Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-01-1996 PC MinutesMINUTES Planning Commission City of Orange July 1, 1996 Monday - 7:00 p.m.PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith Commissioner Bosch STAFF PRESENT: Vern Jones, Manager 01 Current Planning - Commission Secretary;Stan Soo- Hoo, Assistant City Attorney,Jack Brotherton, Sr. Civil Engineer, and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary Chairman Bosch was on vacation; Vice-Chairman Pruett chaired the meeting. IN RE:CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF 6/17/96 Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to approve the Minutes of 6/17/96 as recorded. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED IN RE:CONTINUED HEARING 2. MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW 16-96 - WAL-MART STORES, INC.A proposal to demolish the existing vacated Broadway Store and construct a new Wal- Mart Store,approximately 142,000 sq. It. in size. This project will also include a modification to the parking lot. This site is located at the north end of the Orange Mall, 2300 North Tustin Street.NOTE: Negative Declaration 1504-96 has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of this project.This item was continued Irom the June 17, 1996 hearing.)Vice Chairman Pruett commented the Commission received public comment at the previous hearing and they will open the meeting again for public comment at this hearing. The Commission was looking for new information. It was also important for the public to understand the Wal Mart project was a permitted use at this location. Wal-Mart was before the Commission for site review because the old building is being demolished and a new building is being constructed. The Commission will evaluate the physical aspects of the development proposal, the site plan, the building design, landscaping and traffic circulation patterns, and the potential impact on the environment. Whether there should be or should not be a Wal-Mart at that location is not the question for the Planning Commission to deal with.Vern Jones presented the staff report in detail. The item was considered at the June 17 meeting and at the conclusion of that meeting, the Commission asked the applicant to modify the site plan to address a nurnber of concerns that were stated at that meeting. The applicant agreed to a Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 provided revised plans to address the issues raised by the Commissioners, and to fulfill the conditions recommended by the Design Review Board. The site plan review process provides an opportunity for the Commission and public to review plans for redevelopment projects in terms of the site layout and architectural design, and the compatibility of project design with surrounding development. Through this process, the Commission can evaluate the physical aspects of a development proposal. Site plan review is used only when a proposed project is consistent with all zoning requirements; that is, the use is permitted in the zone, and the project complies with all pertinent development standards such as buildingheight, setbacks and parking requirements. Under the City's Zoning Ordinance, a Wal-Mart store is considered a permitted use in the CTR zone, and the proposed site plan complies with allapplicabledevelopmentstandards. Therelore, although many comments were made at the previous hearing about whether Wal-Mart is an appropriate tenant for the Mall of Orange, the Commission has had to restrict their comments to the development aspects 01 the project. Specific comments/concems were raised at the previous hearing. Staff has briefly summarized those issues and provided an explanation as to how Wal-Mart has attempted to address the concems. Nine concems were identified and are outlined in the staff report. The first eight concems deal with on-site circulation, handicapparking, truck traffic, safety issues relative to angled parking movements at the front of the Mall, and the physical orientation of the building itself. The ninth concern deals with off-site traffic impacts. The applicant will be able to speak to each of the first eight concems. Staff would like to speak to the ninth concem since it related to the staffs analysis.Concem #9 stated that the Wal-Mart store will generate more traffic than the former department store,and thereby cause problems on the public streetsystem. According to standard traffic engineering practices, traffic generation rate lactors are based on the overall size of a shopping center, and not on the individual tenants contained within the center. In an attempttoacknowledgethat, in general, discount stores generate more traffic than department stores, NegativeDeclaration1504-96 looked at the proposal as if it were a stand alone building, rather than part of a mall. By this calculation, the Wal-Mart could generate approximately 1,000 trips per day more than the Broadway. The figure does not, however, take into account the fact that most Mall shoppers patronize more than one store in anyone shopping trip, and that some of the trips are by vehicles that are already on the road, and stop because the store is on the way to their next destination. Therefore, the additional trips should be seen as a "worst case scenario". In any case, the streets surrounding the Mallhaveadequatecapacityto accommodate the trips generated by the Wal-Mart project.There are two additional items to be addressed which include the parking lot configuration west of the garden center, and the Design Review Boardrecommendations. The garden center parking lot is a dead end parking aisle providing 28 spaces at the northend01thestore. The parking ordinance requires that drive aisles serving ten or more parking spaces provide aturnaroundorback-up area. This is to prevent a situation where a vehicle must exit such anaisleinreverseifnoparkingspacesarefound. Condition 11 has been added to revise the parking area to comply with Ordinance requirements. Such revisions can be accomplished in a number of ways. Condition 10 was also added requiring that all project signage proposed for the project be reviewed by the Design Review Board.The public hearing was opened.Apolicant Joel Meyer, Pacific Retail Partners, 2750 University Avenue, #200, Riverside, represented Wal-Mart.They have reviewed staffs comments and would like to respond to each concem, item by item.Concem #8 - that the applicant study a site plan revision that would flip the floor plan and rotate it 90 degrees, in order to place loading areas on the northside01thebuilding. They brought a plan with them that they discussed with Wal-Mart operations. Based upon that review, there were several items that would not permit them to rotate Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 within the 50 loot side yard they need for fire rating up against the theater. From an operational standpoint, the garden center would be at the rear of the store, which would be unacceptable as n would create a lot of traffic on the back side for people entering the garden center. They would like to orient the store towards Tustin, which is the main street and where they want most of the customers to parte The parking should be oriented on Tustin. Inside the building, the major changes with cash registers being brought around - that wall the Commission suggested putting an opening on - has the McDonald's and pharmacy. Wal- Mart's preference is to keep the merchandising inside the store lairly standard with other Wal- Mart stores. By flip-flopping the building, it would put the building onto property that is not former Broadway property. It encroaches onto Newman property, which they do not control.Concem #9 - that the Wal-Mart store will generate more traffic than the former department store, and thereby cause problems on the public street system. They concur with staff's comments and understand this is a worst case scenario. There will be no significant impact.With respect to the new conditions 10 and 11, they have made the changes to the 28 parking spaces back by the garden center. The concern was that the cars would come in Irom the drive aisle and would not be able to turn around if people were not able to find a parking stall. They added an area at the end of the aisle to pull in and back out, then turn around (it would not be used for parking). They will be meeting with the Design Review Board on July 3.Concems #1, #2, and #3 all inter-weave with each other. They looked at the plan and decided the dock really needs to stay where it is on the back of the store for various merchandise reasons. They have screened the trucks from the theater area. They have put wall packs on the back of the store and increased the lighting to make it sale and secure. They have secured the pallet area and have done several things at the back 01 the building to make it safe, secure and aesthetically pleasing. They have also changed the parking situation with respect to the theater. They put a canoe island that would not allow the theater customers (east parking field) - they put in two parking rows and a canoe with some landscaping to not encourage anyone to cross that drive aisle in back of the store. This will be a lot safer.Stall requested they take the parking and shill the drive aisle the opposite direction. Stall preferred traffic come Irom the north, which would be coming 011 of Tustin. Stall asked them to take the angled parking rather than curves and trallic from the south. They concurred and made that change. Concem #2 deals with truck circulation on Canal. They still felt that was the salest truck route. Stall contacted the Mall to find out where Penney's and the former Broadway delivered their trucks from. Those routes have been provided to the Commission. Both stores come 011 of Canal - a very similar route to Wal-Mart's. The Broadway had one to two trucks per day. Wal-Mart will come in, drop their trucks and seal them to their building; then pick up the trailer and move on. In an ellort to compromise and still go over and beyond the Commission's concems regarding Canal, they have proposed a plan to keep the truck routes on site and not use Canal. They could bring the trucks in and out and onto Tustin. It would be a double-edged sword. The customers shopping at the Mall would be more at risk than someone on Canal. Concem #3 addressed handicap parking in the theater area. They have added that on their new plan, and it will comply with ADA requirements. There will be angled parking on the east side, and they have added the flip flop 01 the drive aisle entering from the north.Concem #4 addresses handicap parking in front of the store. There was discussion at the last hearing on whether it was best to keep the handicap stalls up against the Wal-Mart building or put them in the parking field and have the handicap customer come across a painted walkway. Their plan was probably not the best to address ADA requirements. The best for ADA requirements is to keep the cars closest to the entrance. They have done that, but it puts many of the handicap stalls at the end of the parking rows and some as straight as 90 degrees. They've also done a plan that keeps the handicap parking at the end of the angled rows and none on the straight end to Wal-Mart. All three scenarios are acceptable and they looked to the Planning Commission to suggest what they felt Planning Commission Minutes July 1,1996 Concern #5 addressed the angled intersection directly in front of the Wal-Mart entrance. As you enter the parking field from the south, the concem was how the traffic was being handled from the main entrance.On the original submittal there were no arrows or traffic signs to help mitigate that concem. Their revised plan shows they have softened the angle. The DRB wanted to see it being pedestrian friendly with trees;they wanted the area utilized elliciently and aesthetically. They put in two stop signs for north and south trallic, they painted and stripped so as not to create conflicts with cars as they come in the main entrance:Another concem was the first row of parking to the north of the main drive aisle - with that customer taking a lelt turn. They were paralleling the major drive aisle in. A sign was added to say "No left tum" and to make a right tum only on their revised plan. That area has also being widened to make the tums more easily, especially for westbound traffic to go south. Concem #6 addressed the main entrance on Tustin - the first drive aisle - and the concem that customers could be stuck out on Tustin waiting to tum left if traffic was coming east out of the center. They restricted certain movements. Most importantly, the left tum movement on inbound customers so they could not turn left bound and will wait for on-going traffic, potentially backing cars into Tustin. Signs will be erected that state, "Do not enter". "No exit" signs are shown on the north and south legs to alleviate congestion at those points.Concem # 7 addresses the drive aisle in front of the store and north bound traffic lining up with a drive aisle that goes behind the existing retail building to the north. They attempted to show on their plan how to discourage that type 01 movement by taking the curb line and bringing it out and making if off center to that drive aisle. They added a "trucks only" sign as a suggestion to keep cars from taking that route.Commissioner Romero had a question with regard to the garden center parking lot. What were their plans to alleviate the ingresslegress problem? There was no tum around. Would this area be used as a loading area? He saw it as a potential conflict.Mr. Meyer explained they were going to eliminate two parking stalls at the end of the drive aisle so that cars could pull in, back up and then tum around il there were no available parking stalls. It would not be used as a loading area for the garden. This area did not provide access to the garden center. The garden entrance was at the front 01 the store.Commissioner Smith asked where the door was to the garden center?Mr. Meyer said the garden center door laces east, opening to Tustin.Steward Holtz, D.S.W. Intemational Architects, 2301 DuPont, #150, Irvine, pointed out on the plan the location 01 the garden center door at the front 01 the building. The entrance was not currently shown on the site plan.Commissioner Romero was concerned about people parking in front 01 the garden center to load their plants and fertilizer, but he didn~ see an opportunity for them to do that on the plans.Mr. Meyer responded there was no straight in parking; they would have to cross a drive aisle. Most of the time the drive aisle on the north is a street. The majority of customers enter from the south entrance.Commissioner Romero stated the 28 parking spaces around the building would then be inconvenient for customers to park in because 01 the walk around the building.Mr. Meyer said that was why the orientation of the building was so important. They wanted the customers to park in the primary parking field out on Tustin.4 Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 Commissioner Carlton questioned the 10 foot reduction on the side of the maneuvering area where the loading docks were? Why was that done? The large trucks would need more room rather than a 10 foot reduc!ion. Mr. Meyer explained they had the room to do that. The dimensions will accommodate the large trucks. _ They reduced the area to create a more protected parking field for the theater customers facing the front of their loading area. Commissioner Pruett jumped in with a few questions. He wanted more detail on the flip flop of the building and their reasons as to why it wouldn1 work. Mr. Meyer had a letter from David Carey, the architectural program manager from Wal-Mart that he shared with the Commission. The perimeter of the building was outlined on the plan. The building as sited puts the building within 60 feet 01 the theater and it makes a very difficult situation. It would change the fire rating 01 their building and would significantly change the costs for construction. Wal-Mart typically has a tire-lube express that is behind the garden center. It is important for the garden center to be at the front of the building. By rotating the building, it would put the garden center towards the back. It would also promote parking in the rear and cars entering the site from Canal. The preference of Wal-Mart was to orient the mass of the building and garden center towards the major parking field on Tustin. Inside the building, along the east wall, they would need to put in another opening to face the east parking field.There would be all kinds of merchandise flip arounds they would need to do; the registers would be oriented towards the Mall. They encourage people to cross-shop, but the orientation would be much better if they oriented the registers towards Tustin. The signage on the side 01 the building would not be as great. In addition, the garden center would encroach on property not controlled by Wal-Mart. They would like to keep the carts and trallic in the front lot, facing Tustin.Commissioner Pruett didn1 understand how McDonald's would be conflict on the east side of the building.Mr. Meyer said intemally McDonald's is up against the east wall.Commissioner Pruett said then McDonald's would be in conflict with the original design, going into the Mall.Mr. Meyer acknowledged McDonald' s would need to be moved.Commissioner Pruett used the site plan on the wall to illustrate the 90 degree rotation. They're talking about two entrances on the comer 01 the building and there would be no conflict with McDonald's or the registers. II there is, then there is a conflict with the original design as well. He had serious concems as to whether there was a lot of creativity given to the project. By sitting the project as proposed by the applicant, they did create a problem. But it could be moved over a bit, with a small offset, and it would give them the distance for their fire rating and gives them the opportunity to take the driveway north and create a tum out for diagonal handicap parking to where there would only be handicap parking in that area. He believed they created a circular area within the truck traffic and loading docks on the plan they proposed. He wasn1 convinced that was the way to handle the truck circulation. They brought up a worst case scenario and have not looked at other altematives.Mr. Meyer appreciated the input, but this was over and beyond their expertise. Their presentation was from an operational standpoint and an opinion of Wal-Mart on the orientation of the building. They felt the massing of the building must face Tustin. It's significant for the operation of the store. II the property to the north were expanded, it would be facing the back of a Wal- Mart Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 Commissioner Pruett commented they should also be concemed with the property owners to the west. Mr. Pruett didn~ think they would impact neighbors to the north or west, other than a layout issue someday in the future. He was thinking more in terms of the project. Mr. Holtz said there were a couple of reasons why internally n worXs operationally better oriented with the' north-south access. The main entrance to Wal-Mart also accommodates a substantial exiting requirement. It's a building of unlimited area and they're required to provide a certain number of exits.The main entrance has a certain exit width requirement, which is substantial. With the orientation of the common wall, the opening from the existing Mall coming through, it still does impact and have bearing on the location of McDonald's and the customer service area. However, that width does not need to be as great as the exterior exiting of the building. It is imperative for the cash registers to run parallel with the exit doors at the main entrance, because of the volume of people going in and out of the store. If the building were rotated, it would throw out the entire merchandising - a ripple effect through the interior of the building.Commissioner Pruett was confused. He said there were entrances from the Mall and from the street. He understood the applicant to say by rotating the store, the orientation to the Mall is not where they want to locus. They want to locus to the exterior where the people come off the street.Mr. Holtz explained it was a lile salety issue. They cannot exit back into the Mall. They must exit clear of the building. The mall entrance will be somewhat smaller than the main entrance to the exterior.Those sDeakina in lavor Leslyn Hartley, 2248 North Orange Mall, has had a business in the Orange Mall for over 16 years. She is also the Vice-President 01 the Board 01 Directors of the Mall of Orange. She gave a petition of 60 tenants to the Commissioners in lavor 01 Wal-Mart opening in the Mall of Orange. She asked for those in favor of Wal-Mart to please stand and show their support.Moneen Becerra, 6515 East St. Germain, thought the proponents have lost the focus of what the hearing was about. It's not about whether or not Wal-Mart is a permitted use; it's about parking and access. II Wal-Mart doesn't come in to that center, that center could become another City shopping mall.Cindy Shambeck, 555 La Veta Park Circle #232, favored the Waf-Mart store. The Mall is going to end up like The City shopping center. Huntington Beach has already got tenants pulling out because no one is shopping there. Wal-Mart will create jobs and tax dollars for the city.Those sDeakina in oooosition Carole Walters, 534 North Shaffer Street, asked allthoseinoppositiontostandandbeacknowledged.Once the lots are changed, parking will be lost. She was concemed about the truck routes and hours 01 construction. A good plan needs to be in place for the construction phase of the project. The City of Orange needs to talk to those residents and neighbors living around the Mall of Orange to discuss their concerns. It's an important issue to these people. She suggested a study session be held belore a decision is made because there are too many unanswered questions.Commissioner Smith said Mrs. Walters brought up the issue of a lot line split or adjustment. Is that something that is being considered at this hearing?Mr. Jones replied no. That is something that will be going Planning Commission Minutes July 1,1996 Robin Vann, 2382 North Northumberland Road, wanted to know the boundary restrictions for the shopping carts and what will be done to prevent the shopping carts from staying in the parking lots? There are no shopping carts at the Mall. Is the area surrounding the garden center designed for high traffic periods of the year? Will Wal-Mart carry Christmas trees, or will there be a pumpkin patch? This will increase trallic. Has that been considered? She was afraid cars would travel through the residential neighborhoods to avoid traffic on Tustin. Why would Wal-Mart narrow the entrance into the Mall area from their store? Why must the registers be towards Tustin? Will that discourage shoppers from going into the Mall? She didn1 think this was the best place for a Wal-Mart. Some integrity needs to be placed on the Mall; it has a wonderful history. She quoted some items from the newspaper about the Mall of Orange. What will happen to the other retailers in the Mall? Wal-Mart is powerful. Retailers can be put out of business because Wal- Mart offers value, low prices...she liked Wal-Mart. But if people go to Wal-Mart, they will lose the desire to shop the rest of the Mall.Sharon Rockmore, 2621 North Canal, presented a petition of those in opposition to Wal-Mart to the Commission. She also presented a flyer that they have distributed throughout the city. Traffic pedestrian and vehicle) was her main concem. They don1 want the additional traffic in their neighborhoods. There are too many kids in the neighborhood for this additional traffic. What does Wal-Mart have that they can get now from K-Mart or Target? The people from Villa Ford test drive cars in their neighborhood. Buses use Canal and Heim at all hours 01 the day. There will be additional crime in the area. Corporate America needs to stop running their lives. What happened to the mom and pop retail shops? Without a small business community, Orange will be nothing. There is a McDonald's across the street. Why build another McDonald's in Wal- Mart? She referred to the nice write-ups in the local newspapers, and read a letter from Robert Douglas of Orange, which was printed in the paper.Barbara DeNiro, 1118 East Adams, said it was dillicult for the average person to understand what was going on when it hasn1 been seen before. She agreed a study session was needed. She thought she heard the applicant say he appreciated the Commission's input, but no thanks. She still felt it was unfair for the Wal-Mart proponent to not give a presentation 01 their proposed project. She felt they were still being evasive, hurried, non-committal and stingy with their printed information to the public. Demolition plans have not been discussed, nor truck routes for construction activity. She would like to know more about the luture plans for the Mall of Orange (such as bringing the theaters inside the Mall). Much traffic has been added to the area because of the Sports Center behind the Mall. Traffic on Canal and Heim appears to need further study. The Mall parking area appears to be used by trucks for parking, roller bladers and skateboarders. The lot line adjustment was on the City Council's agenda last week for Wal-Mart, before any decision has been made by the Planning Commission. However, the Council saw fit to continue that item, when questioned, to it's propriety because it didn1 seem logical. Along with looking at sales tax generation, Orange still needs to consider neighborhood and business preservation along with the other concerns registered by the citizens.Commissioner Pruett wanted clarification on the site plan review process. He understood they were not in a public hearing perse. Public notices were not mailed out. Public comments were being taken as part of the process.Mr. Soo-Hoo said that was correct. This matter is contained in the Zoning Code. Since n is the creation of the Municipal Ordinance, it differs Irom the normal hearing process. It's a matter of taking informal public comments as opposed to a formal type of public hearing.Ed Mulberry was a 31 year resident in the city of Orange. He spoke about the image of Orange. He couldn1 understand why there couldn't be another department store brought into that location. He opposed Wal- Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 Lyssa Alakore. 2508 North Canal, lives on the comer of Heim and Canal and she urged everyone to sit on her comer and observe the traffic problems. She held a rally on that comer over the weekend and the Mayor and one Council member attended. She thought they were astonished and didn1 realize how much traffic used their streets. Her concem was with the traffic and safety of the children in the neighborhood. John Goodsu, 1236 Vista Del Playa, had concems about the traffic and proposed hours of operation. Will measures be taken by Wal-Mart to make sure that the carts stay contained within the parking area? He didn't want shopping carts scattered around the neighborhood. He wanted additional security, especially if the hours were extended. He would like to see the traffic on Canal mitigated.Debra Hawthome, General Manager lor the Mall of Orange, 2298 North Orange Mall, addressed three items that were brought up in reference to the operations at the Mall. Two tenants have just opened at the Mall - Trader Joe's and Sav On, who have shopping carts. They maintain on an hourly basis, going out into the parking lot and monitoring that. They also have a maintenance staff that monitors shopping carts throughout the parking lot. Also, security monitors the activity around the Mall. To date, they have not had any complaints about the shopping carts. They have 24-hour security at the Mall. The mobile unit continually roves around the Mall as well. A police sub-station was opened last November; they work closely with them. Several procedures have been introduced to help reduce crime at the Mall. The Mall hours are whatever the retailers feel are reasonable business hours. II they want to be open 24 hours, they could.Tom Berry, 2593 Frankie, was not against Wal-Mart perse, but was against a Wal- Mart at the Orange Mall. The new building will encroach upon the existing theaters. Traffic was also a concem. Traffic being generated at the comer of Heim and Canal is unbelievable. The Sports Center draws children to the area like a magnet.Judy Kidd, 3521 East White Spring Lane, stopped listening to the Wal-Mart representatives when they started talking about traffic patterns. She would avoid the parking lot altogether; it' s going to be a disaster. She has never seen Sears or J.C. Penney's operate on a 24 hour basis. The 24-hour store operation at Wal-Mart would not be in the best interest 01 the Mall. She read a recent article that named Wal-Mart as a company that puts the small retailer out of business. She also knows the Mall management is aware of the article. She couldn't understand how the merchants in the Mall thought Wal-Mart couldn't hurt their business.Adele Graves, 1047 West Trinity Lane, said Wal-Mart is a major discounter and will put other businesses out of business. Canal is a dangerous street to travel. Potential crime and fiscal impacts were cited as concerns. She asked il anyone has made a study of the other Wal-Mart stores? She asked that the City not act in haste in reviewing this project.Ken Fitz, 2373 North Bellbrook, spoke about the traffic problems at Heim and Canal. He wasn1 against Wal-Mart, but he was against the traffic, security and salety concems of all the children in the area.Ms. Rockmore wanted to keep the crime element and trash out 01 their neighborhood; and added they were not prejudiced.Ms. Vann wanted to know if the City were going to add sidewalks Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 Rebuttal Mr. Meyer responded there were a lot of issues. A lot of them they addressed. Canal Street and traffic seemed to be the major issue. He pointed out that they would agree to a condition to keep the trucks on site, to come in and exit via Tustin. They have also reduced the parking opportunity in the rear, on Canal.. Spaces are being moved from the rear to the front of the store. Part of the input was about socio- economic issues. People want a higher-end type of department store. Wal-Mart is what Newman Properties wants and they are proceeding accordingly. Sears and Penney's has unlimited business hours;Wal-Mart is requesting the same as they have. They will do the same type of cart retrieval as the grocery stores along Tustin; carts are expensive and they will be maintained. Wal-Mart is also very concemed about security. If a customer is not safe in the parking lot, they will not shop at Wal-Mart. They're working with Newman Properties and their security program. They will make it safe for the customer. He believed the other concems were addressed.Commissioner Smith addressed the issue of the shopping carts going back into the store. What is the company policy on retrieving the carts?Mr. Meyer didn~ know that answer as to how often the carts were retrieved.Commissioner Smith thought of adding a condition to deal with the shopping carts on the site. There is a shopping cart ordinance that deals with carts that are off-site. She asked if Wal-Mart were willing to accept such a condition?Mr. Jones thought a condition could be added for cart monitoring. He didn~ recall if Sav On or Trader Joe's had similar conditions. However, Albertson's was conditioned with a cart retrieval plan.Mr. Meyer would need to review the condition of cart retrieval before agreeing to it.Commissioner Smith wanted specific detail on Wal- Mart's security process. How many security people did they have? Are they stationed in the parking lot or at the entrance to the store?Mr. Meyer explained Wal-Mart has an intemal security department within the company. Wal-Mart addresses each store as it is needed. Many times a security guard is in the parking lot who is always watching for shopping carts and touring the property. They will work with Newman Properties and pay their security staff for utilization of their security program.Commissioner Smith understood through information the Commission received that Broadway had a limited window of time their delivery trucks came and went. She wanted an idea of what time Wal-Mart's trucks would be coming to this site?Mr. Meyer said it was a range of time typically. Wal-Mart stocks their products out of a warehouse in Porterville, up north. It's a 7 to 8 hour drive. There are one to two truck deliveries per day, in the aftemoon (4,5 or 6 p.m.). This is subject to weather over the Grapevine and delays at the distribution center. If it's real busy or seasonal, many times there is a second delivery, which is dropped at 10 or 11 p.m.Commissioner Smith said the question was asked if the garden center would carry Christmas trees or pumpkins. Does Wal-Mart sell these items?Mr. Meyer said Waf- Mart does sell the seasonal items throughout the store. The Christmas trees are sold in the Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 Commissioner Smith said there was some misunderstanding from the audience of what the architect's reference to the narrow Mall doors was about. Mr. Meyer said the issue was it was an unacceptable situation with respect for Wal-Mart to operate the store. The layout is unacceptable (flipping the building and rotating it 90 degrees). The parking lot is very important to Wal-Mart.Mr. Holtz explained the main entry doors, in terms of their collective width, was about 20 to 24 feet of exit width across the main entry, facing Tustin. The entrance on the south end of the Mall, entering into the Mall, can be less than that (8 to 12 feet).Commissioner Smith asked if Newman Properties has agreed to that? (Wal-Mart has not gotten that far along in their negotiations with respect to that exact size of the opening. The size of the Mall doors has yet to be determined.)Commissioner Smith knew there was a code of demolition in the City's ordinance. She asked for Wal-Mart's assurance as to how far along they were in the demolition process? Were they aware of the strict restrictions on the time frames, hauling, number of trips, asbestos abatement, dust control and all those issues?Mr. Meyer understood there were ordinances in place and they need to comply with the restrictions prior to pulling permits. Asbestos abatement must be done prior to demolition. They have not quantified the asbestos yet.Commissioner Smith said the questions she was asking related directly to the site plan. There were probably that many questions or more that don~ relate to the site plan, which she intends to address later.Did she hear him say that Sears and other stores have the option to be open 24 hours a day so Wal-Mart wants to exercise that same option?Mr. Meyer said it was their understanding Newman Properties had a minimum hour requirement for the Mall shops - a minimum hour to be open. There is no maximum hour for any of the parties to the REA,which includes J.C. Penney' s, Sears and Wal-Mart.Commissioner Smith asked, given the public's resistance to Wal- Mart coming in, would Wal-Mart be agreeable to fixed hours of business for the initial opening of the store with the understanding they could come back to negotiate for 24 hours at a later time. She has shopped the Mall of Orange for many years and did not know of any of those stores being open 24 hours.Mr. Meyer stated the answer was no. He couldn't understand why they would be treated any differently than Sears, Penney's or Broadway. If he were someone else, he wouldn't be asked that question. They want to reserve the right to exercise that option.Commissioner Romero said Mr. Meyer had indicated at the last meeting that two truck deliveries were anticipated a day. What was Anaheim experiencing? How successful are they? Is Anaheim open 24 hours?Mr. Meyer said Anaheim had one to two deliveries a day, depending on the time of the year - maybe three deliveries (at Christmas). Anaheim is a successful store; he expected Orange to be in the same range. He didn't know if Anaheim were open 24 hours. Typically, that's not the case. He knew of a couple of stores in Southem California that have gone to 24 hours in certain situations.Commissioner Romero said he didn~ hear any specific response in regards Planning Commission Minutes July 1,1996 Mr. Meyer couldn~ really give specific answers to an issue that hasn~ been quantified or experienced.They want to make it safe for the customer and they have agreed to work with Newman Properties and pay for that service, which is not typical for Wal- Mart.Commissioner Carlton didn~ understand Mr. Meyer's answer regarding people parking to unload or load things from the garden center. Was that going to be marked on the curb for loading and unloadingonly?It seemed to be a very narrow section; it might be a problem if two or three cars were lined uploadingthingsfromthegardencenterwithothercarstryingtogoaround them.Mr. Meyer stated there was no parking along the building or in the drive aisles to load or unload merchandise. A customer will need to cross the drive aisle to get to the parking stalls.Commissioner Carlton was concemed about people not being able to find parking spots during the holidays. They will be wandering around, trying to find a place to park, to load their purchases into the car. How will that be solved?Mr. Meyer said it will be solved the way it is solved in all the other stores. Wal-Mart does nothavebigapplianceitems. An associate will go out with the customer, if needed, to help them withtheproducts.This store is not like Home Depot or Home Base.Commissioner Carlton asked if Wal-Mart would agree to look at marking the stalls closesttothegardencenterforashortperiodoftime (15 minutes) for loading and unloading if it became an issue?Mr. Meyer said they could look at it if it became an issue and would mark the stalls for short periods of time.Commissioner Car1lon wanted clarification on the signage at the front elevation. WasthisaconceptualplanorwasthisspecificallydesignedforOrangewithregardtothesignage on the building?Mr. Meyer responded the signage on the building was standard. They have to go throughDRBforsignapproval. A sign application has not been submitted or reviewed by the DRB. What is seen on the elevation is the standard Wal-Mart sign package. .We Sell For Less. is typically not back lit.Commissioner Carlton would personally like to see the wording eliminated. It would enhance the appearance of Wal-Mart not to have a lot of little signs up and down the front of the building. The Wal-Mart sign and the Garden Center would be sufficient.Commissioner Carlton also noted the residents (adults and children) had concerns about crossing Canal to the Mall, specifically at Glendora and at Canal and Heim. Have they talked to staff about the possibility of a traffic light where people could push buttons to cross and make it safer?Mr. Meyer said they relied on staff to review their submittal and totakeintoconsiderationthesafetyconcems. Although the traffic projection from staff talks about 1,000 trips per day, the size of the store is smaller and the projection is based on an acreage; not on square footage. He thought the impact would be less than the worst case scenario.Commissioner Carlton asked if Wal-Mart would be willing to review that issue again with the staff as to the necessity of a light there where it could be operated by a push button to cross the street?Mr. Meyer deferred to staff to answer that question. He wanted to see what staffs position was on this request. If staff felt there was a need for a signal, then they would consider it.Commissioner Pruett said Mr. Meyer indicated there were one to twodeliveriesaday. Do they always drop off and pick Planning Commission Minutes July 1,1996 Mr. Meyer replied yes, that's why they have three docks. Those are only for Wal-Mart trucks. They will drop the trucks, seal it to the building so that it is safe and secure. One bay is always empty.Commissioner Pruett said some of the concems the Chairman had raised at the last meeting, he was not sure they had all been addressed. One of the concems was the southem entry, that comes in right to the.main entrance. One of the concems was the traffic coming down that drive and making a right tum, and the cars coming out of that aisle would have to look behind them in order to see the traffic, and be able to manage making a right tum. The question has been answered from the standpoint they are going to put in a "right turn only" sign.Mr. Meyer said they took that into consideration. A left tum might be difficult.Commissioner Pruett said a right tum would be difficult as well. The question becomes, should there be a stop on the aisle coming in? Just so the traffic stops and then has to start again to go around that comer.That may be a problem for staff.Mr. Meyer said that wouldn~ be a problem for Wal-Mart.Commissioner Pruett was not sure he liked the traffic circulation solution that is presented.Mr. Meyer showed a slide of a 90 degree, straight in angle plan. Part of the angle was input from DRB with respect to having it pedestrian friendly in front, and adding trees to soften the exterior.Commissioner Pruett was not speaking to that issue. He was speaking to the issue up at the north where one has to make a jog. The small bend does not really address the issue.Mr. Meyer said they tried to not make it as convenient. The "trucks only" sign is how they have mitigated that.Commissioner Smith had referred to the Minutes and Chairman Bosch's comments were clearly spelled out. She thought most of them had been addressed, but she knew Commissioner Pruett's main concem was traffic circulation. There was reference to an already significant problem at the northeast comer of the parking field with vehicles exiting from the parking area to gain access on Tustin. The problem also exists adjacent to Tustin at the southeast comer. Both of those need to be addressed to see how the circulation and parking could be modified somewhat to take care of the hazards.Mr. Meyer confirmed they have presented a plan for doing that. They created a sign plan that should discourage entry so as not to have that problem. They thought by keeping the cars away from where most of the customers will be walking across, which is in front of the store, and where the handicap stalls are, was important and they could bring cars down along the front of Tustin and then down the drive aisles so cars are not crossing the handicap stalls and entrance.Commissioner Smith questioned the garden center door at the north end of the site. Was there any plans for a cross walk to be put at that doorway to help people access the parking lot? Is that within the purview of the site plan or is that something staff would address? She didn~ see any cross walks on the plans?Who puts those in?Mr. Jones responded it was within the Planning Commission's purview to make that determination. He didn't know if the applicant had given any thought to the cross walks, as to where they would be located.Mr. Meyer said they typically put in cross walks and stripping at the main entrance. He didn~ see a problem with putting in stripping at the garden center door, out to the parking Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 Commissioner Smith thought the concern of traffic circulation with the trucks onto Canal was addressed by Wal-Mart saying they would keep the trucks on site and not even go onto Canal. The number of parking spaces has been addressed; they are in excess of the code requirements. There was reference to the traffic circulation in the area of the theater. Mr. Meyer had mentioned the addition of a canoe.Mr. Meyer pointed out the area of the canoe and row of parking. They could put in a hedge or some other'type of landscaping to not encourage people to cross there.Barbara Toth is the Senior Vice President for Newman Properties, which is the managing- leasing agent for Orange Mall Development Associates. She echoed Wal-Mart's comments and supports them entirely in every possible way. She was available to answer questions.Commissioner Romero wanted to go back to the issue of security and the 18 wheelers parking on the property, and kids skateboarding. He and the residents don~ see anything being done to alleviate the problems.Ms. Hawthome said these concems were monitored and controlled by their security. Sears also monitors their property and are in control of their parking lot area. Semi trucks are not allowed to park on the Mall property.Commissioner Smith asked what Ms. Hawthome's authority was over Sears, as the General Manager of the Mall? She informed Ms. Hawthorne there was a City ordinance that prohibited the parking of 18 wheelers in parking lots without permission. She deferred to staff regarding the policy on that. Couldn't code enforcement, traffic or the police department take a look at this problem? (Staff will look into this problem.)Ms. Hawthorne responded Orange Mall Development and Sears worked closely together, but with the agreement at hand, they control the interior and exterior of their building, as well as the parking lot. They were willing to bring this issue to the attention of Sear's manager.Commissioner Car1lon asked about the penalties for the various traffic violations at the Orange Mall?Have there been second or third offenders? How do you handle that?Ms. Hawthorne said if it were a skate boarder or someone that is violating a code of conduct, they are banned from the Mall. If they return, the Orange Police Department is contacted and they are arrested.In reference to the semi-trucks, at present it is just a warning. Everyone has been receptive in moving their trucks.Commissioner Pruett asked for the hours of operation at the Mall?Ms. Hawthorne replied currently the hours of operation are: Monday - Friday, 10:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m.;Saturday, 10:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.; and Sunday, 11:00 a.m.. 6:00 p.m. There are additional hours during the holidays, which occurs in November and December. The hours are voted on by the Board of Directors. The anchor stores must abide by the Mall hours per the terms of the REA. The anchor stores could make a determination as to the hours of operation separate from the other stores in the Mall.Commissioner Smith was interested in hearing more about Newman Properties' security program. What is the security policy?Ms. Toth said it was a continuation of the existing security guard service they provide for the Mall. They have uniformed security guards with 24-hour security service. And, the police sub-station is located on site. They will be providing security for Wal-Mart, subject to their discretion and mutual advantage. This includes security for the parking lot. It is a requirement for Wal-Mart to take part in Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Smith said there were a number of issues raised that should be separated out from the Wal-Mart issue. Those were issues of traffic and safety that pertained to the neighborhood. She would like to leave those until the Commission takes care of the Wal-Mart issues. Orange has grown and as a result there are traffic concerns. The neighborhoods were not built to accommodate the growth of the'city. In terms of the proposed project, she suggested two or three conditions on top of what has been reviewed so far in order to bring the site plan into an acceptable form. She appreciated Wal-Mart's willingness to hear the issues that were raised last time. The Commission's responsibility was to be concemed about the health, welfare and safety of the community. It isn~ always possible to bring in the financial concerns; that's not the Commission's job, although those things also contribute to the health,welfare and safety of the community. By no means have they not heard the comments addressed to the economic issues. but within the Commission's purview are those things relating to the site plan. She was satisfied with the traffic mitigation measures that Wal-Mart has proposed, but she was open to comments from the other Commissioners. If she were to approve the site plan, she would call for a condition that trucks would stay on the site, in the parking lot, and come in and exit on Tustin. She would also call for a condition regarding the shopping carts - that Wal-Mart would agree to a minimum of an hourly collection of the carts and a maximum effort to the containment of all carts on site. She proposed a condition that Wal-Mart subscribe to the security process that the Newman Properties require, and agree to work with Newman Properties' security. She would feel more comfortable if that were a condition so that there would be no misunderstanding as to the requirement of on- site security, as well as the parking lot. Another condition is proposed: There be a cross walk with big, bright stripes at each entrance that crossed over into a parking area for the safety of pedestrians. She was not going to suggest a hedge or something to discourage foot traffic at the canoe by the theater. only because she did not want to isolate the theater too much. It's already being over shadowed by the building.Commissioner Romero wants this store to be successful. But with success, it will create traffic concerns.The truck issue has been resolved with the on-site circulation, staying off of Canal. Kids will always be a concern with a successful store, but the main concern is the deterioration of the neighborhood. He agreed with the suggested conditions stated by Commissioner Smith.Commissioner Carlton also agreed with what has been said. except for the canoe. It might lend to the safety of the theater in giving it more of a separation from truck activity. She asked that staff look into some kind of a means by which people could cross Canal. A study is needed as to whether or not a light is needed; it would make a big difference as to the safety of the people. It's a valid concern.Commissioner Pruett asked staff about the signage on the building. Is the signage determined by the square footage of the front of the building? ( Mr. Jones would look that up and respond a little later.) He knew Wal-Mart liked to use the cookie-cutter approach and liked to keep their stores as close as possible to the other stores they might have. He's still not convinced that flipping the building presents a problem.He did not accept the excuse of McDonald's having to be redesigned, especially when there was already an entrance on that side. The issue becomes an economic issue. Wal-Mart wants to have as much front building on Tustin as they can for signage. When looking at the elevation, it is evident there is a lot of signage and they want to take advantage of it. The other economic issue is that it relates to how Wal-Mart wants to orient itself to the rest of the Mall, From what he is hearing, Wal-Mart is not serving the Mall; they're not interested in really partnering with the Mall. They are interested in bringing customers in from the parking lot and get them out of the parking lot, but not through the Mall. He didn~ think the design was one that took the Mall into consideration as a partnership for a cohesive relationship. One of the findings the Commission must make is that the project will not cause a deterioration of neighboring land uses. By not partnering with the Mall, it will have a negative impact on the neighboring land uses as it relates to the stores. He thought by shifting the store 50 to 60 feet to the east, they would have the ability to move that store away from the theaters and it sets up a lot of room. The north side, where the bays are located - they are laid out the same way as before, Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 be laid out the same way as Broadway. Broadway had them pulling in and back in to where the truckswerefacingnorthandsouth. He showed the applicant on the map what he was talking about. He thoughttheyfailedtolookatthetruckconfigurationinthattheloadingdocksweretakenawayfromthetheater.The cookie-cutter approach on this site is not the appropriate approach. Wal-Mart needs to gobackandlookatthisissuetomakeadditionalcorrections. By shifting it anywhere from 50 to 60 feet totheeast,what it does is give them the opportunity to take that drive and align it, going straight up, instead of veering to the left. It could be aligned with the other driveway that is going out in front of theotherstorestothenorth. Again, that is partnering with the Mall properties. It would be a design that wouldbepositivetotheneighborhOOd. There is also an opportunity to create a canoe between that drive aisleandthehandicapparkinginfrontofthestore. He was not going to approve the site plan review. Hewaslookingforasitethatwascompatiblewiththeotherstores, neighborhood and that will bring valuetotheneighborhoodandtothesite. If the Commissioners wish to take action to approve the siteplanreview,then the project needs to have stipulations placed upon it.Commissioner Smith disagreed with some of Commissioner Pruett's comments. However, she did agree with him about the doors to the Mall. Frankly, she was Surprised at Newman Properties for agreeingtothenarrowdoorsintotheMall. (That had not been agreed to by Newman Properties.) A conditioncouldbeaddedtorequirethatthedoorsbeaswide as necessary.That wasn~ all Commissioner Pruett heard the applicant say. Their cash register layout andthewholestorelayoutistogetthecustomerinandthenout. They want to be convenient to the front ofthestore _it's the marketing concept that they say they can~ change. Commissioner Pruett is saying that's an integral part of the issue. How do you be a partner with the people you are going to be workingwith? He couldn~ agree with the concept as it was presented.Commissioner Smith thought the shopper/customer should have the discretion as to how theywantedtoshop. An 8 foot door into the Mall was rather narrow. She appreciated Commissioner Pruett's comments with respect to the orientation to the rest of the Mall. She didn~ know what the safety code wasforthedoors, or what was acceptable to the Mall in terms of the layout.Commissioner Pruett said the issues raised were more than the doors and safety problems. He took issue with that. Right outside the Broadway doors are glass doors to the right and left. Thosearetheemergencyexits. The safety issue is not the real issue; the safety is there. Again, that'ssomethingforstafftodealwithwhentheyreviewthebuildingplans. Just by widening the entrance does notaddressalltheissues. The other issues deal with the truck ingress/egress and circulation plan. The plantakesthetruckscleararoundthebackoftheMall, driving through the parking lot and out through theotherside.What he is saying, by repositioning the building, there is the ability to back the trucks in and getthemoffthepropertywithlesstrafficproblems. It is no different than what the Broadway had whentheywereloadingandunloading. It will require a redesign in terms of how they approach their buildingdesign. A condition needs to be added regarding the stop sign on the entry driveway (the southerlydrive, westbound stop sign at the t-intersection).Mr. Jones responded to Commissioner Pruett's question about the signage. They areallowedonesignforeachbuildingelevation. If there are four sides of the building, they are allowed foursigns. In addition,they are allowed one additional wall sign for each frontage that exceeds 100 lineal feet. Intermsoftheareathesignscouldcover, there is a ratio of one square foot per lineal foot of thebuildingelevation. If there was 100 lineal feet, they could have 100 square feet for signage.Commissioner Pruelt responded he heard Mr. Jones to say the larger front footage onehasonthebuilding, the more signage they could Planning Commission Minutes July 1,1996 Commissioner Smith appreciated Commissioner Carlton's comments about a cross walk or traffic signaltohelppeopleaccessacrossCanaltotheshoppingcenter. Is there any marked cross walk with a signalonCanal? There's one at Meats at one end. What is the City's plan for helping people to access across Canal with this type of development going in? Mr. Jones was not aware there were any marked cross walks, except at the ends of that street at MeatsandHeim. He was not aware of any plans to put in cross walks either. Commissioner Smith was asking for direction on whether or not it would be the developer's responsibilitytogetintothepublicstreetswithcrosswalksandsignals, or if that was not more the responsibility of theCity, given a lot of issues have been voiced relating to Canal and Heim, including speeding buses, parkedtrucks, children without a cross walk, lots of schools in the area, and sidewalks. If, however, the area is unincorporated, it is County; not the City and they cannot respond to that. Mr. Soo-Hoo responded to the concems in a general way. The City is able to condition forcertainimprovementsonbehalfofthedeveloperiftheycanshowanexusthatthedeveloperhascausedthesituationthatrequirestheimprovements. If not, essentially it is the City's obligation to makethose improvements.Commissioner Smith did not believe there was a nexus. She thought the responsibility was the City's,given the fact it was a large, growing area of the City.Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to approve NegativeDeclaration1504-96 in that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant impactontheenvironmentor wildlife resources. AYES: NOES:ABSENT:Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Smith to approve Major Site Plan Review 16-96 - Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. with the 12 conditions of approval listed in the staff report and add the following conditions: Condition 13 _ All Wal-Mart delivery trucks will ingress/egress from Tustin; Condition 14 - Wal-Mart willagreetoaminimumofanhOUrlycollectionofcartsandamaximumefforttothecontainmentofallcartsonthesiteatalltimes; Condition 15 - Wal-Mart will cooperate and contract with NewmanPropertiessecurity's program;Condition 17 - That cross walks be provided in bold color and be user friendly at allentrancesandexits;Condition 18 - That there be a stop sign installed at the westbound southerly drive atthet-intersection;Condition 19 - For safety purposes, a hedge shall be planted at the east side of the canoe in frontof the theaters;Condition 20 - In consultation with City staff and Newman Properties, the widest doors possible to theMallbeprovided. It is expected that those doors be in excess of 12 feet width. The findings to approvethesiteplanareasfollows: 1) The project will not cause a deterioration of neighboring land uses. 2) The project conforms to the City of Orange development standards and any applicable specialdesignguidelinesorspecificplanrequirements. 3) The project will not cause significant negativeenvironmentalimpact. 4) On and off-site circulation is adequate to support the project. 5) City servicesareavailableandadequatetoservetheproject. 6) The project is compatible with community aesthetics.MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 Moved by Commissioner Romero, seconded by Commissioner Carlton, to deny Major Site Plan Review 16-96 - Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. because the project was not compatible with the neighboring land uses, and that the on and off-site circulation was not adequate to support the project related to truck deliveries. AYES: NOES:ABSENT:Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero Commissioner Smith Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Pruett explained this decision was considered a final action on the site plan review, unless appealed to the City Council. Such appeal must be filed within 15 days of the Planning Commission's action. The appeal shall be made in written form to the Community Development Department,accompanied by an appeal fee of $115.00. The City Clerk will then set petition for a public hearing before the City Council at the earliest date. All owners of property located within 300 feet of the project site will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing.If this were appealed to the City Council Commissioner Pruett asked Mr. Soo-Hoo if notification would take place?Mr. Soo-Hoo believed the appeal notice refers to a typical public hearing item. He was not certain if the 300 foot notification of property owners would occur in this case.Mr. Jones said there would be a 300 foot notification due to the environmental consideration on said document. If anyone else is interested in being notified, they need to furnish their names and addresses to the Planning staff.Commissioner Smith wanted to address a number of other issues. She was extremely surprised by the vote of the Commissioners. She had several suggestions about the concernsraisedatthishearingpertainingtothisproject. She did not believe all the issues are the responsibility of the City to attend to.People cannot depend on govemment to solve all their problems. More than halfoftheconcernsbelongbackinthecommunityfortheresidentstodealwith. 1) If Villa Ford were test driving in her neighborhood, it would not have gone on this long. If that is an issue, she suggested members of the community contact Villa Ford as soon as possible and rectify that situation. 2) If buses are a problem on Heim, Canal and Meats, that issue should be taken directly to the Orange County Transit Authority, which is the servant of the people this County operates on our tax money, as well as Federal dollars. If the residents do not like where the buses are going, they need to tell the OTCA. Those buses can be re-routed. 3) She didn't know about the Sav On parking lot being a disaster, waiting to happen. She wasn~in on that particular hearing, but she believed Sav On had some responsibility to makethatasafeplaceforthecommunity. Those concems should be delivered directly to Sav On. Sav On, the community and the City should probably work together to rectify that before somebody gets hurt, 4) The penalty for trucks traveling on City streets, when they're not suppose to be, is very severe. That is an issue of traffic safety which is controlled by the Police Department. It should be brought to the Traffic Commission or taken directly to the Police Department by report. She suggested the residents note the times and dates the trucks travel their streets, take their license plate numbers and report it to the proper authority. 5) In terms of trucks parking on the Mall site, the community needs to find out if Sears is renting out their parking spaces to those trucks. 6) Sidewalks in the unincorporated area are not part oftheCity's purview since that is County property. If it is County property and the residents want sidewalks, they should talk to the County, realizing it will probably cost the residents some money. 7) In terms of the kids having the right to skate board on the sidewalks, she knew in many areas of Orange, that couldn~ be done as it was against the law. She wished there was an outdoor performance rink in Orange, but in the meantime, she wants the kids to be safe on those sidewalks. 8) She heard there are traffic problems on Heim, Canal and Meats. Lumped into that particular category she heard there were many schools and churches, which use those streets and also generate a lot of pedestrian traffic. That issue, along with the speed of traffic on those streets, the presence of trucks and the traffic signal (as suggested) should be brought to Planning Commission Minutes July 1, 1996 discussion and improvement. There are dollars in the City that are suppose to improve areas, especially those that need improvement for concerns of safety. The traffic issues should come to the City and she would like staff to look at the issues - look into the speed of traffic traveling on Heim, Canal and Meats,what kind of traffic, if ~ is large trucks; whether or not there are enough stop signs and traffic signals on those routes of travel, and whether or not there are enough access points for children to get across the street from schools to the residential area. 9) She also heard that the buses park on Canal. That would:also be an issue to take to OCTA. They use to park out on Tustin.Commissioner Carlton appreciated all the thought that went into Commissioner Smith's list of concems.She hoped they would see some results with the issues that have been raised.INRE: ORAL PRESENTATIONS Carole Walters asked that all interested people be notified if Wal-Mart appeals to City Council. (The people need to let staff know their name and address in order for staff to notify them of the hearing.) Barbara DeNiro was frustrated. She did not think the public needs to be lectured on where they have to go to solve their problems. Lyssa Alakore was confused about the applicant. Who applied and who is the applicant to change the lot lines and the zoning? (The lot line issue is an issue that went before the City Council; it didn~ come before the Planning Commission. The City Council continued the hearing because of Wal-Mart. But,they are two separate issues, related to the same property. The lot line issue was by the applicant, the Orange Mall. The other issue was the site plan review by Wal-Mart.)Adele Graves thanked the Commission for listening to the residents' concems, and taking into account the small business merchants at the Mall.IN RE:ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Carlton, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to adjoum to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission Meeting on July 15, 1996.The meeting adjourned at1 0:35 p. m. AYES: NOES:ABSENT:Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED