Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-02-1998 PC Minutesc;lSoO.q.t?l.3 MINUTES Planning Commission City of Orange March 2,1998 Monday - 7:00 p.m.PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Vern Jones, Planning Manager and Commission Secretary,Ted Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney,Roger Hohnbaum, Assistant City Engineer, and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary IN RE: ITEM TO BE CONTINUED 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2204-97, VARIANCE 2042-97 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1545-97 - TOYOTA OF ORANGE A proposal to expand an auto dealership and construct a parking structure within the front setback area Trenton Avenue frontage)_ The site is located at 1400 North Tustin Street. Applicant has requested to continue this item to Monday, April 20, 1998.This item has been continued from the February 2 and February 18,1998 public hearings.)Moved by Commissioner Carlton, seconded by Commissioner Smith, to continue Conditional Use Permit 2204-97, Variance 2042-97 and Negative Declaration 1545-97 to the meeting of April 20, 1998.AYES:NOES:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None MOTION CARRIED IN RE:CONSENT CALENDAR 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 18,1998 Moved by Commissioner Romero, seconded by Commissioner Carlton, to approve the Minutes of February 18, 1998.AYES:NOES:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None MOTION CARRIED 3. STATUS REPORT ON RAMADA INN (105 NORTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD)Mr. Jones gave a follow-up report to previously approved Conditional Use Permit 2200-97 (Manila Peninsula). Staff was asked to determine whether the subject property was in conformance with current codes and previous approvals. Staff inspected the property, reviewed all previous entitlements and City ordinances regarding nuisance type issues. The previous entitlements were done many years ago with limited conditions on the property. There are no inconsistencies or non-conformities with previously entitled rights for the property. With the widening of the freeway, the landscaping for the property at the front does not look its best and staff has sent a letter to the property owner. Staff has observed trucks parking across spaces clearly marked for vehicles, and have asked the property owner to relocate the trucks to the rear of the property. There is nothing in the code to prevent the trucks from parking on the lot. The site does not appear to have a high occupancy rate, and perhaps this encourages trucks to park across some of the parking spaces.Commissioner Smith wanted to know if the proper permits were in place for the uses on the property. Mr. t!" ~ Planning Commission Minutes March 2, 1998 Chairman Bosch thought the key issue is the truck parking, particularly on the northeast property. He asked if there was anything that controlled location of parking of trucks on the commercial property.Mr. Jones said staff could not find anything in the code. The parking spaces on the site appear to be striped to accommodate truck parking. Staff has asked the property owner to voluntarily comply by talking with the truckers and try to get them to park their trucks in the back area of the property. The original plans did not include the rear area. There were some additional plans that came in a number of years ago, in which the owner proposed to expand the hotel back to that area. However, that plan was never implemented and the entitlement has expired. The owners have paved a large portion of that area for truck parking, which exceeds any of the parking requirements for their existing entitlements.Commissioner Smith wanted to know if the City were going to require the owner to re-Iandscape the front portion of the property.Mr. Jones' understanding is that over the next couple of months the freeway widening will be completed and then improvements to the property will be implemented.The public hearing was opened for public comments.Dan Van Dorpe. 295 #A Rampart, asked that this matter be set for public hearing to allow people to speak on these issues. He would like to know what the area of the site is and what the size of the parking area is. Does the parking area include the driveways, as well as the parking spaces. He guessed the parking lot was about five (5) acres or 200,000 square feet. He believed that would require 20,000 square feet of landscaping. The owners have torn out about 30,000 square feet of landscaping.He wanted to know if the current landscaping complies with the code requirements. There is no landscaping along Rampart. He suggested revoking the current entitlements.Mr. Jones replied the landscape requirement is the setback area and then 10% of the parking areas,which would include the drive aisles as part of the parking area. The site conforms to the existing requirements. It' s possible the site had more landscaping than was required and is now a legal, non-conforming use due to the street being widened. Mr. Jones offered to review this information with Mr.Van Dorpe during business hours_The public hearing was closed.Commissioner Pruett thought this was an unusual situation in that there was a conditional use permit for a restaurant at the property. He felt the proposed restaurant has generated these issues. He wanted the process to be considered. Staff needs to review this issue and report back to the Commission. He is reluctant to move forward and set this for public hearing when staff has not made a recommendation that violations exist. Commissioner Carlton didn't understand why this would be the forum to hear complaints. A written complaint needs to be filed with the City for a perceived code violation and staff needs to respond to the complaint. Mr. Jones said complaints are handled by Code Enforcement staff, who make a site visit to determine if there are code violations. In this particular instance, staff is monitoring the noise complaint on an on-going basis over the next couple of months.Chairman Bosch suggested this matter be placed under a Miscellaneous item on the next Agenda for a report back from staff.Commissioner Smith is concerned whether or not the landscape requirement has been met. The area looks rather shabby and something needs to be done to make it look better. It is unfortunate that the restaurant' s application for beer and wine has gotten mixed up in this process.Moved by Commissioner Carlton, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to receive and file staff's report on the status of Ramada Inn, with the assurance that staff will follow up with Mr. Van Dorpe.AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None MOTION CARRIED 2 lr Planning Commission Minutes March 2, 1998 IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2202-97 - SEGA GAMEWORKS, INC. The applicant is proposing an amusement arcade within the new City Mills Shopping Center. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303. The full reading of the staff report was waived and the public hearing was opened. Aoolicant. Janice Miller. Sega GameWorks. 10 Universal City Plaza. Suite 3300. Universal City. explained that GameWorks was formed for the purpose of developing and operating interactive entertainment centers, and they are designed to attract a broad range of patrons, including young adults ranging in age up to the mid-30's. A CUP is requested for amusement devices, including video games, pinball machines, pool tables and similar devices, and for a restaurant. No alcoholic beverages will be served at this time. They have read the staff report and agree to the conditions of approval.Commissioner Romero referred to condition 6, prohibiting the admission of, or allowing any persons under the age of 18, to remain upon the premises after the hour of 10:00 P.M. unless accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. He asked if it wouldn't be more convenient for the kids to wait inside the business instead of outside near the theaters for parents to pick them up.Ms. Miller explained this condition was a requirement of staff. They don't want to turn their guests away as their environment is quite safe. If the Commission desires, they could withdraw this condition. The managers will be monitoring the patrons on a daily basis.Commissioner Romero referred to condition 7, where the business shall prohibit the admission of, or allow any person under the age of 18 years to remain upon the premises between the hours of 8: 00 A.M. and 3:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, when OUSD is in session. He asked if this will cause concem.Ms. Miller said it will hurt their business, but again, if there are curfews and restrictions placed upon them,they will abide by them. They will not card the students if they are accompanied by an adult though.Commissioner Pruett reviewed the Evaluation on Page 3 and it indicates several items to be considered.He wanted to know if the items will be considered if they are not incorporated into the conditions.Mr. Jones explained the criteria on Page 3 that staff asked the Commission to look at and take into consideration before making a decision. Some of the conditions do reflect some of the questions that are asked. Each City Department looks at a particular project and identifies conditions that are appropriate to make sure the use will be a positive benefit to the City_ Conditions are not needed for each criteria.Commissioner Pruett asked if the attendants would be working with the game activities or will they also be working in the snack bar. How are the attendants going to be managed.Ms. Miller explained they will have game hosts, staff and managers on the floor at all times. They will be roaming the area to make sure everything is being monitored. In this facility they anticipate to have about 30 employees.The public hearing was closed.Commissioner Pruett did not have a problem with the proposal as presented, and thought it was an appropriate use for the site.Commissioner Smith also thought it was a good use and was in favor of it. She thought it needed a security guard. Condition 5 refers to monitoring of the facility by the Crime Prevention Bureau, but it doesn't say how often that will occur. She thought the use should be monitored within the first 90 days,and then every three (3) months after that. Planning Commission Minutes March 2, 1998 Chairman Bosch looked back at Page 3 in the Evaluation, item 4. One of the areas of consideration is that the City may require that a private security guard be provided. The Staff Review Committee stated th,e Police Department has not required at this time an on-site security guard because the new Center will have a security force and the Police Department will have a sub-station located in the Center. He shared Commissioner Smith's concern, but the Police Department has been very good at monitoring a variety of entertainment and gathering spots in Orange, and he had confidence they will do the same at this site.The Commission discussed how often the Crime Prevention Bureau should monitor the level of activity at this new business. If there is a problem, staff can bring this back to the Commission. With a Police ,sub-station on site, the Police Department has a comfort level in knowing if there are problems, they will be handled quickly.It was noted the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review.Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Carlton, to approve Conditional Use Permit 2202-97 - Sega GameWorks, Inc., with conditions 1-12, finding that the required findings of Section F of Section 17.10.030, requirements for granting conditional use permits, has been demonstrated in the application with the conditions as illustrated, and the requirements for consideration under Section 17.18.070.B have been taken into account and appropriate mitigating actions incorporated into the conditions.AYES:NOES:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None MOTION CARRIED 5. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15519 AND MINOR SITE PLAN REVIEW 39- 97 - TNR DEVELOPMENT HEWES PARK)The applicant is requesting a tentative tract map to allow the subdivision of approximately 9. 5 acres into 13 lots, some of which would not have direct access to public streets. The proposed lots will be developed with single family residences. The subject site is located west of Esplanade Street and north of LaVeta Avenue (formerly called Hewes Park), addressed 394 and 416 South Esplanade Street.Mitigated Negative Declaration 1525-97 has been prepared to address the environmental impacts of this project.There was no opposition to this item and the full reading of the staff report was waived.NOTE:Mr. Jones stated at one time the applicant was requesting an administrative adjustment be considered as part of the application, but has withdrawn that request. A February 27 memorandum was given to the Commission; a subsequent March 2 letter was also received withdrawing the request for the administrative adjustment.The public hearing was opened.Applicant. Tim Roberts. TNR Development Corporation. 130 McCormick Avenue. Costa Mesa.explained they were introduced to this property over a year ago. It's an extraordinary piece of property in terms of topo, plant life and trees. They agreed less density and less disruption to the land is the best way to accomplish their goal of saving as many trees and foliage as possible. They are proposing to build 11 new houses, one lot is for an existing house that will be remodeled, and another lot (Lot 13)that will accommodate the existing residents on the property. The main entry will be on Esplanade with an exit only on LaVeta. They will sculpture the pads around the 100 year old trees and will build 2-story houses to shrink down the footprint of the building and provide more space for the lots. They have reviewed the conditions of approval and accept them. They have one comment, though, as it relates to the widening of LaVeta in terms of the tree at the corner of La Veta and James. They want to widen the street without damaging the tree and to avoid root conflicts. He brought his development team with him and they were available to answer questions.Commissioner Smith was very interested in the preservation of the trees on the site. She asked if the applicant were willing to leave the tree and work around it and see if the tree survives. (Yes.) She asked what type of house exists on the site and how will Planning Commission Minutes March 2, 1998 Mr. Roberts replied it was a beautiful house, but needs to be improved and remodeled. They will m8:ke exterior improvements but it will retain it's existing architecture. It needs a new roof and the balconies need to be rebuilt. The interior will be gutted and the kitchens. bathrooms, bedrooms and stairways will be upgraded and improved. There is existing landscaping. GreQ AppleQate. the consulting arborist, spoke about the shrubs and trees on the property. They propose to preserve the trees, but not the shrub-like foliage.Public comments:James Penner. 4005 East LaVeta, spoke in favor of this project on behalf of himself and his father in-law,Robert Schuller. They are extremely pleased with what TNR Development proposes for the site,especially their desire to preserve the trees and to develop 1/2 acre lots.The public hearing was closed.Commissioner Carlton said this is a beautiful site and she's delighted so much effort has been put into the tree preservation study and how the houses are going to be located on the property.Chairman Bosch said there were conditions for the widening of LaVeta and sight distance easement.However, at this stage, it is unknown what impact those requirements will have on the historical tree. He asked staff what kind of flexibility there is in order to work with the tree for modifications to the street improvements that wouldn't cause danger to the public on the street, but still save the tree.Mr. Hohnbaum explained they currently have a bottle neck out there, along that stretch of LaVeta. Staff is most concerned with the sight distance coming out from the side streets, and have recommended a full width. They discussed with the applicant the impacts of that as well as the possible impacts to the tree roots. They are hoping that the pruning of the tree's roots will allow the tree to remain and the street to be widened.Chairman Bosch suggested doing something with the park way or sidewalk modifications, but leaving the curb line at the recommended location and preserving the sight line. (Staff concurred to keep the park way to a minimum.)Chairman Bosch said he was on the Commission when the last proposal came before them with additional lots, and he recalled at that time the great care that was given to preserve as many of the trees as possible and to minimize the grading. He's delighted to see a way has been found to come forward with a proposal with even fewer homes on the property and taking great care to preserve the historic landmark of the trees. He's confident the project can be fine tuned as it will be a great asset to the City.Commissioner Smith was sitting on the Commission when another project had a tree preservation plan,but the trees were bulldozed. The developer's comment was that the bulldozer man made a mistake and they were very sorry. The City lost all of those trees, including a stand of about 75-year old Sycamore trees. She wanted to know if there was a penalty if the preservation planwasnotcompliedwith, or is there a guarantee that the trees will be preserved. She felt the developer, in that case, should have been penalized. She didn't see anything in the conditions of approval to assure her the trees are going to be preserved.Mr. Jones said the basic protection is that the developer has to file a landscape plan, which goes to the Design Review Board, and staff is charged with making sure that the plan is implemented as approved.Mr. Carnes said this project has conditions that will be tied into the grading plan and the building permits with regard to the preservation of the trees. The grading plans will include the mitigation measures for grading of the site and fencing off the tree roots and utility installation. Unlike other projects, typically they don't have these type of conditions unless added by the Commission and/or Council. This project is conditioned to have them attached to the building permits and grading plans.Commissioner Smith noted that conditions 6,7,8,9 and 10 all refer to the trees. She asked who monitors that. Who is going to rinse the tree foliage once a week. which is mentioned in condition 10. 5 Planning Commission Minutes March 2, 1998 Mr. Carnes said those conditions will be attached to the grading permit. It will be monitored by the on-site grading inspectors, who are on staff in the Public Works Department. Rinsing of the tree foliage is also attached to the grading permit.Mr. Hohnbaum also said staff could work in conjunction with Howard Morris on this project to ensure the trees are being treated in the proper manner.Commissioner Smith would like to see attached to the conditions, more than a hand slap if the conditions are not fulfilled. There should be some type of penalty spelled out in the conditions, either monetary or in the developer's inability to proceed on the project until it has been mitigated.Chairman Bosch said they have required on other projects that there be replacement of like-kind and like-size specimens to handle that type of mitigation.Mr. Reynolds said they could have the developer post some type of security, based on the value of the trees, to ensure if a tree is damaged or destroyed, there would be money available to replace it.Mr. Hohnbaum noted that the one tree at the corner of LaVeta and James - if it has to be removed or it dies as a result of the road widening - the tree should be exempted from any penalty. Mr. Jones said condition 9 refers to the fencing around the trees to be preserved. He suggested the Commission could expand the condition to ensure that the fencing is installed prior to the issuance of the grading permit. It would provide an additional level of certainty that procedurally the right steps would occur. Commissioner Smith would also like to include a condition that says any tree that is suppose to be preserved and is lost or damaged, will be replaced by the same species of tree in a somewhat mature form, rather than a seedling. Chairman Bosch stated if a tree that is to be preserved disappears, there should be a stop work notice issued. Mr. Hohnbaum thought it would be worthwhile to indicate on condition 9 that prior to any grading operation, that the fences be in place and approved by the City. He had concern, though, about the stop work notice. He suggested if a stop work notice is issued it is for the purpose of re- establishing planting of a size and type approved by the City with re-review by the Design Review Board so that the penalty for removal of any protected trees would be that the developer must come back through the City with a replanting schematic, approved by the ORB.Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to recommend to the City Council to approve Mitigated Negative Declaration 1525-97, finding there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant impact on the environment or wildlife resources, subject to its development in accordance to the plans presented to the Planning Commission, the consulting arborist's report, and the proposed conditions of approval.AYES:NOES:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Carlton, to recommend to the City Council to approve Tentative Tract Map 15519 and Minor Site Plan Review 39-97, with conditions 1-28 in the staff report with the following modifications: To amend Condition 1 to include the following words after the words, "substantial compliance with plans," and the oreliminary Tree Preservation Study dated February 24. 1997. prepared by Greg Applegate. At the end of Condition 2 add the wording, and specifically address necessary construction details. plant maintenance and plant relocation plans and procedures to assure full compliance with the preliminary landscape plan and the findings of the Preliminary Tree Preservation Study. Modify Condition 9 to state: Install secure fencing around all trees to be preserved with the inspection and approval of fencing by the City's Department of Public Works and Community Services. and City tree specialist prior to the issuance of the grading permit. Equipment and foot traffic must be kept out from under all trees to be preserved. All trees indicated to be Planning Commission Minutes March 2, 1998 approved plans and Tree Preservation Study shall be maintained and protected in accordance with sound professional arborists' practices and re-established in accordance with the approved plans. as reviewed by the Design Review Board. Any trees lost or excessively damaged shall be replaced by the developer with the same species and mature forms with necessary sizes to be approved by the Design Review Board. A stop work notice shall extend until such time as a mitigation clan for re-establishment of the lost orexcessively damac;;Jed specimens be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board. excepting the tree at the corner of LaVeta Avenue and James Street. Modify Condition 17 by adding additional words to the last sentence - subiect to additionalric;;Jht-of- way imcrovements review relative to the potential preservation of the tree at the corner of LaVeta Avenue and James Street. as further defined in Condition 22. Modify Condition 22 by adding another sentence to the end of the condition: Applicant to consult with City Public Works staff and to modify sidewalk and park way improvements outside of the curve line necessary throuQh approved right-of-way development standards. subiect to the approval of the City Engineer. to limit any damage to the tree at the corner of LaVeta Avenue east of James Street to the extent possible. If. after all good efforts have been made to preserve this tree through design and preservation efforts fail. the tree shall be replaced with a similar species. but of a size agreed to with the Design Review Board.AYES:NOES:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None MOTION CARRIED 6. NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1546-98 - CITY OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS A project that includes removal and reconstruction of curb, gutter, sidewalk, access ramp, and pavement;relocation of street lights and chain link fence; modification of traffic signal, and construction of a bus bay in front of the Ralph Store's parking lot on Chapman Avenue, approximately 230' east of Yorba Street.Mr. Hohnbaum reported there are two projects wrapped into one. The first, is widening of Chapman Avenue to the west of Yorba. Work is being done in conjunction with the Caltrans widening of the off ramp at that location. The City will be providing an exclusive right hand turn lane. The other portion of the project is a bus turn out. The right-of-way was previously dedicated by the Ralph's market as a condition of their construction.The public hearing was opened and then closed as no one came forward with comments.Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to approve Negative Declaration 1546-98. AYES:NOES:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None MOTION CARRIED 7. 2ND ADDENDUM TO EIR #631 - CITY OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS A 2nd addendum to EIR #631 (including Traffic and Noise Studies) to evaluate restriping Cannon Street from two lanes to four lanes.Chairman Bosch excused himself from the meeting due to a potential conflict of interest. Vice-Chair Smith conducted the hearing.Mr. Hohnbaum presented the staff report as there was opposition to this item. Public Works is proposing the restriping of Cannon Street, between Serrano and Via Escola, from the existing two lanes to a 4-lane configuration. Previously, the CityCouncilapprovedLomaStreetEIR #631 in 1985. During the public hearing, it was determined that if any of the three traffic conditions were achieved after Cannon Street was opened, that City staff would begin the necessary environmental documentation, as required by CEQA, to restripe the roadway for four travel lanes. The three conditions are: 1) Opening of the Eastern Transportation Corridor; 2) Widening the Cannon Street bridge crossing over Santiago Creek;and 3) ADT volume of 20,000 vehicles on Cannon Street. Two of the aforementioned conditions are about to be achieved. The ETC is scheduled to open in October 1998, and the bridge Planning Commission Minutes March 2, 1998 Creek will be completed this coming June. The Addendum contains the initial environmental study, as well as traffic and noise studies for the project. The traffic study concludes that the restriping of Can~on Street from two to four lanes will result in an improved level of service for traffic flow without substantially increasing the total volume. The restriping of the street will not have any adverse environmental impacts. Commissioner Pruett wanted to know Anaheim's plans for restriping their lanes in the Anaheim Hills area. Mr. Hohnbaum said staff has corresponded with the City of Anaheim and learned Anaheim has, in their C.I.P., a signal slated at Big Sky. That funding, though, will not be available until 2001-2002. They have indicated when the signal is installed, they will then restripe their street to four lanes.The public hearing was opened.Bob Bennyhoff. 10642 Morada Drive. Orange Park Acres, said they had this fight 14 years ago. The road has been delayed for 14 years and it is absolutely essential to restripe the road. The free flow of traffic on Cannon is needed for the growth of East Orange.Sharon Moore. 6065 Ridgewood Court. Anaheim, lives off of Nohl Ranch Road, east of Imperial. She takes Cannon most every day to go to work in Irvine. The additional lanes will help move cars and she favored this project.Christina Stichler. 6642 East Waterton Avenue, was not opposed to the project, but had a lot of questions. She asked if this was an answer to Resolution 6494, is the City redesignating the road to a modified major highway, has the 100 foot right-of-way been obtained from Southern California Edison and other property owners, is the traffic report a current one and when was it done. She encouraged the Commission to look at maintaining the existing road, even though it is congested until the ETC opens to see what the traffic is really like. She would like to see the road coincide with the bridge opening to not create a bottle neck.Commissioner Romero asked Ms. Stichler what her negative was in restriping the road to four lanes.Ms. Stichler thought by opening the road to four lanes would create more traffic. This will create a freeway or race track for the cars using this street.Mr. Hohnbaum answered Ms. Stichler's questions. The road is not classified as a modified major highway. It is being built as a primary road with four lanes. He is not able to answer the question about obtaining the right-of-way from Edison; however, the work being proposed is within the existing curb and sidewalk. They are not proposing to widen the road any further than what exists now. The ETC is opening in October, 1998. Villa Park has had a project in the works for approximately three to four years and have grant funding from Measure M. They have not been successful in completing their project, but Orange is aware of that and realize there could be a portion that could be restricted during that construction. The traffic study was completed in February, 1998; however, some of the information in the study goes back. The existing counts were actually taken in October, 1997. Staff feels the counts are still representative, but are probably lower than what is actually out there. Currently, they have 17,000 trips on this 2-lane roadway. That exceeds any normal operating capacity. The intersections are operating at a level of service D, E or F, depending on what intersection you are at and whether it is in the A.M. or P.M.peak hours. The traffic study indicates in 1998 there will be 20,000 trips on the roadway. At buildout in 2010, it should be noted there will be 22,000 trips. However, the traffic south of Serrano will be approximately 28,000 trips. These traffic volumes predicate that more than two lanes are necessary for this roadway to convey traffic through the intersections in an efficient manner.The Commission and staff discussed the opening of Serrano, the restriping of Cannon Street, Resolution 6494 which was adopted in 1985, and the 100 foot right- of- way issue.The publichearing Planning Commission Minutes March 2, 1998 Moved by Commissioner Carlton, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to recommend to the City Council approval of the 2nd addendum to EIR #631, as the restriping is not going to take place until one of the conditions is met. The project will not cause any significant adverse impacts. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED Chairman Bosch returned to the meeting. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Pruett, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to adjourn to a study session on Monday, March 9, 1998, in the Weimer Room at 5:00 p.m. to review the City of Orange Economic Development Strategy and Work Program. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith None MOTION CARRIED sld 9 r