The regular meeting of the San Lorenzo Village Homes Association Board of Directors was held Thursday, May 20, 1999 at 7:38 p.m. in the auditorium with Vice President David Sherman presiding over the meeting.

1.1 CALL TO ORDER - Vice President David Sherman called the meeting to order for President Jim Spears.

1.2 SALUTE TO THE FLAG - Vice President David Sherman led the Board and the audience in the pledge of allegiance.

1.3 ROLL CALL - Directors David Sherman, Dorothy Partridge, Jim Sherman, and Millie Arieta were present, Jim Spears was absent.

2.0 COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC AGENCIES

2.l Alameda County Sheriff's Department - The Administrator stated that the Sheriff's Department could not be present at the meeting this evening. The Deputies had left a copy of the crime statistics for last month.

2.2 CHP Department - Officer Rob Tuazon reported that Conunander Mike Flores is no longer with the department because he was promoted to the Golden Gate Division. John Larson will be the new commander and will be attending the unincorporated meeting scheduled in the San Lorenzo Community hall on May 26, 1999.

Officer Tuazon stated that traffic collisions decreased by two from the previous month in the San Lorenzo area. There were 7 DUI's in the San Lorenzo area, and a total of 93 DUI's for the entire county. A total of 1,339 citations were given out in Alameda County. Twenty-three percent were given in the San Lorenzo area (310). Other statistics for entire area, which included the freeways: 300 total traffic collisions, 109 injury collisions, 190 collisions with property damage only and one fatality.

Tuazon reported the department had its third bike rodeo, there were 107 participants and it was held at the Redwood Christian Chapel. Fourteen schools participated from throughout the area. Prizes and awards were given to the participants. It was a very successful event and many businesses participated in giving prizes and supporting the event.

Tuazon noted that the CHP had been getting a lot of calls, of which most were for traffic problems. He noted that a large amount, 78 percent were for vehicles parked up on side walks, or illegally. Tuazon stated that these calls are not top priority, collisions come before parking complaints, but the department is trying to get out as quickly as possible. The Administrator questioned whether the CHP had considered having an individual who is not a fully sworn officer to issue these types of citations. She stated that at one point she had spoken with the CHP Captain and he was going to look into doing this. Officer Tuazon stated that the CHP is a state agency and the moneys generated by the issuance of these citations are not received by his department. He believed that the County Sheriffs' Department would have more incentive to explore this option since they receive the funds for these citations.

Resident Keith Barros asked if radar surveillance is currently happening on Bockman road. Tuazon stated that yes, since the speed humps had proven to slow traffic the CHP is now shooting radar on Bockman mostly in the area between Via Alamitos and Bandoni.

2.3 Supervisor Gail Steele - Supervisor Steele had no report for the meeting.

3.0 MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

3.1 Approval of Minutes of Meeting No. 1019, Thursday, April 15, 1999 - Director Arieta made a motion to approve the minutes, with a second by Director Jim Sherman, the motion passed unanimously.

4.0 FINANCIAL REPORT

4.1 Approval of April 1999 Expenditures - Director Arieta moved with a second by Director Jim Sherman, that the Board approve the expenditures for April 1999. The motion was passed unanimously.

4.2 Discussion of Significant Variances - The Administrator said that there were no significant variances to report.

5.0 LIEN AND VIOLATION REPORT - The Administrator reported that there have been 3 liens that have been released, and currently there are 135 cases open.

Violation Report:

Inoperable/Unlicensed vehicle in front or side yard area:    20
Recreational vehicle in front or side yard area:              9
General Maintenance of property:                             93
Vehicle parked on lawn or other unpaved area:                 3
Others:                                                      10
Total Number of Letters Sent in April 1999                  135

6.0 ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT

6.1 Informational items - The Administrator announce that there will be a barbeque and craft event on June 6, 1999 by the San Lorenzo Theater Association.

Motion by Director Jim Sherman, and seconded by Director Arieta to approve the Administrator's Report. Motion carries unanimously.

7.0 OTHER BUSINESS

7.1 Continuation of Self-Storage Proposal at Washington & Grant (motion) - The Administrator announced that the representatives for the Self Storage proposal were present for the meeting. She reminded the audience that this agenda item is a continuation from last month, there were a number of items that the board asks to have clarified from the developers. Also at the zoning hearing the developers were asked to put together a drawing which would show the three stories in relationship to the other buildings in the area.

Richard Flynn, attorney representing Mr. Poliso, stated that the continuation of the zoning hearing was due to many factors. There were requests to change the access point from Grant Ave. to Washington, there were requests to increase setbacks and there were also requests to complete a computer simulation that would show the observer how the building would appear to the surrounding developments. Mr. Flynn stated the county was presented with a computer disk with the simulation, however they were unable to translate the simulation thus far, but have promised to have the simulation by next Wednesday, May 26, 1999 at the zoning administration public hearing. Flynn suggested that persons interested in that aspect of the presentation call the planning department and talk to the project planner to get a better idea of the availability of the computer simulation.

Mr. Flynn presented some colored versions of the modified plot plan. He stated that the county traffic engineer was contacted and has no objections to the access for this facility shifting from Grant Ave to Washington. The developer also had no problems with this, thus the ingress and egress for the facility are now located on Washington Ave. All exterior portions of the facility have now been increased to two stories, including the managers live-in unit. The heights have been reduced pursuant to a request by a neighbor Mr. Poliso spoke with. The three story unit will be reduced anywhere from 2 to 3 feet in height, making the height 31 feet to the ridge and 28 feet to the eaves of the structure. The set-back from the church has also been changed to meet the zoning administrations requirements. Flynn stated that the developer feels the project has been improved by this process and they believe it should now be considered for development in the area.

Director Arieta said it seems that the storage area has now been increased so that the developer can get away with a three-story structure in the center of the project. She stated she is opposed to the project. She did not approve of the three-story unit in the middle of the facility and that corner is not the right place for this type of development. There is currently a new proposal on tonight's agenda for another storage facility to go in on Lewelling and there is curently a storage facility on Hesperian. She said the Village is surrounded by storage facilities and she is not in favor of another at this location. Flynn stated that an analysis for use was done extensively for the site. Market surveys were done do evaluate what development would prosper at this site. What the audience is seeing tonight is the distillation of that market survey. A business that does not succeed, does no one any good, not the neighbors, not the property owners, the surrounding community, nor the Association. Director David Sherman asked how much lower the center building is from the original proposal. Flynn stated that it is approximately three feet lower, making it now lower than the ridge line of the church next door. Director Partridge asked whether the facility would be a gated facility and what the hours of operation would be. Flynn stated that it would be a gated facility and the hours of operation would run from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. daily. Director Partridge stated that she felt the developers had made some genuine efforts to change certain things about the development based upon the concerns from the last Board of Directors meeting. Partridge said that this type of development would generate the least amount of traffic to the area, and right now she is tired of looking at the vacant, weed-ridden lot which is one of the entrances to San Lorenzo. She would support the current project with modifications due to the fact that the proposal would generate the least amount of traffic.

Vice President Dave Sherman opened up the floor to the public prior to the board voting on the issue. Resident Kathy Ready was concerned about the 24 inch tree landscaping around the facility. She questioned how the trees would survive the high school and grammar school children who travel the area to and from school on week days. She was also concerned with the fence between the church and the facility. She questioned the measures of prevention which would be taken so that this wall did not become a huge graffiti canvas for children in or out of the area. Flynn stated that the landscaping on the drawings is diagrammatical only. The landscaping in only one possible plan, and will be ultimately evaluated by a trained landscaping architect prior to the county's approval. Graffiti is a concern for the property owner, he has an ongoing responsibility of keeping the property clear of any graffiti. Flynn stated that there would a very careful evaluation of the texture and finish of the wall. There are textures and finishes which are designed to discourage and/or practically prohibit the use of paints and/or sprays. Nancy Shelby asked how this business will benefit the residents of San Lorenzo. Flynn stated that the industry's objective is to locate facilities of this sort as close to the community who have need of them. He reiterated that the market analysis showed that there are more than enough people within the surrounding area who are in need of this type of storage facility. Resident Diane Rinella stated that she is a former Arroyo High School student. She stated that when she went to the high school traffic was already bad enough. She did not feel another storage unit was needed in the area. She also was concerned with the type of clientele attracted by some of the current storage units in the area. She wanted to see the artists renditions of this facility with respect to the surrounding buildings and development. Jill Maughan, resident, was concerned how the owners would prevent businesses from running out of this facility. Flynn stated that the traffic issue is easily addressed, he said in an analysis by use, a storage facility promotes the least amount of traffic to an area. The conduct of a business out of any one of the storage units is a zoning violation and the owner would call the zoning enforcement to handle any of these problems.

Director Jim Sherman questioned whether the corners have been raised with the lowering of the three stories. Flynn stated that the corners would stay the same size. Flynn reminded the audience that the computer simulation at the May 26 planning meeting would address concerns about how the development looked as compared with other structures in the area. Director David Sherman stated that at last month's board meeting many of the board members had concerns about the third story and now the directors are being asked to make a recommendation without the computer simulation that would show how the facility would look in comparison to the surrounding area. He said without this simulation it is very difficult to approve this development.

Resident Lisa Gudjohnsen asked what other businesses or facilities could properly be zoned for the area. Flynn stated that the C-1 business district is zoned for virtually any retail business. Taverns, restaurants, fast-food (conditional use), theater (conditional use) any recreational facility that you could get in on this site is permitted. Mortuaries and any retail business. Flynn stated that it is the least restricted commercial zone that you will find in the zoning ordinance. Resident Pat Piras stated that there has been a lot of discussion about alternative uses for the site including recreational opportunities for youth, and in particular a bowling alley. She stated that she felt that the developers have been very responsive to the concerns of residents with respect to changing the entrance of the facility and was pleased that the development would not affect the bus stops that are currently located in front of the lot. Piras stated that she hoped the board members would remember at the last association meeting as well as the subsequent zoning hearing, a majority of the residents in the affected area were in support of this proposal. Piras believed that this type of development would have the least negative impact to the surrounding community when compared to other potential uses for the site. Resident Keith Barros asked whether the lease and/or the facility notifies potential storage tenants of the violation to the zoning ordinance for running a businesses out of a unit. Flynn stated that typically the rental agreement does not contain language that deals with the zoning violations for running a business. However, he did not think the property owner would be opposed to adding this requirement as a condition for approval should the Board recommend this. Resident Christine Wagner asked what kind of signs would be on the facility and what type of lighting and security would be surrounding the facility. Flynn stated that the signs used and the lighting would be subject to the standards of the site development review process and the zoning administrator. The security of the building would be the on-site manager with the facility being a locked, gated facility. The Administrator asked how the owner would prevent drugs from being stored in the facility. She stated that it was suggested by Mr. Meniktas at another meeting that as long as it is in the lease, law enforcement authorities could come onto the property to search for drugs if there was any suspicion of drug storage on the premises. Flynn stated that this would not be a problem and it is standard for most storage facilities.

Director Jim Sherman stated that he wishes the county would have had the computer simulation available, so that he could see how the three stories looked in the surrounding area, because the way that the proposal stands now he could not support it. Director Partridge stated that she would make a motion to support the proposal, with conditions attached to it, but felt her motion would die for lack of support.

Director Jim Sherman made a motion to oppose the proposal of the storage facility on the corner of Grant Avenue and Washington in San Lorenzo, Director Arieta seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote:

     J. Sherman:       Aye
     D. Sherman:       Aye
     Arieta:           Aye
     Partridge:        No
     Spears:           Absent

7.2 Construction of four-story hotel/self storage facility at Lewelling and Embers (motion) - The Administrator stated that she had a number of residents come to her from Paseo Del Rio concerned about the proposed construction of a four-story hotel with self storage unit in San Leandro. She stated that she just got the information regarding this proposal last Thursday, when there was a scheduled planning commission meeting on the issue. A resident went to this meeting and brought her back information regarding the project. Ron Groves a resident on Paseo Del Rio contacted surrounding neighbors and outlined the problems and concerns of the residents in the area regarding this project in a letter. The problems outlined were land use: overwhelming, towering building looking down upon homes, in some cases the only view in a resident's back yard will be that of the hotel building. The second concern, light and glare: buildings causing more lighting into back yards of homes; parking lots giving off extra lighting, automobiles headlight's flashing into back yards from the parking lot and the third item, transportation circulation: over-flow parking into the surrounding area. The other concerns are the increase traffic congestion in and around the facility, and finally the issue of noise: parking lot noise echoing across the creek and air conditioning noises; opened windows allowing guests to call out and neighbors to hear unwanted conversations; and extra noise by trucks delivering hotel supplies. The neighbors have come up with a recommendation to the Board to forward these concerns to the San Leandro Planning Commission along with suggestions to the site plan which would include either Plan 1: change the current site plan and build a two-story facility along the creek, which would then buffer and block the noise, lights and sounds from the hotel or if that can't be done Plan 2: have the current site plan to be used that makes the hotel 3 stories and build the tallest sound wall possible along the creek with big trees making the rear windows so that people cannot call or open to allow loud conversations heard from outside and minimize air conditioning noise make lighting in parking lot as well as lighting on and around hotel in such a way to minimize impact to the neighborhood. The Administrator reminded the Board that the motion that would be before them this evening would not be a motion supporting or opposing the project, but rather a motion that would 1) recognize and agree with the problems that the development of this project could have upon the neighbors of the area; and 2) Recommend that the proposal either in the form of plan 1 or plan 2 be looked at seriously by the developer before it is to be implemented. The motion would not be on the merits of the proposal. The facility is proposed for the city of San Leandro and will be heard by its Planning Department.

The Administrator asked the developer to come up and introduce himself and address some of the concerns. Ian Birchall from Field Paoli Architects and Kevin Carter from the Cubix Construction Company spoke on behalf of the project. Birchall stated that the hotel being proposed is a 120-room Hawthorne Suite Limited Hotel. Hawthorne is a franchise and caters to traveling business people. The prices for rooms will start out on average for $79.95 per night and will go up in subsequent years. Mr. Birchall stated that there are no kitchens in the rooms, the hotel will be a legitimate top quality business catering to business persons. There are no on sight banking or entertainment facilities. The cooking facilities in the hotel are for continental type breakfasts for guests only. The bar at the hotel will not host sports events or any other events to draw outside persons. It will be a bar for business persons, catering to guests coming back from a business meeting and will serve cocktails from approximately 5pm to 7:30pm nightly. Birchall stated that four stories were required to make the development economically successful for the developer, as well as to have adequate parking and landscaping at the sight.

Birchall stated that the developer has tried to mitigate the problem of the headlights of the cars spilling into adjacent residents properties across the creek. The hotel has been moved back to limit the parking and the travel to the back of the sight. The orientation of the building has been looked at to either parallel Embers, the first site design looked at placing the storage between the creek and the hotel, however this would not work without serious impacts to the project, one of which would be moving the Roberts House to somewhere else in the county. Birchall stated that this house with the current plan will remain where it is and will be restored. With respect to the lighting of the building there are no signs at the back of the hotel. There will be no flood lights on the back of the building, no illumination on the back of the building whatsoever at night. There will be lamp standards throughout the parking area for safety that will be hooded to prevent the spill of the lighting to other areas. The developer will provide additional landscaping and trees on the creek side of the property to help prevent any spill of lighting, sound etc. Birchall presented two architectural drawings of the sight to the Board and the audience to review and asked for suggestions, concerns.

The Administrator stated that Birchall did not cover the issue of air conditioning, nor did he address the issue of open windows, allowing conversations to be heard by nearby residents. Birchall stated that the he is a proponent of natural insulation and thus there will be opened windows. With respect to the air conditioners he stated that the sound from these units will be far less than that of a car traveling along the road. He stated that the developers would look seriously look at the sound coming from the air conditioners and try to mitigate the amount of noise coming from the units. The Administrator asked whether the developer had considered internal air conditioning units. Birchall stated that internal units were looked at however, they are substantially more expensive. The Administrator asked why the developer wants fewer parking spaces for the site. Mr. Birchall stated that there was a desire from the city of San Leandro to increase the landscaping at the site which would thus impact on the amount of parking needed for the development. Mr. Birchall recommended to the city that if the parking requirements were relaxed then the development would be able to meet the additional landscaping needs. Birchall said the hotel rarely has all 120 rooms full. The facility does not have a banquet room for large groups of people. They have projected an average occupancy for the hotel of approximately 65 to 70 %. The question as to what happens when the hotel is full and every guests drives to the facility is an important one and they are in discussion with the city as to how to balance the parking needs with the landscaping needs. The Administrator asked how many parking spaces are presently slated for the site. Birchall stated that currently there are 116 spaces for 120 rooms.

A resident questioned where the employees will be parking. Birchall stated that there have been discussions about shuttling employees to the sight, but he is unclear as to where they will be shuttled from as they are still working out the parking with the city. Resident Harry Gin said he missed the first part of the presentation and asked what type of hotel the establishment this would be. Birchall reiterated that the hotel would cater to business persons. Resident Lorene Rouse stated she was concerned with the fact that prostitutes and drug dealers could afford to stay at a hotel for $79.95 per night, she didn't feel that the pricing would be a deterrent to receiving this type of clientele at the hotel. She was also concerned with the amount and the location of the parking. Rouse did not feel the parking would be stream-lined to the front of the building but felt that there would be more room to the back of the facility, where her home is near. She was also concerned about the Robert's House and how it would be utilized. She questioned how it would remain a historical landmark if it was transformed into an office. She also did not feel that the storage unit or an additional hotel was needed in the area and urged the Board to support the residents concerns by voting to send a letter outlining these concerns to the City of San Leandro.

Kevin Carter outlined the storage unit proposal. He stated that the Cubix Construction Company was working with the city on this project to develop a low traffic business along with the historical landmark that is presently at the site (Captain Robert's House). The construction company looked at several site plans and concluded that due to security and other reasons the present design worked the best. Carter stated that Roberts House will be restored. The facade on the outside of the facility will remain the same and repainted. One room will be converted into an office but the rest of the inside will remain the same. Resident Ron Groves stated that he is one of the residents on Paseo Del Rio who helped to draft the letter of concerns. He was concerned about the way the City of San Leandro notified the surrounding residents, without addressing what the development would look like. He pointed out that the diagrams presented at this Board meeting have additional changes that he and other residents were unable to see at the San Leandro meeting. He said that what is being asked in the letter are some considerations that address the same negative impacts the city of San Leandro had with respect to land use, lighting, noise and transportation. Groves pointed out that none of the residents in San Lorenzo near this development were notified about these negative impacts. He said that he would like Supervisor Steele to get the city and/or county involved in doing a site development description wl-iich would include input from the San Lorenzo residents it could affect. He stated that he walked his neighborhood and received endorsement to this letter of concerns from 15 neighbors. He invited the residents to review the diagrams presented and have further discussion on the issue.

The Administrator stated that comments must be given to the San Leandro Planning Commission by June 2, 1999. She questioned what the procedure was with respect to further review of the project. Groves stated the item will go back to the San Leandro Planning Commission on June 10, 1999 and when he left the last meeting the commission had directed the developers to work with the concerned citizens on Paseo Del Rio to iron out the concerns.

Christine Stuber a resident on Paseo Del Prado questioned why a storage unit and a hotel were being developed on the property, when the two seem like a strange combination. Carter clarified that the meeting that his company had last week was a planning meeting, and not a meeting for approval. The developers wanted to get feedback from city staff at that meeting regarding the project. They were also under the impression that county staff would be forwarding a packet regarding the project to the San Lorenzo Village Homes Association, but apparently that did not happen. Carter stated that the storage unit was suggested as a good buffer to the development that would create lower traffic in the area and was suggested by the City of San Leandro. Director David Sherman asked where these business people would be coming from. Birchall was unclear as to where they would be coming from but stated that the Hawthorne Hotel has been successful in the past at attracting business persons to its facility.

The Administrator stated that she felt that all the continents regarding this hotel/storage facility from Paseo del Rio residents and those who spoke tonight were legitimate concerns and she would recommend that the Board approve a letter voicing these concerns to be forwarded to the City of San Leandro and further, that she be directed to appear at June 10 Planning Commission meeting to make sure that these concerns are vocalized by the Association. She stated that there are a lot of unanswered questions, especially the question as to where the employees would park. The Administrator stated that the increase in overflow parking will not necessarily affect the residents on Paseo del Rio but rather other residential streets in the Association.

A resident, Blake Pannell, stated that he works for Mervyns Corporation and he has seen business people who come to Mervyns Corporate meetings, stay at hotels in the area and dine at nearby restaurants. He said that this hotel could actually bring business to nearby restaurants in San Lorenzo and would be a positive benefit to the community. Resident Karyn Ready stated that she agrees that the hotel would bring business into our area. Resident Harry Gin pointed out that this business will benefit San Leandro not San Lorenzo. Gin suggested that the owners donate some of its revenues to the community as an effort in good-faith to the developments neighboring community. Resident Howard Beckman stated that he is also concerned that whatever development occurs at this site will affect what San Lorenzo develops within its boundaries. He stated that he is concerned not only about the impact of the nearest neighbors to the development, but in a more broader sense, how this development will impact to the whole community. Resident Mary Ann McMillan stated that she is concerned with the retention of the historical significance of Captain Robert's house. She questioned as to whether the interior had been maintained as Victorian in nature during the last restoration. Carter stated he believed that it had been maintained.

Carter stated that overflow parking is a concern. There is currently no parking on Embers, Lewelling or Hesperian near the hotel. However he stated that most guests/employees would not benefit from parking in the adjacent neighborhoods because they would be blocks from the hotel. He also stated that with respect to the increase in noise, any development at the site would be an increase in the noise due to the fact that there is no development currently at that sight. He stated that the development is creating a noise break from freeway traffic for residents behind the development. Director Partridge stated that many of the hotels in the area that cater to business persons are very busy, the Executive Inn at the San Leandro Marina is a good example, and she felt that there is a demand for this type of hotel in the area.

Director Partridge made a motion that the Board send a letter as drafted by the residents of Paseo del Rio expressing their concerns and have the Administrator appear at the San Leandro Planning Commission regarding these concerns. Director Arieta seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

7.3 Second and Final Reading of Incorporation of Centex Homes - The Administrator read the resolution to incorporate the Centex Homes development into the Association for the final time. (See attached resolution.)

Roll Call Vote on the Resolution:

         Spears: Absent
         Partridge: Aye
         J. Sherman: Aye
         D. Sherman: Aye
         Arieta: Aye

7.4 Proposal to declare Lorenzo Theater as a historical building (motion) - Larry Leal announced that the Theater Association is having its Crafts Fair/BBQ on June 6, 1999. To date they have sold 50 spaces to the Craft Fair and thus they will be utilizing both the Homes Association parking lot as well as the old Mervyns' parking lot for the event.

Leal stated the reason he is present is to request that the Board support the County of Alameda designating the Lorenzo Theater as a county historical landmark. He stated that this support does not commit the San Lorenzo Village Homes Association to any financial responsibility for the theater and it has no bearing on who acquires the building, how much it will cost to restore, nor who will fund it. Leal announced that the Lorenzo Theater Association filed papers in Sacramento yesterday for non-profit status. He said they have become advocates for the theater, something that has not been done since the closure of the theater nearly 20 years ago. He stated that there are over 100 interested supporters of the Theater Association and it is growing. Leal stated that per the Association's survey last Sept/Oct 98 had a 39 percent response rate which is high. Of the two questions concerning the theater, one of which asked whether a respondent would like to see the Lorenzo Theater restored as a multi-use facility, 54 % of respondents wanted to see the theater come back as a multi-use facility; 62% of the respondents stated they would donate time and or money to the effort of this restoration. Leal stated that this shows that there is support for this effort within the Association. Leal outlined why the theater is appropriate to be deemed a historical landmark and urged the Board's support for this effort and presented booklets outlining the history of the theater to each of the Board members. He noted that he has been contacted by many theater groups in and out of the area interested in what the group is doing with respect to the Lorenzo Theater.

Director Jim Sherman made a motion to support the Lorenzo Theater as being declared a county historical landmark. Director Partridge seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

The Administrator noted that prior to the Board meeting members of the Board and the Theater Association group met with the prospective buyer of the theater, Dr. Sanwal. She suggested that the group should talk about this meeting and should discuss what needs to be done to get the word out to the community and how the group wants to proceed with the evaluation of what this Doctor's proposal was since he is planning on going before the zoning administrator on June 9. 1999. The Administrator stated that the perspective buyer is planning to devote 3900 square feet of the total 13,000 square feet available in the theater, to an animal hospital care facility. He plans to restore the building on the outside. There remains some 9000 square feet of space that has been suggested could be home to a senior housing facility, however, he seemed receptive to what the community wants for this remaining space.

The Administrator asked the Board how it would proceed with this issue, such as having a special meeting? Director Arieta stated that the Board is not prepared on how to proceed on this matter this evening, that it was only prepared to vote on the historical designation of the theater. She suggested that the community make the Board aware of how it wants to use the theater. The Administrator stated that she thought it was important for the community to have a meeting with the prospective owner regarding this issue due to the fact that if the theater is used as a veterinary clinic it may quash any means of getting it deemed historical. She suggested that the Board urge the county delay the item before the county for a month or more so that the Business Development Committee, the community and Theater Association could meet with the prospective owner to discuss his intentions. Resident, Keith Barros, stated that he would help draft a letter to get a continuance on the issue before the county.

Director Partridge stated that the new potential owner seemed amenable to working with the community as long as he gets a veterinary clinic. Supervisor Steele stated that the county is presently taking action against the current owner due to the fact he did not paint the theater as requested. This abatement action will be heard prior to approval of any plans moving forward. Daryl Gray, the zoning administrator is aware of this action. It is unclear if the prospective owner is aware of this action. The Administrator stated that the community needs to decide what it ideally wants for the building and the Theater Association needs to have a plan for a way to finance the project they want for the theater. She stated that there needs to be discussions of what to do with the theater if the finances can not be raised to restore the theater as a multi-use theater facility. She said she has no opinion on the matter but felt that these public forums should take place. Resident Diane Rinella stated that the community needs the Board assistance and any help they can give to the theater groups vision would be appreciated. Director Arieta stated that the Board is aware of what the theater group wants and is supportive of what it wants. Resident Kathy Ready stated that she does not believe the Board is supportive of the theater group's vision, especially when it continually states what "a nice person" the prospective owner is. Ready stated that this is what the community was told about the current owner who bought the property.

Director David Sherman stated that if the board is going to set up a meeting with the prospective owner, he encouraged residents to be respectful of his ideas. Resident Patricia Hoke stated that she feels it is important to set an agenda of what needs to be done for the theater. Clarify what is going to be done and set some dates so that those who have busy schedules can do what they can to assist with the process.

Director Sherman asked for a motion to send a letter requesting/demanding a continuance on the item on the zoning agenda regarding the theater and also set up a meeting with the community and the prospective owner regarding what his plans are and what the expectations of the community are.

The Administrator asked what the meeting would be about. Would it be just to discuss the theater? Director Jim Sherman stated that it should be just about what to do with the theater. The Administrator stated that the community needs to have some goals if it is going to meet with the prospective owner about how it would raise the funds to restore this building as a multi-use theater. She asked Leal whether the community is ready to sit down with prospective owner and talk to him with a definite proposal as to what the group can do money-wise? Leal stated that money-wise the group is not ready, but the community can let this man know what it wants to see for the area. Leal suggested that redevelopment moneys may be available as they have been for other old theaters. He said that the goal of the group is the restoration of the theater not the acquisition of the theater. The Administrator asked if there is any room for compromise. Leal said no, if the theater is turned into a vet clinic the murals and interior of the facility will be changed as to make it difficult for the building to be deemed historical.

Director Partridge stated that the first thing the board needs to consider is to get a continuance on the hearing on the issue before the zoning administrator. Director David Sherman stated that a two-month continuance would give the group enough time to meet with the prospective owner. Supervisor Gail Steel stated that she would take care of getting the continuance through Daryl Gray, the Zoning Administrator. Steele said she personally would not approve a partial use for the theater, especially without the community's input.

The Administrator suggested that the Board set up a community meeting with a forum regarding the theater and also look into a meeting with the Business Development Committee and the County regarding the issue of redevelopment for the area. Resident Howard Beckman stated that he did not feel that redevelopment was an issue for the theater and should not be discussed.

The Administrator asked for a good day to meet with the prospective buyer of the theater. June 14 and 15 were chosen as potential dates. The Association office would check with the prospective buyer and schedule accordingly. The Board to decided to discuss the redevelopment meeting date at another time due to the time constraints of the meetings's agenda.

8.0 COMMITTEE REPORTS

8.1 Council on Prevention of Drinking and Driving No report due to Director Spears absence.

8.2 Youth Resources Committee - No report.

8.3 California Highway Patrol Committee - No report.

8.4 Airport Committees - No report.

8.5 Business Development - Mary Ann McMillan reported for Chair Thoms on behalf of the Business Development Committee. She stated that the committee had met with Scott Bohannon and some county personnel at its last meeting and had finalized its vision statement which is included in the brochure they are planning to use to approach businesses. McMillan stated that Bohannon agreed to meet with the subcommittee to be present for a mini-seminar with county personnel regarding how to approach businesses. Bohannon also agreed to provide some previous site development plans for the committee to look at. The Business Development Committee agreed to get more education about the process of getting business interested and agreed to get updated demographics. Director Partridge questioned what the vision of the committee was for the Square area, she had stated the Board had not received a formal document outlining its vision. McMillan stated that the committee's vision is in the brochure prepared by the committee and given to each Board member, however if needed it can prepare a letter and formerly outlining its vision plan and forward it onto the Board by its June 1999 meeting. McMillan stated that the committee will be formulating a plan to implement its vision and will need until August or September to formulate this plan.

The Administrator stated she had forwarded a memo to Business Development members and the Board prior to the Association meeting regarding the Business Development Committee and she would like to withdraw the memo at this point and time in terms of the recommendations and in the interest of harmony and unity.

Howard Beckman stated that the vision statement is not a plan but merely a vision to be put forward prior to developing a plan. He was frustrated that the Board had not accepted this vision plan which is in the brochure given to them two Board meetings prior to tonight. The Administrator pointed out that the Chair, Travis Thoms, had never formally presented the vision plan to the Board as requested. She recommended that the Board accept the plan as outlined in the brochure so that the committee could move on.

Director Partridge made a motion to approve the four points to the vision plan for the Business Development Committee as outlined in its brochure. Director Arieta seconded. The motion passes with 3 Ayes and 1 Abstention (Jim Sherman).

9.0 COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - Director Dave Sherman stated that he initially ran for the Board hoping that he could do something positive for the community and to spend more time with his father, who was a Board member. In the recent months he feels that it would be more beneficial to spend time with his wife and children and so he respectfully is resigning from the Board. He thanked the public for voting him into office and for his time on the Board.

10.0 PUBLIC COMMENT - No public comment from the audience.

11.0 ADJOURNMENT - Director Arieta made a motion to adjourn the meeting. With a second by Director Jim Sherman. The meeting was adjourned at 11:05PM.

Respectfully Submitted,

Dorothy Partridge
Secretary-Treasurer

Recorded & Transcribed By: Kathleen Harrigan, Sr. Admin. Assistant
Reviewed By: Nancy Van Huffel, Administrator