HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/23/1983 - Minutes PCPLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
City of Orange
Orange, California
February 23, 1983
Wednesday, 7:30 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Orange City Planning Commission was called to order
by Vice-Chairman Master at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Commissioners Coontz, Master, Nickelson
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez
STAFF Jere P. Murphy, Administrator of Current Planning and Commission
PRESENT: Secretary; Norvin Lanz, Associate Planner; Gene Minshew, Assistant
City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Doris Ofsthun,
Recording Secretary .
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
IN RE: APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 7, 1983
Regarding page 5, paragraph 8 of the minutes, Commissioner Coontz
asked that the word "not" be inserted in the sentence: "Commissioner
Coontz did not see the necessity of going through ...", rather than
"Commissioner Coontz saw the necessity of going through..."
Moved by Commissioner M,ickelson, seconded by Commissioner Coontz
to accept the minutes for February 7, 1983, as corrected.
AYES: Commissioners Coontz, Master, Nickelson
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED
IN RE: ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN:
ZONE CHANGE 994 - CITY OF ORANGE:
A proposal to rezone from the M-1 (Light Manufacturing) District to
the MH (Mobile Home) District on land located on the north side of
Rampart Street approximately 400± feet east of tiie centerline of
State College Blvd. (300 North Rampart Street, Park Royale P~obile
Home Park). (NOTE: This project is exempt from Environmental Review.)
Jere Murphy explained to the Commissioners that a request had been
received from Donald C. Caskey, Vice President & Trust Officer of the
Wells Fargo Bank, trustee for the property in question, asking for
a continuance of this item to March 21, 1983, the reason for the
request being that their Trust Real Estate Department recently moved
their offices and apparently the mail was not forwarded in a timely
manner so that they had time enough to consider this zone change with
their counsel representing the trust. Since they intend to oppose
this proposed zone change for a number of reasons, they require time
to study the situation and prepare the presentation of their views.
Vice-Chairman Master polled the audience to find out how many were
attending the meeting to hear this item and it was discovered that most
of the peopld in the audience (more than half of the auditorium was
filled) were there for this agenda item.
r
Ernest Johnson, 300
Homeowner's Associa
the Commission and,
would be willing to
they would agree to
clarification as to
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
N. Rampart, Space 202, Orange, President of the
tion for Park Royale Mobile Home Park, addressed
after polling the audience to find out how many
come back for a hearing on March 21st, said that
a continuance in the matter. He asked for further
exactly what will take place at that hearing.
Commissioner Coontz suggested that the Staff Report be presented and
then the .people could decide.
Mr. Murphy explained that on May 18, 1982, the City Council adopted
Urgency Ordinance No. 15-82, prohibiting the conversion of any mobile
home park to any other use pending completion of a study on the
appropriate land use provisions which should be applied to all mobile
home parks. At the same hearing, the City Council directed Staff to
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 7983
Page Two
commence public hearings to rezone existing mobile home parks to
the mobile home district.
Mr. Murphy pointed out that this rezone action is the ninth of
nine mobile home park rezone actions on existing parks in the City.
He also pointed out that the outcome could be different on each of
the individual parks.
Mr. Murphy further explained that not only would the Planning
Commission be expected to make a decision on rezoning the individual
mobile home parks, but they would pass a recommendation on to the
City Council, the City Council then holding a similar public hearing
and making the final determination.
The purpose is to consider rezoning all of the mobile home parks
existing in the city from their present zoning to mobile home park
zoning.
Don Caskey, Trust Officer and Vice President with Wells Fargo Bank,
addressed the Commission, explaining that he had been asked to request
a continuance because they did not receive notice in time to go over
it. They do intend to oppose the rezoning to mobile home zoning.
Mr. Johnson again addressed the Commission and said that they would
be in favor of a continuance to March 21, 1983 and in favor of the
zone change.
Mr. Bartlett, agent for Park Royale Mobile Home Park and representing
the leaseholder of the land, explained that they hold a lease on the
land itself until the year 2010. At this time the leaseholder has no
desire or intention of doing any kind of conversion or doing anything
other than keeping it a mobile home park. He pointed out that the
individual leases are for a period of one year. He also pointed out
an error in the Staff Report, the lease having 26 years to run, not
17 as stated in the Staff Report.
Moved by Commissioner Mickelson, seconded by Commissioner Coontz
to continue this item to March 21, 1983, feeling that the request
is reasonable under the circumstances, since the City of Orange in-
stigated the zone change, not the landowner.
AYES: Commissioners Coontz, Master, Mickelson
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED
NEW HEARINGS:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1257 - NAUGLES, INC.
A request to construct a drive-thru restaurant on property located
on the south side of Lincoln Avenue approximately 300± feet west of
the centerline of Tustin Street. (NOTE: Negative Declaration 817
has been filed in lieu of an Environmental Impact Report.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1261 -BURGER KING CORPORATION:
A request to construct a drive-in restaurant on property located
on the west side of Tustin Street, approximately 200± feet south
of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue. (NOTE: Negative Declaration
820 has been filed in lieu of an Environmental Impact Report.)
Since these two agenda items relate to the same shopping center
and are almost identical, it was decided that the Staff Reports
'~ be presented together.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 1983
Page Three
Norvin Lanz presented these application, stating that the property
contains 10.13 acres of land and is located at the southwest corner
of Tustin Street and Lincoln Avenue (2650-2690 North Tustin). It
is developed as an integrated commercial shopping center and is
zoned C-1 (Local Commercial) District.
Mr. Lanz explained that the applicant (Naugles, Inc.) requests
approval of Conditional Use Permit 1257 to develop a drive-thru
restaurant containing 2,150 square feet on the subject property.
Section 17.44.020(E) of the Orange Municipal Code allows such use
subject to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed
development would include a fast food restaurant with drive-thru
service, 18 parking stalls and a trash area. Simultaneously with
this application, Burger-King Corporation requests approval of
Conditional Use Permit 1261 to develop a drive-thru restaurant con-
taining 1,960 square feet on the subject property. This proposed
developmen t would include a fast food restaurant with drive-thru
service.
Mr. Lanz pointed out that the parking situation for the property
(Olive Court Center) has been assessed to determine the amount of
available parking for the proposed Burger King and Naugles restaurants.
Staff has reviewed the proposals and has the following concerns:
A. The drive-thru exit of the Burger-King Restaurant at the
northwest area of the proposal does not provide an adequate
turning radius to make the "U" turn maneuver required to exit
the shopping center driveway to Tustin Avenue.
B. All allowable pole signs and pole sign area have been taken
up by the major tenants of the shopping center.
C. The center's parking area should be restriped to provide
five (5) additional handicapped spaces fora total of 8 spaces.
D. With the 15% allowable reduction in required parking spaces
for an integrated center, a parking problem may develop due to
the lack of use of the southwest lot (87 spaces), unless tenants
and their employees are required to park in this area.
E. The landscaping around the Burger King site should be reviewed
for safety and visibility at entrances and exits.
F. The parking spaces along the west side of the proposed Burger
King building are substandard in length - 17 feet (the require-
ment is 22 feet). This, however, can be modified since the
driveway depicted on the plan is 6 feet wider than the City
required width.
G. The northern three parking spaces along the existing drive/
approach off Lincoln Avenue may cause serious traffic safety
problems.
H. The proposed circulation of the Naugles drive-thru will cause
car lights to be pointed directly at the second floor of the
residential unit adjacent to the west. Noise from conversations
at the speaker box and take-out windows may interfere with the
residential comfort of the neighboring unit, especially due to
the fact that most Naugles are 24-hour operations, unless mitigated
by screenwalls and/or landscaping.
I. That one handicapped space should be provided on the Naugles site.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 1983
Page Four
Regarding Naugles, Inc., it is recommended that the findings of
the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 817
be accepted.
Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 1257 for
three reasons:
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land uses
and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the Land Use Element of the
General Plan.
3. The proposal will be compatible with the surrounding land
uses with the adoption of the recommended special and
standard conditions.
Approval of Conditional Use Permit 1257 is recommended, subject
to the 5 special and 12 standard conditions listed in the Staff
Report.
Regarding Burger King Corporation, it is recormmended that the
findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative
Declaration 820 be accepted.
Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 1261 for two
reasons:
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land uses
and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the Land Use Element of the
General Plan.
Approval of Conditional Use Permit 1261 is recommended, subject
to the 5 special and 10 standard conditions listed in the Staff
Report.
Commissioner Mickelson commented in regard to the Staff's concern
for the "island" on this property and the restricted turning ability
of vehicles in that area, pointing out that there are similar islands
at the Orange .Mall which do not seem to create a problem.
Commissioner ~~1aster asked for more clarification with regard to
Staff's comments about signage. Mr. Lanz explained that neither
applicant is asking for signing at this time. He pointed out that
this shopping center was built about 20 years ago and today there
is insufficient signage available for all of the tenants. Their
comments are merely a note of the problem and to make the applicants
aware that there could be a problem in this area.
Vice-Chairman Master opened the public hearing.
Gary Bose, CRHL, Inc. 560 W. 1st Street, Tustin, architects for
Naugles, Inc., addressed the Commission in favor of their application.
He stated that they have worked extensively with Mr. Dennis of the
Traffic Department and the plan before the Commission at this time
seems to be the best one as far as traffic circulation is concerned.
He said that they have no objection to taking out the three parking
spaces mentioned in the Staff Report. He also pointed out that they
have provided in the plans fora three-foot high block wall to
mitigate the headlight problems for the neighboring residents. He
furtr~er pointed out that the location of the order board is such that
speaker noise would be directed away from the neighboring residences
and more toward Lincoln. He felt that they can work out these problems
with the Design Review Board.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 1983
Page Five
Commissioner Coontz asked about the hours of operation and was
tola that Naugles is a 24-hour operation.
There being no one else to speak for or against this application,
the Vice-Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Coontz expressed concern over the fact that this is a
24-hour operation and Staff's comments about headlights shining in
the direction of second floor residences. Commissioner hiickelson
pointed out that the applicant has said that they would be willing
to place a 3-foot wall in that area to mitigate the situation. He
did not know about the noise problem.
Moved by Commissioner Mickelson, seconded by Commissioner Coontz to
accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file
Negative Declaration 817.
AYES: Commissioners Coontz, plaster, Mickelson
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED
gloved by Commissioner t+lickelson, seconded by Commissioner Master
to approve Conditional Use Permit 1257 for reasons as stated by
Staff and subject to the 5 special and 7 standard conditions listed
in the Staff Report, adding to Special Condition #1 ...address
the lighting, especiaZZy car Zighting not to be directed towards
the residences..." 'and also "that the Zighting plan be reviewed
by the Design Revzew Board.
AYES: Commissioners Master, Mickelson
NOES: Commissioner Coontz
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED
Commissioner Coontz indicated that problems which are developing
because of this application she did not feel were being properly
solved at the point of thE:ir seeing the application. She was not
sure that the Design Review Board can solve these problems: to
pick the employee parking lot which would be so far from place
of employment; this would require lighting which may have to be
changed and cannot be at the level it should be for their safety,
because of the residences which adjoin the parking lot; and the
other problems which were discussed, i.e. noise, car lights, etc.
She did not think these problems are adequately solved at this point.
Regarding Conditional Use Permit 1261, Burger King Corporation,
Vice-Chairman Master opened the public hearing.
Al Schroeder, 1503 South Coast Drive, Costa Mesa, representing
Burger King Corporation, addressed the Commission in favor of this
application. He explained that the finger which appears to be a
problem on the property will be redesigned. They have been in contact
with the owner of the property and he has assured them that letters have
been sent out to a71 owners of the property asking them to have their
employees park in the back of the property. Reworking of parking in
front of their building will also be accomplished.
He pointed out that there is also additional parking behind Safeway
which could be used for employee parking. This has not been taken
into consideration for total parking and with this there would be
more than sufficient parking for the entire center.
The Commissioners pointed out that the parking in back of the Safeway
store is considered to be very unsafe.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 1983
Page Six
l~
Mr. Schroeder brought up the five additional handicapped parking
stalls mentioned in the Staff Report and asked for clarification
on this. hir, Lanz explained that there are 25 additional parking
spaces in the center itself and, in analyzing the entire parking
situation based on the state laws, five additional handicapped stalls
would be required. In order to put these in, some of the 25 existing
stalls would have to be eliminated. Therefore, restriping involves
adding in the additional five handicapped parking spaces in order
to obey the recent law. Mr. Schroeder asked about using compact spaces
to alleviate restriping the entire parking lot and was told this was OK.
Commissioner asked for more clarification regarding restriping for
the additional handicapped parking, stating that this was a little
difficult to understand. It was explained that five additional handi-
capped-parking spaces would be needed throughout the entire center.
Therefore, although this application is for just part of the property,
the landowner must provide those additional spaces because of this
application.
Vice-Chairman Master closed the public hearing, there being no one
else to speak for or against the application.
Moved by Commissioner Coontz, seconded by Commissioner Mickelson to
accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file
Negative Declaration 820.
AYES: Commissioners Coontz, Master, Mickelson
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED
Moved by Commissioner Coontz, seconded by Commissioner Mickelson
to approve Conditional Use Permit 1261 for reasons as stated by
Staff and subject to the 5 special and 10 standard conditions listed
in the Staff Report, with the same modif ication to Special Condition
#5 as stated in the previous application.
AYES: Commissioners Coontz, Master, Mickelson
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED
TENTATIVE TRACT 11915, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1259 -
504 WEST CHAPMAN PARTNERS:
A request to subdivide airspace to allow the sale of 22 light
industrial condominium units from existing office/industrial
units on land located on the south side of Chapman Avenue west
of the A.T. & S.F. railroad right-of-way (504 West Chapman Avenue.)
Norvin Lanz presented this application to the Commission, stating
that the property contains 1.91 .acres of land located between
Chapman Avenue and Almond Avenue adjacent to the west side of the
A.T. & S.F, railroad right-of-way. It has approximately 95 feet of
primary frontage on Chapman Avenue and approximately 165 feet of
secondary frontage on Almond Avenue. The property contains existing
office/industrial units.
Mr. Lanz pointed out that the project area surrounds a 9660 square
foot parcel approximately located in the northwest corner of the
site with commercial (furniture, telephone exchange) businesses
zoned (C-2) General Business district. The applicant proposes to
subdivide airspace to allow the sale of 22 light industrial condominium
units from existing office/industrial units.
lJ
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 1983
Page Seven
The Staff has reviewed the proposal and expressed several concerns:
A. That the easternmost access driveway on Chapman Avenue
should be widened to a minimum of 25" and preferably 30'.
U. That one trash enclosure should be provided for approximately
every three units.
C. That an on-site fire hydrant could be necessary due to the
594' length of the site.
D. That the current overparking of the driveway/alley along
the west property line coupled with the minimum upkeep of
the buildings and grounds should require a community
.association to maintain the appearance of the site and
protect the rights of each owner/user.
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract 11915 for two reasons:
(1) that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the
City of Orange Zoning Ordinance; and (2) that the proposal is
consistent with the Orange General Plan, approval being recommended
subject to the six special conditions listed in the Staff Report.
Staff further recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 1259
for two reasons: (1) that the proposal is compatible with the
surrounding land uses and zining; and (2) that the proposal is in
conformance with the intent of the General Plan, approval being
recommended subject to the 3 special and 11 standard conditions listed
in the Staff Report.
Commissioner Mickelson asked that the word "dwelling" be deleted from
Condition #13~ said word perhaps giving. the impression that these
might be residences, which is not the case.
Vice-Chairman Master opened the public hearing.
Uruce Duncan, 1030 N, Main, Orange, representing the applicant,
addressed the Commission in favor of this application. He stated that
they concur with the Staff Report, but would like to amend Condition
#9, referring to afire protection system.- They agree that it is
wise to have afire hydrant somewhere on the property, but they have
a problem with a suggested sprinkler system, as it would be very
expensive and eat up their profits on the buildings. He explained
that these buildings are concrete tilt ups and do not neet this
extra protection.
lair. Murphy explained that this is a standard condition and there are
other methods of fire protection which could be used other than a
sprinkler system. This can be worked out with the Fire Department.
Vice-Chairman Master explained that this would not be a decision made
by the Commission. It would be up to the Fire Department. Mr. Duncan
said that they would be willing to work with the Fire Department to
come up with alternatives. Vice-Chairman Master explained that it is
imperative that fire protection systems should be adequate.
There being no one else to speak for or against this application, the
Vice-Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Mickelson made some comments with regard to Condition #9,
stating that unless the Code has been recently changed, it was his guess
that they would probably not have to sprinkle their buildings. He did
feel that only the Council could tackle the question of eliminating
sprinklers from that condition. He thought that if the Commissioners
were to approve the Conditional-Use Permit, perhaps the applicants
could spend the next 15 days resolving this question with the Fire
Department, so that in the event it is not resolved, they could appeal
to the Council at the time this item comes before them.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 1983
Page Eight
Moved by Commissioner Mickelson, seconded by Commissioner Coontz
to recommend approval of Tentative Tract 11915 and Conditional Use
Permit 1259 for the reasons stated in the Staff Report and subject
to the conditions listed in the Staff Report.
AYES: Commissioners Coontz, Master, Mickelson
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT - LAND USE ELEMENT 1-83 - CITY OF ORANGE:
A proposal to change the land use designation from Low Density
Residential (2-6 units/acre) to Medium Density Residential
(6-15 units/acre) on land located at the northern terminus of
Parker Street between Palm and Plaple. (NOTE: Negative Declaration
822 has been filed in lieu of an Environmental Impact Report.)
Jere Murphy presented this application to the Commission, stating
that this consists of 3.6 acres of land situated between Palm and
Maple Avenue, at the north terminus of Parker Street. The change
being considered is from Lova Density Residential (2-6 du/ac) to
Medium Density Residential (6-15 du/ac). The amendment is in
response to recent rezoning action on the property.
Mr. Murphy explained that the property has been the subject of re-
zoning hearings by both the Planning Commission and City Council.
Previously zoned R-M-7, R-D-6, an d M-l, and application was filed
requesting that the entire property be zoned R-M-7. At their meeting
of December 20, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the zone change to the City Council. The Commission's recommenda-
tion was partially based on a statement in the Staff Report which
indicated the property was shown for High Density Residential
(15-24 du/ac) on the General Plan Land Use Element. At the City
Council hearing of January 18th, however, discussion centered around
the correct Land Use Element designation -For the property. A sub-
sequent staff investigation determined that the property is actually
shown for Low Density Residential (2-6 du/ac) in accordance with
Resolution #4020 adopting the Land Use Element in August, 1974. The
discrepancy in interpretation was dine to the residential land uses in
the general vicinity being inaccurately depicted on the Land Use
Element base map. The Council acted on January 18th to rezone portions
of the property, but from R-M-7 and M-1 to R-D-6. However, the Council
has subsequently agreed to reconsider their action at a public hearing
to be held on March 8th. Regardless of whether the Council acts to
rezone the property R-M-7 or sustain its action of January 18th to
rezone the property R-D-6, the Land Use Element should be amended to
show Medium Density Residential (6-15 du/a c). Under the provisions of
the Planned Unit Development Ordinance, property zoned R-D-6 can be
developed at a density of 10.89 du/ac, while property zoned R-M-7 can
be developed at a density of 16.33 du/ac. Medium Density Residential is
the most appropriate General Plan Land Use Element designation for
either of these zoning districts.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission accept the findings of
the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration #822.
Staff further recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the redesignation of the property from Low Density Residential to
Medium Density Residential on the General Plan Land Use Element.
Commissioner Mickelson commented that as long as this is a "cart before
the horse" situation, he wondered if it wouldn't be appropriate to
continue this item until we see what the Council decides. He would
be agreeable to even consider High Density Residential, depending upon
what the Council's action would be.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 1983
Page Nine
Vice-Chairman Master opened the public hearing.
Barry Cottle, Century American Corporation, 1428 E. Chapman Avenue,
Orange, addressed the Commission stating that they have been selected
by Anaconda-Ericcson to be the buyer and developer of the property
involved. He asked for more clarification from Commissioner Mickelson
regarding his comments about a possible continuance until after the
March 8th Council meeting. Commissioner Mickelson explained that
technically speaking, whatever decision is made by the Planning
Commission tonight would be in the form of a recommendation to the
Council. Therefore the Council would be in the same place on 1~9arch 8th
whether a decision is made tonight or there is a continuance. He felt
that what he is saying is that he would like some direction from the
Council. He felt that by leaving the door open, so to speak, it might
give the Council the opportunity to look at the possibility of even
High Density Residential for this property.
Mr. Cottle explained that their plan is to come back to the Commission
asking fora condominium development, which, under Medium Density
Residential, could be developed at about 15 units/acre. Even if this
were to be zoned High Density Residential, it would only add about
three units on the entire site. He felt that they could do what they
want to do without a High Density zoning. He explained that there
will be a total of eight public hearings on this item before they get
through and there is a time problem.
Raymond Williams, 1413 E. Adams, Orange, addressed the Commission,
explaining that he owns property immediately to the west of the
property in question. He had two concerns: he thought that the City
would again allow development without the completion of an existing
deadend street. He said thatit's somewhere in the vicinity of 3/4 mile
from the railroad track to Batavia before you can turn to the south.
He also pointed out that any future development will landlock about
15,000 sq. ft. which he owns. He was not actually in opposition to
this application, but was merely raising these questions.
Commissioner Mickelson asked if Parker Street were continued through
would it necessarily give him frontage? Mr. Williams responded that
it would not. However, for the past twenty years, Anaconda has not
objected to his having access to that property at the rear. He pointed
out that the City, for the past five years, has done the clearing of
the lot with regard to weed control, etc. He has been in contact with
the Sanitation Department who told him that once the development goes
in it will be all hand labor back in there and he realizes that this
means that he will begin to have to look at what he will do with that
last 15,000 sq, ft. of property, He needs to know how to do it and
how quickly to do it. He hastened to point out that Anaconda has not
given him a right-of-way or an easement, but he would suggest that by
virtue of the fact that he has never been denied access through there,
that perhaps something could be worked out.
Vice-Chairman Master felt that this is a matter which should be taken
up with Anaconda.
There being no one else to speak for or against this application,
the Vice-Chairman closed the public hearing.
Moved by Commissioner Coontz, seconded by Commissioner Mickelson to
accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file
Negative Declaration 822.
AYES: Commissioners Coontz, Master, Mickelson
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED
Planning Commission Minutes
February 23, 1983
Page Ten
Moved by Commissioner Coontz, seconded by Commissioner Mickelson
to recommend redesignation of the property from Low Density Residential
to Medium Density Residential because either this density or High
Density Residential is appropriate.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Coontz, Master, Mickelson
Commissioners none
Commissioners Hart, Vasquez
MOTION CARRIED
IN RE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
IN RE:
c
MISCELLANEOUS:
Ah1ENDMENT 2-82-C, SIGNS AND PROMOTIONS:
Consideration of an extension of moratorium on enforcement of
code regulations pertaining to temporary signs and banners.
Moved by Commissioner Mickelson, seconded by Commissioner Coontz
to recommend that the moratorium be extended for six months.
Commissioners Coontz, Master, Mickelson
Commissioners none
Commissioners Hart, Vasquez
4~.1(IIIRNMFNT•
MOTION CARRIED
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m., to be reconvened to a
regular meeting on Monday, March 7, 1983 at 7:30 p.m. at the
Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue., Orange,
California.
C