HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-13-1971 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLA~NNING COMiMISSION
MINUTES
TI~: Monday, 13 December 1971 - 7:30 P.M.
PLACE: City Council Chambers - 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, 'Saratoga, California
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION.
The meeting was called to order. by Chairman Lively at 7:30 P.M.
A. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Bacon, Bela~ger, Lively/Marshall, Martin,
Metcalf, and Smith.
B. 'MINUTES
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall,
that the reading of the minutes of 22 November 1971'meeting
be waived and that they be approved as distributed to the
Commission; motion carried unanimously.
C. FORMER CO~MISSIONER RODERICK V. FAGAN
Chairman Lively suggested that the Planning Commission authorize
a letter of acknowledgement. to former Commissioner Roderick V.
Fagan for his service to the Planning Con~nission.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Metcalf, that a
letter be drafted by the Secretary and signed by the Chairman of
the Commission thanking former Commissioner Fagan for his contri-
butions and services to the Saratoga Planning Commission;_motiOn
carried unanimously.
D. JOINT STUDY SESSION
The Secretarystated that at the last meeting a date was suggested
for a Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning Commission
but that date does not seem to be suitable for everyone concerned
and a time later in January? 1972 might be more appropriate.
Chairman Lively stated that'the Planning Commission is agreeable to
any date decided upon by the City Council.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. C-129 - James F. Wilson, Pierce Road - Request for'Change of Zoning
from "R-I-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) to "R-I-20,000"
· ~ (Single-Fa>nily Residential)
Chairman Lively opened the hearing relative to C-129 at 7:36 P.M.
The Secretary stated that the Notice of Hearing was mailed and
published. He further stated that no communications were received
but that the residents of the area that submitted a petition when'
this application was previously under consideration wish to have
that petition reinstated.
-1-
Planning Conmission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued
II. A. C-129 ~ Continued
Mrs. Wilson, the applicant, was present and stated that the change of zoning
would provide only one additional building site and would allow utilization of
proparty which is a problem and a nuisance at this point.
Chairman Lively stated that the most recent General Plan sh'owed this parcel
of property as a buffer area between the "R-i-40,000" (Single-Family Residential)
and the "R-t-12,500" (Single-Family Residential) zoning and this subject request
for change of zoning is in conformance 'with what is sho~ on th'e General Plan.
Mr. Seymour Bross, 12849 Ashley Court, stated that he lived directly behind
this parcel and requested, on behalflof the residents in the area, that the
petition previously submitted in opposition to this change of zoning be
reinstated to apply to the present request.
Chairman Lively inquired if the Commission is to assume that the people whose
names appear on this petition. still feel that their complaint is valid since
the change of zoning request has been altered from the request originally
submitted. Chairman Lively advised that he would be hesitant to accept a
petition that was signed a year ago especially since the proposal is now
different.
Mr. Bross stated that he had not contacted all the residents whose names
appear on the petition, but he could do so and submit a new petition. He
then read and submitted a letter stating his ox~m views and objections to
the proposed change of zoning.
Chairman Lively, in answer to an inquiry from Mr. Bross, stated that 1) the
General Plan has been amended and shows this parcel as a buffer zone 2) the
General Plan Map is a land use map and not a zoning map 3) this particular
parcel is a problem piece of property'and 4) because of the size of this
building site it will be close to a 40,000 square foot lot on a parcel that
is zoned "R-l~20,000".
Mr. Frank Patton of 12842 Carniel Court was present and Stated he would like
to'be better informed on this proposal.
Chairman Lively explained that Mr. Patton could arrange for an appointment
with the Subdivision Committee since they will be doing further study on
the matter and will prepare the report relative to the subject request.
Mrs. Wilson, in answer to an inquiry from Mr. Bross, stated that the home
proposed for the subject site will not be as close tc the neighbors rear
property line as their (the neighbors) home is to the rear property line of
her property.
Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 7:59 P.M., referred the
change of zoning request (C-129) to the Subdivision Committee, and continued
the matter to the next regular meeting.
B. C-140 - Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, Saratoga and Cox Avenues - Request
for Change of Zoning from "A" (Agricultural) to "P-A" (Professional-
Administrative)
. Chairman Lively opehed the hearing at' 8:00 P.M. The Secretary stated the
Notices of Hearing were mailed and published.
Reverend Anderson, present to represent the applicant, stated that no one
in the area has voiced any objection to the proposed change of zoning.
No one else present wished to comment.
Plannin8 Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued
II. B. C-140 - Continued
Uhairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 8:02 P.M., directed
C-140 continued to the next regular meeting, and referred same to the Sub-
division Committee for study.
III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS
A. SD-904 - George W. Day, Fruitvale Avenue and Douglass Lane - Subdivision
Approval -.15 Lots - COntinued from 22 November 1971
The Secretary explained that 1) this.request for subdivision approval will
eventually be fon~arded to the City Council as part of the "P-C" development
currently being considered by the Planning Commission for this property
2) the developer is ready to submit a revised tentative map for review by
the Planning Commission and 3) the City Council will again review the "P-C"
zoning in connection with this application on 15 December 1971.
Chairman. Lively advised that the City Council cannot make a recommendation on
the change of zoning request until a tentative map is approved by the Planning
Commission and fon~arded to the City Council.
Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee did meet with the
applicant and the revised tentative map consist Of two (2) proposals:
1) Lot sizes of 35,000 to 37,500 square feet.
2) Lot sizes of 35,000 square feet or a little
less.
Commissioner Smith further stated tha~ 1) these size lots seem to be the
most desirable; however, there has been mention made of 30,000 square foot
lots but the Subdivision Committee feels lots of this size would be too
small 2) the present tentative map shows a common"g~een area along Fruitvale Avenue
and Douglass Lane with n8 internal common. green area for the development
3) the road w0~ld tie-.in with possible street development planned for the
some eighty (80) acres as sho~m in the General Plan and 4) the maps are
available for review.
Mr. Lou Leto, General Manager for George Day Company, was present and sub-
mitted the revised maps and explained each in detail.
chairma_n__Lively stated he is in favor zof the plan with a range of building site sizes
from 35,000 to 47,000 square foot lots or an average of approximately 38,000 square ft.
Commissioner Smith, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Belanger, stated
that the remaining undeveloped property in this area will eventually be
developed and the property currently under consideration must be laid out
with this future development in mind.
Commissioner Marshall stated that x~ith the applicant's current proposal a
substantial house can be built on a large lot an~ a common green area can
still 'be provided.
Commissioner Smith, in answer to an inquiry from Comnissioner Belanger, stated
that there would be deed restrictions and City Ordinances to control fencing in
this development.
Commissioner Belanger stated that she is really sorry that the City did not
arrange for a more extensive study by an outside firm for the subject "P-C"
development.
Commissioner Martin stated that'l) he is in favor of the 35,000 to 37,500
square foot size lots 2). he would like to see more than 30-foot setbacks on
Fruitvale. Avenue 3) 50-feet would be aesthetically more pleasing and 4) he
would like to see the 50-foot area .become part of the cornmon green area.
-3-
Planning Comnission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued~
III. A. SD-904 - CDntinued
Commissioner Belanger stated she is .really not in favor of either plan as
submitted by the applicant at this time.
Chairman Lively stated that the sentiment of the residents of this area is
that they will accept a proposal that has lot sizes similar to their
It is his opinion that either one of the applican~'s plans are acceptable°
The Secretary, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Lively, stated that the
applicant will be required to submit a Maintenance Agreement for the cormnon-
green area along with the tentative map.
Commissioner Smith recommended that SD-904 be continued to the next regular
meeting in order to allow time for p.reparati0n of the Building Site Committee
Report and submittal of the tentative map.
Chairman Lively so directed.
B. SDR-918 - Monty R. Boyd, Arroyo de Arguello - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 22 November 1971
The Secretary stated that the applicant did review the proposed conditions
of approval and expressed satisfaction with smne.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the Building
Site Committee Report dated 13 December 1971 relative to SDR-918 be adopted and
that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 12 August 1'971) be approved subject
to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously.
C. SDR-931 - Jordan M." Penno~ Via Regina - Building Si~e'Approval - 2 Lots
The Secretary requested that this matter be continued .since there is a
topographic situation there ~,~ich entails grading and a retaining. wall; therefore,
'additional time is required to review the matter.
Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee concurs with the
request for continuance since they would need additi~aal time for review of
this property and an on-site inspection of the building site.
Chairman Lively directed SDR-931 continued to the ne~t regular meeting°
D. SDR-932 George Akers, E1 Camino Senda - BUilding Si.t,e Approval - 2 Lots
~e Secretary recommended that SDR-932 be continued t~ the next regular meeting
in order to allow time to resolve 1). the Health Depar.tment refusal to approve
septic tank facilities for this building site and 2) '~he Fire Department require-
ment for a wider driveway into this property.
Chai~nan Lively so directed.
E. SDR-933 - John L. Hernandez, Avon Lane - Building Sit'e Approval - 1 Lot
The Secretary explained that this application is for a lot that was previously
approved.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Conmissioner Ba~on, that the Building
Site Conm~ittee Report dated 13 December 1971 relative '~to SDR-933 be adopted
and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 3 December 1971) be approved
.subject to the conditions set forth in said report; msition carried unanimously~
F. SDR-934 - James F. Wilson~ Pierce Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot
Commissioner Smith advised t~at this'matter will have ~to be continued to the.
next regular meeting in order to resolve the change ~f zoning'(C-129) request.
-4-'
Planning Cormnission Minutes - 13 December 1971 -' Continued
III. F. SDR-934 - Continued
Mrs. Wilson, applicant, stated that 1) she has now discussed and explained
this proposal with the two gentlemen who voiced some opposition to the'subject
building site earlier in the meeting and 2) they no longer have any objections
to either the change of zoning or SDR-934.
Chairman Lively directed SDR-934 continued to the next regular meeting and
referred same to the SUbdivision Committee.
IV. DESIGN REVI~
A. A-383 - Corinthian Studios, Big Basin Way - Final Design Review - Facade
Remodeling and Warehouse Addition - Continued from 22 November 197]
Conmissioner Metcalf explained that this applicant has a permanent arrangement
with the Chevron Station for seven (7) off-street parking spaces at the Chevron
Station.
The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 13 December 1971 reconnnending
that Final Design Approval be granted for the front exterior and warehouse
addition.
Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that the Staff
Report dated 13 December 1971 be adopted and that .Final Design Approval be
granted for the fron exterior and warehouse addition as sho~n on Exhibits
"A", "B", and "C" in file A-383 and subject to the conditions set forth in
the subject Staff Report; motion carried unanimously.
B. A~300 - Bro~.m and Kauffmann, Cox Avenu~ - Final Design Review - Decorative
Fence and Landscaping Along Cox Avenue
%]~e Assistant Planner read the Staff Re~ort dated 13 December 1971 recommend-
ing that Final Design Approval be granted for the decorative fencing and
landscaping for. Prides Crossing South Subdivision - Units 3 and 4.
Commissioner Martin stated that 1) he.objects to the planting of pyracantha
shrubs so close to the sidewalk since it is difficult to control and especially
dangerous to anyone walking by and it has sharp thorns and 2) he did not feel
it was an appropriate shrub to plant in the subject area.
Commissioner Metcalf stated that this landscape treatment is exactly the
same as the landscaping along Cox Aven~e in the Greenbrier tract; therefore,
the plan must be continuous and arrangements will have to be made to keep the
sh~bbery well-trin~ed.
Commissioner Martin stated that there does not seem to be any provision for
watering these plants.
Mr. Rene Gumusio, architect for the applicant, stated that Bro~,~ and Kauffmann
will be happy to install another meter; however, an effort has been made to
provide planting material that will require very little upkeep.
Comnissioner Martin recommended that instead of a meter some
hose bibs be provided in the shrubbery area.
Chairman Lively recor~nended that ~e subject Staff Report be amended as follows:
Condition (b) be amended, to read as follows:
(b) Alternate variety.of plant materials (bushes espaliered
against fence) in each fence planting~area including area
from Darie~ Way to Miller Avenue.
and Conditions (c) and (d) be added as follows:
-5-
Planning Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 ~ Continued
IV. B. A-300 - Continued
(c) Provide two (2) hose-bibs in the area from Miller
Avenue to Homes Drive and one (1) hose-bib from Homes
Drive to the easterly edge of Lot 109.
(d) Provideadequate site distance at Cox Avenue and
Homes Drive. ~
Commissioner Martin raised the question as to whether the pi!~r~_a~e ..............
correctly' plac~'"'in li'~"with the other' fence pillars along Cox Avenue.
Commissioner Metcalf stated that 1) it is true.that the second set of
pillars are four (4) inches closer to the sidewalk than the first set,
- both sets are within the property of Bro~,m and Kauffmann 2) it has
been stipulated in the Staff Report that fencing for the new area be set
· back in line with the new pillars so there will be precisely the same
planting space from the edge of the fence to the sidewalk.
Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Conmissioner Bacon, that' Staff
Report-dated 13 December 1971 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design
Approval be granted for the decorative fencing and landscaping for Prides
Crossing South as sho~,n~ on E~ibit "X" and subject to the conditions set
forth in the subject report; motion carried unanimously.
STOP SIGN AT BROOKGLEN AND MILLER
Comnissioner Metcalf stated that there is a stop sign at Brookglen and Miller
Avenue, but it is still a hazard to get.out of Miller onto Cox and it is
possible to do one of two (2) things:
1) Move the white stop-line further out so that the
driver can see what is coming from the left.
2) Alter the fence and the colurm~s around the area
of the Cox Garage.
Commissioner Belanger stated she concurs with the opinion of Commissioner
'Martin relative to the subject sight-problem.
Commissioner Bacon agreed that a problem existed at this intersection and
something should be done to correct the .situation; however, he wondered if
theeline were moved if the cars may not encroach too far into the intersection
and cause a further trafficshazard.
Chairman Lively referred the matter to the Staff'for study and a report at the
next regular meeting.
C. SS-69 - Highland Development Co., Prospect Road 'Final Design Review -
Temporary Subdivision Identification Sign
The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 13 December 1971 recommending
that Final Design Approval be granted for SS-69 for a temporary subdivision_
sign as sho~.m on Exhibits "A" and "B".
Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Belanger, that the Staff
Report dated 13 December 1971 be adopted.and that Final Design Approval be
granted for a temporary subdivisionssign.as shown on Exhibits "A" and "B"
subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously.
RECESS z~ND RECOmbiNE
-6-
Planning Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - ContinUed
V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT
The Secretary gave a sunmm-ry of items reviewed and action taken at the
City Council meeting of 1 December 1971, 'with emphasis the following item:
Reappointment of Comanissioners Belanger
and Metcalf to the P~anning Commission
for another term.
PL~\~rING POLICY CO~D~TTEE
Chairman Lively sta~nd that on 1~ursday evening, 16 December 1971 the Planning
Policy Committee will be considering the final ordinance for a Hillside Zoning
District and some proposals include 1) one home per five acre lot 2) another
is for homes on as much as twenty acres p'er building site. Chairman Lively
continued that 1) he would like the Staff and Design Review Committee to review
these proposals 2) most of the building heights are limited to 25-feet and the
landscaping is very well handled 3) there is'one thing that he was concerned.
with and that involves Section A.8 4) this could allow the developer a 25%
bonus when developing hillside lots and 5) it is his opinion that the bonus
should not be offered so freely.
Councilman Jerry Smith was present and stated 1) that the land the ordinance
is talking to is very steep land and the 25% bonus will be administered accord-
ing to that ordinance 2) in order to understand the bonus the entire ordinance
must be taken into consideration and 3) a developer will not automatically get
a 25% bonus - that will be the optimum.
'Chairman Lively stated that 1) his concern is that the bonus is clearly outlined
in the ordinance and the minute a subdivider gets started on a development he will
demand his bonus and 2) he feels 25% is too g~eat a percentage.
Councilman Smith stated that 1) he did not feel the bonus should be eliminated
but should be left in the ordinance and administered proparly by City and County
governments and 2) the hillsides cannot be developed properly if the rules are
too restrictive.
Chairman Lively stated that he is not confident that the County government can be
relied upon to do what is best for the City.
Cormnissioner ~rtin stated that the ordinance should be written so the hillside
development can be controlled - why mention any bonus at all?
Chairman Lively stated that if no mention of a bonus were included in the
ordinance then Section Ao8 would have to be deleted.
Commissioner Smith stated that if that is necessary then that'Section A.8 will
have to be left out of the subject ordinance.
VI. OLD BUSI~tSS
A.Possible. Revisions for Desig-n Review of Single-Fmm. ily Residences -
Continued from 22 November 1971 '
Chairman Lively, after a brief discussion, referred this matter to the Design
Review Conmittee, Subdivision Co~nittee~ and Staff and asked that they study
the matter and prepar~ a final ReSolution for adoption by the Planning Commission.
B. Hillside Zonin~ Ordinance
Chairman Lively stated that he felt that either the bonus offer should not
be included in the ordinance or the ~nount of the bonus should be reduced.
-7-
Planning Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued
VI. B. Hillside-Continued
Commissioner Smith stated that the.City encourages hillside development
by allowing the cluster type developments and he did not 'feel it was
necessary to go any further.
Commissioner Martin stated that he felt some bonus should be offered but
Section A.8 could be left out of the ordinance and the bonus be ~dministered
· on an individual basis.·
Councilman Smith stated that 1) thle Planning Commission has had two (2)
Commissioners regularly attending planning Policy Committee meetings x,here
the Hillside Zoning District was discussed and formulated and now all of
a sudden for the first time ~en the ordinance is ready for adoption there
is opposition 2) the bonus proposal has be~n in the ·ordinance guidelines
for months.
Chairman Lively stated that he just recently received a copy of the
proposed ordinance and before that he had not had an opportunity to
review it.
The Secretary explained that the subject proposal has been revie~.zed by
the two (2) re resentatives of the Plannin~ Commission.and the Planning Director
as members of F~e Hillside Committee.
Chairman Lively answered that the Planning Conmission as a ~ole has
never had a chance to review the proposed ordinance.
Councilman Smith stated that the meetings were purposely moved over into
the west side of the County so that the meetings could be attended by all of
the Planning Comnissioners in this area; therefore, the discussion of this
ordinance has hardly been kept a secret and the subject material has been
available for months.
Chairman Lively stated he felt the objections of the Planning Co~m~ission
'relative to the bonus should be noted.
Councilman '·Smith stated there is not a single 100-acre parc·e! in the
hillsides ~ere acre zoning can be applied.
%~e Secretary suggested that maybe the ordinance should be presented ·to
the Planning Commission by the City 'or County Staff to clarify particular
items.
VII. ~W BUSINESS
None
VIII. COmmUNICATIONS
A. WRITTEN
SDR~9il - Willard Thompson, Oak Street and St. Charles - Request for
Building Site Approval
The Secretary read a communication dated 13 December 1971 received from
Willard ~ompson r~questing that his request for building site be·granted
at this time instead of waiting since ·he finds he cannot build on the lot
or sell it in its present form. He further stated that the adjacent lot
is now for sale and the two (2) lots together might make a more attractive
development. It is almost impossible to put up a five (5) unit apartment
and obtain proper financing.
Chairman Lively stated .that there is a study of the area being done and
until that is completed any further construction in the area has been
discouraged.
-8~
Planning Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued
VIII. A. SDR-911 - Continued
The Secretary explained that the General Plan includes a comment
~nich prohibits all development On properties bounded by Oak Street,
St.. Charles Street and Big Basin Way ur~til the Traffic Survey is
completed.
· Chairman Lively explained to Mr. Willard that the Planning Commission
realizes that he has= problems with this lot, but the City has been
looking for other ways to ease traffic on Big Basin Way.
The Secreta~y, in answer to an inquiry from Con~nission Bacon, stated
that the subject traffic study i~ underway and the information will be
given careful consideration. tt will probably be a matter of months
before the entire study and review is completed.
~ Chai~nan Lively requested Mr. ~]~ompson tO wait just a·little while
longer and suggested that, perhaps, Mr. Thompson could request the
City Council to act on the matter as expeditiously as possible.
B. Telephone Facilities - Cox Avenue Between Darien Way and Miller Avenue
Letter from Pacific Telephone
The Secretary read a letter received from Pacific Telephone in answer to
an inquiry sent to them from the Planning Department. ~e letter stated
that the present unformulated plans will provide for the undergrounding
of the telephone facilities ( along a po'.ction of Cox Avenue between Darien
Way and Miller Avenue ) in conjunction with the development of the West
Valley Freeway by the State of California.
Chairman Lively requested the Secretary to contact the local manager of
Pacific ~elephone to obtain information relative to this matter.
C. Memo from Code Enforcement OffiCer
The Secretary read a memo from the Code Enforcement Officer explaining
that the Amling-Gilmore Florist .has a Court date for a jury trial
scheduled for 21 December 1971.
D. Trees - Status Report
The Assistant Planner stated that at the request Of· Commissioner Martin
a status report pertaining to street tree.requirements for recent sub-
divisions has been prepared for the information of the Planning Commission.
B. ORAL
"P-C" - Planned Community Development for Fruitvale Avenue and Douglass· Lane
Commissioner Belanger stated that it is her feeling that the City should
sponsor a special study for this area to dete~nine what amount of clustering
would be appropriate and to come up with a creative use of green space.
Chairman Lively stated that the people in the neighborhood do not want
"P-C" and the only way to satisfy them is to put something in there that
is very close. to what they have now.
Commissioner Belanger stated that, perhaps, the neighborhood has a
disproportionarm voice in determining what is to happen to this property.
Con~nissioner Belanger further stated she would like someone outside of
the developer to do a study.
Conm~issioner Metcalf stated that this matter has been under study for
about six (6) months already and it is at a point at which further delay
becomes unreasonable from the point of view of the developer. Maybe,
a good architectural and landscape plan should be required.
-9-
Planning Cormnission Minutes - 13 December 197.1 Continued
VIII. B. "P-C" - Continued
Con~nissioner Belanger stated that the City should hold out for a
better plan.
Connnissioner Smith pointed out that 1) a lot of people have worked
very hard to come up with the plans submitted 2) Joint Study-Sessions
with the City Council have been held to study the 80-acres in this
area and matter has been discussed many times and in great. depth and
3) a new study by an outside fir~ would have to be authorized by the
City Council..~
Commissioner Bacon stated that maybe the question should be asked
what is wrong with the current plan and then have the actual criticisms
broken do~.~n.'
'Commissioner Belanger stated that there must be one developer in the
united states that has had some success with a "P-C" development°
Chairman Lively stated that the proposed development is in reality
not a true "P-C", but only has "P-C" controls.
Connnissioner Metcalf stated that a street pattern for the 8C'acres
could be made a part of the General Plan in a way that the City could
maintain some control over the entire 80-acreso
Guests
Chairman Lively acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of Councilmen
Bridges, I~yer, and Smith, and Mrs. Stark of the Good Goverzmnent Group.
He, also, thanked Mrs. Stark for the coffee served at recess.
IX. ADJOUR!\r~ZNT
Chairman Lively adjourr~d the me.2ting at 11:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
%,.=?~-~"" .'_..::',..,..!_.'i!:'."-:,'.':-:'f."~,~. ' t C.., ',..,. .-', -'- ,. :'s-!.'_~',~,
Stanley M. ~;T~lker, Secretary
Saratoga Planning Commission
j
-10-