pc_05 17 2001LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTE RECORD
MAY 17,2001
4:00 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being nine (9)in number.
II.Members Present:Richard Downing
Fred Allen,Jr.
Craig Berry
Bob Lowry
Rohn Muse
Judith Faust
Mizen Rahman
Bill Rector
Obray Nunnley,Jr.
Members Absent:Pam Adcock
Open Position
City Attorney:Steve Giles
May 17,2001
ITEM NO.:A
NAME:Master Street Plan Amendment
LOCATION:Master Street Plan Revision on Kanis Road —Bowman Road to
Chenal Parkway
SOURCE:Developers and Public Works Staff
B
In the winter of 2001,the City Manager and local development community met to discuss
the Kanis Road development corridor between Chenal and Bowman Road.Developers
noted that expected development activity levels were not taking place.The discussion
centered on the difficulty of constructing required street improvements as the principal
reason hindering development.The currently required street improvement is a minor arterial
complicated by some areas of grade change and horizontal re-alignment.
The discussion concluded that a phased street improvement needs to take place,using a
reduced street standard for half-street construction but still requiring the 90-foot right-of-
way of minor arterials.Such a plan would be Phase 1 construction.Phase 2 construction
would be the typical minor arterial standard (4 lanes with a median).Funding for Phase 2
would be at City's cost in the future.The timing of Phase 2 is uncertain,but would depend
upon traffic counts,available financing,and other pressures.
The segment of Kanis Road in question is a 2.5-mile segment between Bowman Road and
Chenal Parkway to the west.The proposed standard (Phase 1)for the segment is a 36-foot
collector.(It should be noted that for the segment,the nature of the Phase 1 standard
generally precludes phasing into a divided 4-lane parkway,which is the type of minor
arterial currently planned there.l
On February 15,2001,the Public Works Department held a public meeting.All adjacent
property owners were notified of proposed Kanis Road changes.Public Works staff were
present to describe and discuss the changes and to answer questions.A list of attendees is
attached.
1
Findin s of Public Meetin:
Concerning the proposed amendment,attendees did not reach any consensus over the
proposal for a 36-foot collector.However,there was perceptibly more favorable support
than opposition.Developers who supported the proposal found it to be reasonable,citing the
burden of the current plan.They made claims the current plan actually devalued their
fronting property.The devaluation was due to the cost of complex street improvements and
the 45-foot half-street right-of-way sacrifice.
Supporting developers also complained the current standard forces them to bear more than
their fair share of street improvements.They believe an arterial street serves through-traffic
and relief traffic associated with west Little Rock's growth,and includes lane costs for
which they do not feel responsible.In their view,continuing the current standard will stifle
corridor redevelopment or will force them to seek re-zoning to more intense land uses.
Some residents expressed concerns about encouraging speeding and unsafe passing on a
partially improved Kanis Road.Because they felt half-street improvements of the minor
arterial variety would be worse than the collector variety with respect to this concern,they
supported the proposal.They also believe the proposal will have a better appearance during
the period of piecemeal construction.
Those opposed to the proposal cite the current arterial standards'reater traffic-carrying
capacity for the long-term.One individual asserted his belief that,once the collector is
completed,the City would quickly have to improve Kanis Road to arterial standards because
Phase 1 would attract by-pass and relief traffic from Chenal Parkway.This scenario would
mean constant construction activity for several years in an area that already suffers from
traffic congestion.The opponents argued that it would be unfair to other developers in the
west Little Rock area to reduce the standard and cost for a select group on Kanis Road
between Bowman Road and Chenal Parkway.
There was discussion on whether or not the proposed collector should be curbed and pipe-
drained.No consensus was reached.It was noted,however,that future widening would
result in the demolition of curbs and some storm pipes under the proposal.
Findin s of Traffic Studies:
Traffic studies fall into two main categories —existing traffic counts and future projections.
For this plan amendment proposal,discussion will consider the two study categories in light
of the known variation in traffic counts along the 2.5-mile segment.The variation is an
escalating count from west (Chenal Parkway)to east (Bowman Road).
Existin traffic counts for the segment of Kanis Road in question are as follows,given as
average daily traffic,2-way (ADT).These figures are the result of traffic counts conducted
by Public Works February 20 to 26,2001,and are listed by sites arrayed from west to east.
One exception is the Kirby Road site,which is dated 1997.
2
@Baker Elementary School 3,526 ADT
@Kirby Road 3,100 ADT
@ Gamble Road 5,336 ADT
@Point West Drive 8,742 ADT
The precise location for all site counts is just east of the listed intersecting road.
It is estimated that the Kirby Road site,if adjusted for 4 years of traffic growth,would
presently show a count of 4,000 to 4,500 vehicles per day average.
Pro'ected future counts by two consultants were reviewed extensively and projected
independently by a consultant in November 1998.Three "opinions"now exist and depend
upon assumptions and methods,often competing,of modeling driver choice,trip generation
(a function of development intensity),and street capacity.Divergence of opinion is large.
Peters k Assoc.M~etro lsn The Mehlhor er Firm
@Baker Elementary 11,000 4,600 22,460
@Kirby Road 28,000 7,200 22,460 +
@Point West Drive 40,000+14,000 Above arterial threshold
of 28,000
For reference to street capacity,the rated service volume in Ordinance No.18055 for
collectors is 5,000 ADT and minor arterials is 18,000 ADT.However,Public Works
experience is that collectors can sustain 8,000 to 10,000 ADT at an acceptable level of
service for the user with proper turning lanes.Similarly,minor arterials can sustain 28,000
to 32,000 ADT.
Plannin and Develo ment Comments:
In the Ellis Mountain District,along Kanis Road from Bowman to Gamble Road Office and
Commercial uses are recommended.The property is currently zoned for either commercial or
office use.This section of Kanis Road is proposed to have normal to intense land use
development pattern for a minor arterial.The portion of Kanis Road from Gamble Road to
Pride Valley Road is proposed to have a use pattern with a reduced density than the normal
arterial in Little Rock.An effort to modify the Master Street Plan in this section,which
encourages a reduced pattern of land development along the road,is positive.However,at
Cooper Orbit Road the Plan and current zoning pattern allows for commercial development and
appropriate road designs should be required.
3
Public Work Recommendations:
Public Works recommends approval of the proposed Master Street Plan amendment for the
Kanis Road segment between Bowman Road and Chenal Parkway.
Specifically,Public Works recommends a 36-foot collector street built to match existing
grade and alignment,except where Public Works deems necessary grade and alignment
changes for safety.Public Works also recommends the 90-foot right-of-way standard
needed for future widening.
Street configuration is recommended to be two 18-foot lanes,changing to three 11-foot
lanes including a left-turn lane at intersections.Public Works also needs to reserve the right
to require right-turn lanes and associated striping up to 250-feet in length for new
development.
Subdivision Committee Comments:Februa 15 2001
Committee members inquired of Public Works staffers about the type of streets being
proposed in the MSP amendment.They requested that maps of future Land Use Plans and a
discussion of traffic studies be included in the amendment write-up.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission.
Plannin Commission Action:March S 2001
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested that MSP Kanis Road proposal
be deferred to the April 19,2001,meeting.Extra time was needed for Public Works staffers
to present the proposal 'to the Pulaski County Planning Board meeting of March 29,2001,
and to perform additional traffic counts.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the consent
Agenda for deferral to the April 19,2001 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays,and 2 absent.
Pulaski Coun Plannin Board Action:March 29 2001
Public Works and Planning Staff presented the item to the County Planning Board.After
discussion,the Pulaski County Planning Board voted unanimously to support the
amendment to the Master Street Plan.
4
Plannin Commission Action A ril 19 2001
Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,described the proposed changes to the Master Street Plan
(MSP)regarding Kanis Road,between Bowman Road and Chenal Parkway.He noted that Public
Works supported the phased development.He explained the reasoning is that developers bear a
disproportionate share of street cost,compared to traffic generated,when building arterial streets.
He went on to explain that piecemeal construction would not work.The first phase would
therefore require developer construction to reduced standards,which includes a 36-foot wide
road with 18-foot lanes and 11-foot lanes at intersections.It was also noted that the concept of
classifying Kanis Road as a minor arterial would not be changed.The entire right-of-way for
minor arterial standards would still be required.With this proposal,the City could preserve its
intended land use intensity.
Commissioner Judith Faust stated that Kanis Road needed to be of greater capacity than a
residential collector is.She questioned how the City would finance the development of Kanis
Road to the minor arterial standards.Ms.Faust also questioned the benefit of downgrading the
MSP at this time,considering all of the past work that has gone into it.
Mr.Turner stated that Vision Little Rock is currently discussing financing mechanisms for
infrastructure.He noted that impact fees might be one solution.He explained that impact fees are
not contingent upon the classification of the road being developed,only upon what is being done
to the road.
Mr.Dickson Flake,of Barnes,Quinn,Flake &Anderson,introduced himself as the
representative of several property owners on Kanis Road and stated that his firm and the property
owners were in favor of the proposal.He believes it would take too many years for Vision Little
Rock to find appropriate financing.
Mr.Ralph Bozeman,property owner on Kanis Road,stated his belief that the property owners on
Kanis Road were being asked to pay for an east-west corridor that would support all of the
development west of the intersection of Kanis Road and Chenal.He stated his opinion that this is
an unfair burden on the area property owners and that he supports the proposal.
Mr.Russ McDonough,of Winrock,stated his belief that the proposed changes would allow
Kanis Road to develop into a quiet,office-use corridor that would help relieve traffic from
Chenal Parkway.He also stated that the cinTent zoning does not match the MSP requirements
and that the current standards are preventing development of the area.He saluted Public Works
for devising an equitable compromise that is a larger and safer road for the present and does not
prevent building a 5-lane arterial in the future.
Mr.Ramsey Ball,property owner on Kanis Road,asked the Planning Commission to approve
the proposal and send it to the Board of Directors.
Ms.Ruth Bell,of the League of Women Voters,asked the Commission not to approve the
proposal.
5
Mr.David Jones,real estate developer,stated his opinion that the minor arterial standard of 5
lanes needs to be built now on Kanis Road.He believes it is the only fair and reasonable position
that can be taken,in light of traffic needs and ordinary real estate risk-taking.
Mr.Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,stated his objection to calling the
proposal a change to a "collector."He called the word "collector"a misnomer and noted that
"phased construction"is the proper term.He stated that Kanis Road would have to be an arterial
at some point.He agreed that residential and office property owners should not be made to build
an arterial but that the classification should not be changed.
Mr.Turner agreed with Mr.Lawson and stated that the proposal would not downgrade Kanis
Road to a collector,but would put an asterisk on the MSP to note that the first phase would be a
36-foot wide road.
Mr.Jones stated the precedence that would be set would not be in the best interest of the City.
Commissioner Faust agreed that the MSP classification should not be changed for Kanis Road
and that the minor arterial right-of-way dedication should be required.She stated concerns
regarding the length of time before a minor arterial would have to be built and how to finance the
construction.
Chairman Downing stated his concern that this item was too important an issue to put to a vote
with only 6 members present.He asked for a motion to defer this item to next Planning
Commission meeting.
Mr.Lawson suggested an informal meeting or public hearing to discuss long-term plans for
Kanis Road.
Motion to defer to May 17 public hearing was passed.
Plannin Commission Action Ma 17 2001
Mr.Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,described the proposed changes to the Master
Street Plan (MSP)regarding Kanis Road,between Bowman Road and Chenal Parkway.He
recapped his comments before the Commission on April 19,2001.
Commissioners Rahman and Berry asked how much Phase 2 would cost the City,how much
of the Phase 1 construction would have to be tom out during construction of Phase 2,and
how much time would elapse during the two.
Mr.Turner explained that when Phase 2 begins,as much as 40%of the existing road might
have to be tom out due to centerline and grade changes.He stated the Phase lroad would be
sufficient to handle traffic for many years,except for the segment between Bowman Road
and Point West Drive.He further explained that the City has neither the capital nor a capital
budget plan to fund construction on Kanis Road.
6
Commissioner Faust inquired about the history of the planning for this 2.5-mile segment of
Kanis Road.
Mr.Turner stated that the road became the current 4-lane divided parkway two years ago
following the recommendation of an engineering study.Earlier studies proposed other types
of roads,including a "super 2-lane."The "super 2-lane"was the Commission's first
amendment recommendation,deriving from the Metroplan study of 1997.One-time funding
was the later recommendation for the divided 4-lane.
Tony Bozynski explained that a concordant overlay district for special-zoning rules failed to
pass into law in April 1999.However,the Commission did establish the current Land Use
Plan in June 199S that was later affirmed in February 1999.It establishes low to moderate
development intensities and mixed uses (mainly suburban office and low density residential
with small commercial nodes).
Jim Lawson explained that,in his opinion,Land Use should remain as is because
transportation needs must not drive Land Use Plan revisions.Moreover,a Land Use Plan
revision would not alleviate the pronounced piecemeal nature of arterial construction by
developers,while it likely would generate complaints against over-commercialization.
Bob Turner and Commissioners Rector and Lowry discussed traffic "warrants,"or
justifications,for the current 4-lane plan.Mr.Turner explained that previous professional
studies vary from a definite "yes"to a probable "no"in answer to the 4-lane need question.
Public Works falls in the middle with a short-term "no."A 36-foot 2-lane will be
satisfactory for many years,using controlled access.A 4-lane is indeed ultimately warranted
by long range studies.
Bob Turner stated that he did not feel that the new Summit Mall would create a traffic
nightmare on Kanis Road,though the effect will be to distribute a degree of traffic to the
road.
Questioning of staff concluded by establishing that Metroplan has not included Kanis Road
on the regional arterial network,meaning it is not a thoroughfare qualified for Federal
funding assistance.Staff agreed with Commissioner Rector that the public cannot afford to
one-time build what it ought to build (current 4-lane),leaving developers to face the half-
street problems themselves,which they cannot afford either.It does not need to be a 4-lane
now;however,at some point in the future the warrant will exist.
Bob Turner stated that long-term funding possibilities might come out of Vision Little Rock.
However,Kanis Road must compete for future funds with other critical needs such as
Cantrell and Markham and some 37 traffic signals.Commissioner Faust summarized by
stating past actions of city boards got the City to the point it is now,a public policy problem
of funding.There is no point in waiting for future funding.The City should act now with the
framework of given needs and available options.
7
Those in favor of the proposal included property owners and developers along the corridor.
They offered a number of reasons to support the amendment.
The owner of Green Thumb Nursery,on Kanis Road at Bowman,stated her belief that it is
unfair to require full arterial construction and believed traffic congestion was not as bad as
some claim.
Developer Flake cited the lack of property attractiveness under the current 4-lane plan,
which leads developers to look elsewhere.Ramsey Ball stated that the sheer number of
existing residential parcels will have a prolonging effect on the time it take for commercial
re-development,should Land Use be upgraded to commercial.One office developer stated
the current 4-lane road is a mismatch to current Land Use.The shallow nature of tracts and
long frontage make right-of-way dedication itself the maximum burden developers can
afford,according to developer McDonough.
These developers were in favor of the amendment because it is affordable,provides some
degree of relief to Chenal Parkway congestion,is more manageable,and quicker developing
in its piecemeal fashion of construction.
Kathleen Olson,an advocate for a voter's group,advised not making burdensome boundary
street requirements the impetus for Land Use revisions.
David Jones,a developer opposed to the proposal,initiated a discussion against the
proposal.Traffic demands now require 4 lanes near Bowman Road by City Planning
guidelines and up-trends are strong.Furthermore,the Summit Mall will add traffic.He
disagreed with Public Works'laim that the proposed 36-foot street will carry rising traffic.
He disputed the idea the City will be able to find funds to widen the road at a later date.
Lastly,the proposed amendment would set a precedent for other planned arterials where he
and other developers would demand the same kind of street cost relief.
Discussion between Commissioner Rector and Mr.Turner concluded that precedence would
not be set because of Kanis Road's unique conditions:the land use,the number and
configuration of tracts,and the fact of stifled re-development.The proposal would make no
general policy change.Attorney Giles opined it was,in fact,unique.
Chairman Downing enlisted Tony Bozynski to display a map of the Land Use Plan and an
audience member to describe his law office development project on Kanis Road.The citizen
concluded he would generate little traffic and preferred a tree-lined street.He supported the
proposal with the caveat that full right-of-way acquisition was the lesson the City should
apply to the Kanis Road question.
Chairman Downing voiced objection to the proposal,preferring to table the amendment to
give an improvement district,which might fulfill the 4-lane intent of past City actions,time
to organize at the private level.He felt the proposal at hand exchanged one set of problems
for another.
8
Commissioner Berry replied that,given a certified Land Use policy and lack of public
financing for a 4-lane road,he supported the Commission's original 2-lane
recommendation.This 36-foot street amendment meets the enhanced 2-lane idea he
supports.
One criticism of the current plan,offered by Marilyn Carrico,was that Kanis Road
landowners pay for thoroughfare improvements.She felt the beneficiaries were large
"nodes"at both ends —the large residential and commercial districts where so much of west
Little Rock development is taking place.
Final discussion concluded public financing was necessary for the current 4-lane plan.
Without it,compromise on a case-by-case basis is necessary.Commissioner Rector
summarized that the thoroughfare component of Kanis Road had to be relegated to,and
financed by,thoroughfare users on the outside.
A motion was made to approve Public Works'SP amendment.The motion passed by a
vote of 8 ayes,l nay,2 absent.
9
May 17,2001
ITEM NO.:B
NAME:Master Street Plan Amendment
LOCATION:Master Street Plan Revision on Kanis Road —Stewart Road to
Burlingame Road
SOURCE:Developers and Public Works Staff
In the winter of 2001,a developer met with the Public Works staff to request their support
for a variance of boundary street improvements along a segment of Kanis Road for a
residential development.Kanis Road is in the extraterritorial area called Fletcher Hollow.
The current Master Street Plan (MSP)requires a minor arterial standard at this location.The
developer noted that the required street standard would be overly burdensome to the
residential development and would force the subdividing of lots into 5-acre tracts.Such
subdivision is exempt from boundary street regulations and similar residential developments
along this segment have already opted for this exemption.
The meeting concluded with the developer and the Public Works Director agreeing to a
reduced street standard for half-street construction but still requiring the 90-foot right-of-
way of minor arterials.The segment affected was for 0.8 miles of frontage within Fletcher
Hollow.This reduced design standard was approved by the Planning Commission on
January 25,2001 and the Board of Directors on February 20,2001.
Subsequently,Public Works staff considered it advisable to amend the MSP for a distance
beyond the frontage in question.The proposed amendment pertains to a 3.9-mile segment of
Kanis Road from Stewart Road west to Burlingame Road.The reduced street standard that
Public Works proposes is a phased street wherein the developer builds half of a 22-foot rural
2-lane road with 4-foot gravel shoulders and improved side ditch.The 90-foot right-of-way
now required would still apply under the proposal.Phase 2 construction would be the
typical minor arterial standard (4 lanes with median).Funding for Phase 2 would be at the
public's cost.The timing of Phase 2 is uncertain,but would depend upon traffic counts that
are not expected to put pressure on the street for 15 to 25 years and available funds.
Public Works believes this change is justified for three reasons:
(1)The current standard is prohibitively burdensome on residential development
affordability,
(2)There is a strong public desire to preserve the attractive,natural tree canopy,
1
(3)Traffic counts are low and expected to continue to be so.
On February 15,2001,the Public Works Department held a public meeting.All adjacent
property owners were notified of proposed Kanis Road changes.Public Works staff were
present to describe and discuss the changes and to answer questions.A list of attendees is
attached.
Findin s of Public Meetin:
Concerning this segment,attendees were largely in favor of the change to a 2-lane with
shoulders.Traffic counts are relatively low (1960 to 2545 vehicles per day)and the tree
canopy is important to area residents.A majority of attendees expressed a desire to preserve
the tree canopy rather than have a 5-lane arterial constructed.However,there were some
concerns over the likelihood of inducing higher speeds on the road caused by the addition of
shoulders.
Findin s of Traffic Studies:
Existing traffic counts for the segment of Kanis Road in question are as follows,given as
average daily traffic,2-way (ADT).These figures are the results of traffic counts conducted
by Public Works February 20 to 26,2001.
@Burlingame Road 1960 ADT
(located just east of intersection)
@ Stewart Road 2545 ADT
(located just west of intersection)
Projected future traffic counts for the near term (5 years)are expected to rise at a 5%to
10%annual rate,due to adjacent residential land use actively developing.This rate will put
future counts at about 2500 to 4000 ADT from the west end (Burlingame)to the east end
(Stewart)of the segment.These figures include a gradual rise in through-traffic.
Long term projections involve many assumptions and support a minor arterial street 15 to 25
years from now.Rated street capacity for an arterial is 18000 ADT,but can be tolerated at
levels upwards of 28000 ADT.
Plannin and Develo ment Comments:
The Land Use Plan in the Burlingame District proposes Single Family Use along Kanis Road
from just west of Stewart Road to the Planning Jurisdiction (east of Burlingame Road).While
this road will serve through trips,adjacent development should not be intense.A road design
2
that reflects a reduced intensity of development along the road would re-enforce the City's Land
Use Plan for the area.
Public Work Recommendations:
The Department of Public Works recommends approval of the proposed Master Street Plan
amendment for the Kanis Road segment between Stewart Road and Burlingame Road.
Specifically,Public Works recommends a 22-foot rural 2-lane road with 4-foot gravel
shoulders and improved side ditches.Right-of-way is to be 90 feet.Pavement structure and
drainage design is to be the same as the collector street standard,but sidewalks are not
required.Public Works will reserve the right to require left and right turn lanes as locations
of entrances into new development.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission.
Subdivision Committee Comments:Februa 15 2001
Committee members inquired of Public Works staffers about the type of streets being
proposed in the MSP amendment.They requested that maps of future Land Use Plans and a
discussion of traffic studies be included in the amendment write-up.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission.
Plannin Commission Action:March S 2001
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested that MSP Kanis Road proposal
be deferred to the April 19,2001 agenda.Extra time was needed for Public Works staffers
to present the proposal to the Pulaski County Planning Board meeting of March 29,2001,
and to perform additional traffic counts.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission,for inclusion within the consent
Agenda for deferral to the April 19,2001 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays,and 2 absent.
Pulaski Coun Plannin Board Action:March 29 2001
Public Works and Planning Staff presented the item to the County Planning Board.After
discussion,the Pulaski County Planning Board voted unanimously to support the
amendment to the Master Street Plan.
3
Plannin Commission Action:A ril 19 2001
Motion to defer the item until May 17,2001,passed by unanimous vote.
Plannin Commission Action:Ma 17 2001
Mr.Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,introduced the item and defined its extent from
Stewart Road to the Extraterritorial Planning Boundary (the operative boundary for the
MSP).
Mrs.T.L.Jumper,of Public Works,explained the amendment proposal before the
Commission.She described the phasing amendment wherein the developer builds an 11-foot
half-street with shoulder and ditch,and the City completes the arterial at some point in the
future (see "Background").
She summarized Public Works reasons for proposing this amendment.It is consistent with
county planning and with the variance to boundary street rules granted Ferncrest Estates II
along a portion of this corridor (see attached letter).It preserves the natural beauty of
Fletcher Hollow,thereby being context-sensitive to the residential Land Use of the area.The
proposal does not restrict any traffic capacity requirements.
Mr.Haas,an area notified resident,raised concerns over the original arterial classification
and whether or not the proposal represents cost shifting from developer to taxpayer.
Mr.Turner and Mrs.Jumper explained it was not cost shifting so much as not over-
burdening developers while making a desirable change for scenic environmental protection.
They further explained that the City would still receive the 90-foot right-of-way.
Mr.Walter Malone,of Planning Department,explained the functional classification
originates from the old highway usage of the road;people going long distances.The
structural design standard should be the focus of discussion.He went on to say that not all
arterials must be 4 lanes.
Mr.Mitchell,an area resident,supported the proposal.It was his opinion the proposal
preserves the canopied "gateway"to the Ferndale community for many years to come.
Ms,Olson,a voter's advocate,similarly supported the proposal,praising the right-of-way
acquisition.
A motion was made to approve the amendment.The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,0
nays,4 absent.
4
Staff U date Ma 1S 2001
Staff corrects the limits of the amendment from Burlingame Road to the operative Planning
Boundary.This correction reduces the affected length of Kanis Road to approximately 1.9
miles.
5
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
CO
M
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
VO
T
E
RE
C
O
R
D
DA
T
E
DO
)
ME
M
B
E
R
RE
C
T
O
R
,
BI
L
L
v
DO
W
N
I
N
G
,
RI
C
H
A
R
D
gy
,
'
g
g
)
~
NU
N
N
L
E
Y
,
OB
R
A
Y
v
BE
R
R
Y
,
CR
A
I
G
AD
C
O
C
K
,
PA
M
A
RA
H
M
A
N
,
MI
Z
A
N
LO
W
R
Y
,
BO
B
AL
L
E
N
,
FR
E
D
,
JR
.
FA
U
S
T
,
JU
D
I
T
H
v'U
S
E
,
RO
H
N
v
ME
M
B
E
R
RE
C
T
O
R
,
BI
L
L
DO
W
N
I
N
G
,
RI
C
H
A
R
D
~&
g
Ik
9
0
EA
NU
N
N
L
E
Y
,
OB
R
A
Y
L~
~
',
$
0
BE
R
R
Y
,
CR
A
I
G
AD
C
O
C
K
,
PA
M
RA
H
M
A
N
,
MI
Z
A
N
LO
W
R
Y
,
BO
B
AL
L
E
N
,
FR
E
D
,
JR
.
L
T
g:
5
Q
FA
U
S
T
,
JU
D
I
T
H
MU
S
E
,
RO
H
N
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Ad
j
o
u
r
n
e
d
j
5
P.
M
.
AY
E
NA
Y
E
AB
S
E
N
T
AB
S
T
A
I
N
RE
C
U
S
E
May 17,2001
There being no further business before the Commission,the meeting was adjourned
at 6:15 p.m.
nate 7 Z(-0
Sec e ary Chairman