why Mr. Wel]ner would have to get two different mortgages.
Mr. We7lner s�ated that at the time of construction, the minute they go with
zero lot line, they have two separate units and, therefore, they would have
two different deeds. He stated it was still his intent to hold some of these
units for.rental. He may c�oose, and it may be to his advantage, to get two
different mortgages, and at that time he would apply for zero lot line. But,
he did not want to be compe7led to do so at the time of construction. Again,
he stated that was not the intent of the agreement.
Mr. Oquist stated that was also his understanding from the discussions at
the last Planning Commission meeting.
Mr. Larson stated Mr. Qureshi had assured the neighborhood there would be
some provisions or the pro'ect would no� proceed. Those provisions were:
(1) tuck-under garages; (2� minimum square footage; and (3) zero 7ot lines.
As he recollected, it was not that the builder would have the option to app7y
for zero lot 7ine at some future date, but that from the conception of the
p7at and upon its approval, there wou7d be zero 7ot lines.
Mr. Oquist stated it did not make sense to say there had to be zero lot lines,
because then they might as well get the land resurveyed and have the lines
put in on the original plat. �„�
Ms. Schnabel stated since the City Council members were the ones that worked
with and created the agreement between Mr. Wel7ner and Mr. Doty and the
neighborhood, the Planning Commission was probably better off in not getting
into this so deep that new problems surface. She stated it was probably
better for the Planning Commission to just act on the pre7iminary plat, as
they have been ir�structed to do, knowing that this discussion will go on to
City Council.
MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO CLOSE TNE PUBLIC HEARING ON
P.S. #82-01 BY W. G. DOTY AND GARY WELLNER.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
XEARING CLOSED AT 7:58 P.M.
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO RECOMMEND TD CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT� P.S. #82-OZ� DOTY/WELLNER ADDITION,
BY W. G. DOTY AND GA,RY WELLNER: BEING A REPLAT OF THAT PART OF BLOCKS 8 AND
9, LOWELL ADDSTION, LYIING SOUTB OF T8E NORTH LINE OF SYLVAN HILIS PLAT 8,
EXTENDED IN A WESTERLY DIRECTION TO THE BTEST BDUNDARY OF SAID BLOCK 8, AND
LYING WESTERLY OF THE PLAT OF SYLVAN HILLS PLAT 8� TOGETHER WITH THE EASTERLY
ONE-XALF OF VACATED ELM STREET� AND THAT PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2� BLOCK 7� LOWELL
ADDITIOIU TO FRIDLEY PARK� LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF TNE
NORTH LINE OF THE PLAT OF SYLVAN HILLS PLAT 8� TOGETHER WITH THE WESTERLY
HALF OF VACATED'ELM STREET, TO BE DEVELOPED AS THREE R-1 LOTS (SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLING AREAS� �1ND FIVE R-2 LOTS (TWO FAMILY DWELLING AREAS) GENERALLY ^
LOCATED SOUTH OF MISSISSIPPI ST.� N.E.� EAST OF THE �IRLINGTON NORTHERN
RIGXT-OF-WAY.
��
n PLANPIING COMMISSION MEETING,'MAY'19;�1982�� � PAGE 5
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TIiE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. -
Ms. Schnabel stated P.S. #82-01 would go to City Counci7 on June 7.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: REOUEST FOR A SPECIAL�USE PERMIT SP #82-05 BY
12, 13, and
Terrace N.E.
: Per Section 205. 5, 2, to a ow t e construction of a
ft, detached garage in CRP-2 zoning (flood plain) on Lots ]1,
14, B7ock X, Riverview Heights, the same being 7921 Riverview
�IOTION BY MS. VAN DAN, SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
SP #82-05 BY JOY ANDERSON.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAI1�tWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
SEARING OPEN AT 8:00 P.M.
Mr. Boardman stated this is in the flood plain and under flood p]ain regula-
tions, any structure built in the flood plain requires a special use permit.
The existing dwelling is located on Buffa]o and Riverview Terrace. The
petitioner wants to put in a 24 ft, by 24 ft, garage located so the driveway
comes off Buffa]o St. This garage is a7lowed in a flood plain with the
� specia'1 use permit requirement as an accessory structure. Accessory structures
do not have to meet the requirements fo"r livable structures. The only things
required for accessory structures are that the structure is not for human
habitation, has both flood damage potential and is permanent7y anchored to
prevent flotation, and is flood proofed. He stated this garage meets all
requirements as far as setback requirements, and Staff has no opposition to
the proposal.
The petitioner, Joy Anderson, was in the audience.
Ms. Schnabel asked Ms. Anderson if the garage was intended for any use other
than a garage.
Ms. Anderson stated it was to be used only as a garage.
MOTION BY 1�2. SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
SP �82-05 BY JOY ANDERSON.
UPON A YOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCANABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
XEARIIVG CLOSED AT 8:10 P.M.
MOTION BY N�t. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #82-05� BY JOY ANDERSON: PER SECTION
205.1574� 2� TO ALLCIW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 24 FT. BY 24 FT. DETACXED GARAGE
IN CRP-2 20NING (FLOOD P.LAINJ , 02V IATS ,ZZ � I2, Z3, AND 14, B,LOCK X, RIVER-
VIEW AEIGHTS� THE SAME BEING 7921 RIVERVIEW TERRACE N.E.
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 7982 PAGE 6
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECI�iItED T8E
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY..
Ms. Schnabe7 stated.SP #82-05 wou]d go to City Counil on June 7.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST�FOR A�SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #82-06, NORTHWESTERN
�'NA�I I� �I� B� � I���VYO�TB �: Per Secti on �0�.%�3;�, to a'�� ow an auto-
matic teller macfiine in an enclosed building, on Lot 7, Block 1, Target
Addition, the same being 755 - 53rd Avenne N.E. (Target Parking Lot).
MO'l'ION BY 1�t. SABA� SECOINDED BY MR. SVANDA� TO OPEN THE PU,BLSC HEARING ON
SP �82-06, NORTHWESTERN .BANK EY KENYON BLUNT.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING OPEN AT 8:12 P.M. '
Mr. Boardman stated this proposa� was for a bank teller machine to be
located in the Target parking ]ot. Because it is a lease operation, it
requires a special use permit. He asked Mr. Weber to further explain this
proposal request.
Mr. Wi7liam Weber stated he is a planner for BRW, Inc., a local planning and
architectural firm in Minneapolis. He stated that also at the meeting was
Mr. Kenyon Blunt, who is with Northwestern National Bank.
Mr. Weber stated this is an instant cash machine. It is a drive-up facility
and not a wa7k-up facility. He stated this is a lease agreement between
Target and Northwestern National Bank. Northwestern National Bank will install,
operate, and maintain the facility, and Target will lease the site on a long-
term basis. He stated it is a predesigned, prefabricated metal building,
very secure and very maintenance free, with a teller machine mounted inside
the building. It is partial]y heated, but there is no human habitation. The
building is about 10 x 12 with a canopy over the drive. The driveway is about
]2 ft. wide.
Mr. Weber stated that in Fridley, there are about 6,000 Northwestern National
Bank customers, so it is a fairly high concer�tration. They anticipate about
5,000 transactions per month or about 160 per day. Most of the transactions
will be between the hours of 10:00 a.m, and 10:00 p.m.
Mr. Weber showed the location of the machine which is near the Target gas
station off 53rd Ave. He stated they have been very careful in siting the
automatic teller machine within the parking lot in order to minimize the
number of possible traffic problems. He stated that in this part of the
Target parking lot, there is not much parking. Target has 7,389 parking
spaces now. Northwestern National Bank will be removing only 8 of those
spaces, leaving 1,381. The city code requires only 738 parking spaces, so
Target has a surplus of 657 parking spaces. He stated there is also very
]ittle auto movement in this part of the parking lot.
�
�
�
0
PLANNING COMMISSION�MEETING; �AY�]9;�1982� ��� � PAGE 7
Mr. Weber stated the site will be very well landscaped. All the landscaping
wia] be maintained by a nursery contracted by Northwestern National Bank.
All the trees wil] be 3" in dia�eter, the ornamental trees wi7] be 2" in
diame�er, and the foundation plantings wil] be the 3 gal. size.
Mr. Weber stated the building will have two different signs, and they have
applied for permits. Both signs wi]1 be �pproximately 2 ft. by 12 ft.--one
wil] be located across the face of the building and the other one will be
located between the posts of the canopy. They will have a total of 48 sq, ft.
of signage.
Ms. Schnabel asked if there wou]d be any pedestrian use.
Mr. Weber stated the bank does not encourage pedestrian use, but it would be
possib]e. ,
Mr. Blunt stated the on]y walk-up use they have is for those who have big
trucks that are too high for the clearance. He stated the c7earance will be
posted on the canopy.
Mr. Saba asked how many teller machines like this Northwestern Bank had in
the metropo]itan area.
�"\ Mr. 67unt stated they on]y have two of this fashion in the Twin Cities. In
the total five-state area, they have seven. They have a total of 83
autamated tel]er machines, and most of them are located in banks or grocery
stores,
Mr. Saba stated he would be concerned about vandalism and also asked about
the maintenance.
Mr. Blunt stated the building itse]f is very secure and not easily vandalized.
If there is any vandalism to the building, they have a provision in the lease
with Target that says any type of vandalism must be cleaned up with 24 hrs.
He also stated that the building and area would be mainta3ned daily.
Ms. Schnabel asked about security.
Mr. Blunt stated their buildings are wired to policy or a private security.
One of the reasons they went to a drive-up facility here was for securit,y
purposes. Eighty-three percent of the banking transactions are done by women,
so the security of a drive-up is the reason they chose this particular
configuratfon.
Ms. Schnabel asked about the lighting at night.
Mr. Blunt stated there wou7d be flo�dlights on each side of the building
and down over the canopy.
�
�
PLANNING COMMISSION �EETING, I�IA� 19,�]982 PAGE 8 �
Ms. Gabel asked how long the lease was with Target.
Mr. Blunt stated it was a five-year lease with renewable options each year
after that. -
Ms. Gabel asked if they cou]d accommodate any other bank, other than North-
western Bank customers, at this facility.
Mr. Blunt stated in their instant cash network, they have all the affiliates
of Northwestern Nationa] Bank in the five-state area that can use this
machine. They also have credit unions and some savings and loans signed up,
so it is not entirely a bank product.
Ms. Schnabel stated she was concerned about the direction of traffic flow
and how they were going to designate which way the traffic approached the
teller machine. �
Mr. Blunt stated it would be.no problem for them to put in entrance and
exit signs.
Mr. Svanda stated he was concerned about the actual location of the building.
A lot of times during the year, those two entrances and exits to Target are
pretty congested, and they would really be forcing more traffic to try to get ^
into and out of the parking lot right at the worst part of congestion. He
felt it would be better if the building was moved back closer to the gas
station to allow more mobility for the traffic using the faci]ity.
Ms. Gabe7 stated she shared that same concern, as the traffic does stack up
at that entrance and exit.
Mr. Weber stated they would have no problem with moving the teller machine
closer to the Target gas station if the Planning Commission asked:them to
do so.
Ms. Schnabel also agreed the location of the facility needed to be changed
a little bit.
Mr. Rod Brannon, owner of the So7ar Car Wash, stated he would also agree with
the moving of the facility to-help prevent further traffic congestion at that
entrance and exit point. He stated that because of the huge sea of blacktop,
any ]andscaping done by North�estern National Bank was going to be an improve-
ment in that parking lot.
MOTION BY A�2. SABA� SECONDED BY MB. GASEL� TO CLOSE THE PUSLIC HEARING ON
SP #82-06� NORTHWESTERN 11TATIONAL BANK BY KENYON BLUNT.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAI14itTOMA14i' SCANABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
H�ARING CLOSED AT 8;45 P.M. ^
^ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 19, 1982 PAGE 4
MOTION BY �2. SVANDA, SECONDED 8Y MR. SABA, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP ,�82-06, NORTHWE5TE.RN NATIONAL BANK BY
KENYON BLUNT: PER SECTIDN 205.101, 3, I� TO ALTAW AN AUTOMATIC TELLER
MACXINE IN AN ENCLOSED BUILDING, ON LOT 1, BLOCK Z, TARGET ADDITION, TAE
SAME BEING 755 - 53RD AVENUE N.E. (TARGET PARKING LOT)� WITH THE STIPULATION
THAT THE LOCATION OF THE AUTOMATIC TELIIER MACFIINE BE MOVED TWO PARKING STAT.T.S
NORTH OF TAE PROPOSED LOCATION.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWO1�iAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TAE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabe7 stated SP #82-06 would go to City Council on June 7.
4. RECEIVE MAY 4, 1982; PARKS & RECREATION COMINIS$ION MINUTES:
MOTIOIV BY 1�Z. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN, TO RECEIVE THE MAY 4� 1982�
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES.
Mr. Kondrick stated that, regarding the request by Mr. Terry Merriman that
the City or County mow an area at Locke Park, a meeting was held on May 13
with Mr. Merriman, Mr. Torkildson, Dr. Boudreau, some of the neighbors, and
Parks & Recreation Commission members. The matter was resolved at that
meeting. Mr. Kondrick stated the County will mow on a regular basis an area
n where it was stated by the neighbors the children play most of the time. The
rest of the area will be 7eft as is to provide a buffer between the neighbors
and the walkway.
Ms, Schnabel stated the Ca�nission was to be commended for getting this
problem reso7ved.
Ms. Gabel-stated that a couple of ineetings ago, she had asked Mr. Kondrick
to find out how the Parks & Recreation Department handles the process when
peop]e cannot afford to participate in city programming.
Mr. Kondrick stated there is a form that has to be filled out. A few basic
questions are asked, but these questions are not mandatory. He stated the
Parks & Recreation Department on]y has on record four people who have signed
up saying they are unab]e to pay for city programming, but they do volunteer
to pay something. He s#ated the City also advertises that if people cannot
afford the programming, it can be worked out.
Ms. Gabel stated the recent summer Parks & Recreation program brochure did
not have any statement like that, and it bothered her. It should say in
there that recreation is provided for everyone and that inability to pay
does not preclude anyone from participation. She was very concerned about
the number of peop]e and chi7dren who are not participating in city programming
� because of inabi'ity to pay. She would like to see the City take steps to
ensure that a statement is put, not on7y in the recreational brochures, but
^ also in the City newsletters.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 1982 PAGE 10
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CBAIRWOMAN SCHAIABEL DECLARED T8E MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. �
5. RECEIVE MAY 11� 1982, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:-
MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY 1NR. SABA� TO RECENE TFIE MAY 1.Z, 1982�
APPEALS COMMISSION 2�?INUTES.
UPOA1 A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTTNG AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TAE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. OTHER BUSINESS:
Ms. Schnabel stated that at one time, the Comnission members had received a
memo from Virgil Herrick regarding special use permits. She stated that
since some of the Planning Commission members were fair7y new, it would be
a good idea to put this on the next agenda for the Commission members to
review and discuss.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY 1�2. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MR. SAbA, TO ADJOURN TXE MEETING. UPON A VOICE
VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECI.ARED THE MAY 19� 1982� PLANNING /`�
COMMISSIDN MEETIAIG ADJOURNED AT 9:29 P.M.
Res ectfu]ly su mitted,
y e Saba '
Recording Secretary
�