COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM FULLERTON CITY HALL
THURSDAY, 9:00 A.M., FEBRUARY 6, 2003
|CALL TO ORDER:||Mullis, Acting Chair called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m.|
|COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:||Mullis, Tabatabaee, Thompson, Wallin|
|COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:||Lynn, Maynard, Rosen|
|STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:||Eastman, Kusch|
January 16, 2003 minutes approved as written.
The applicant was present.
Staff Assistant Planner Kusch presented the project. The applicant is proposing a 58-foot tall "monopine" antenna located at the back of the property, and adjacent to an existing landscape finger in the parking area. The "monopine" antenna and its equipment would take up four parking spaces. This reduction in parking could make the site have an inadequate parking supply. However, It does not appear that the demand for parking spaces would out number the availability. There is an existing church located across from the parking lot, but because their services are held during off peak hours, there seems to be no conflict. The second area of concern is the "monopine's" design. Mr. Kusch also noted that no provision has been made for another carrier to co-locate on the "monopine" or place additional equipment in the proposed equipment area.
Committee Member Mullis thought that the "monopine" should be made to look more realistic by extending the branches further down the pole and by adding two live pine trees of comparable height (24" or larger in size) to the landscape to help disguise the "monopine".
Committee Member Wallin recommended that the applicant should visit the site on a Sunday during church services to take photos of the parking situation. He also advised that the owner should be aware, and acknowledge in writing, that by permanently removing parking spaces, future tenants may be affected.
Committee Member Thompson noted that the applicant should contact the Fire Department to discuss the generator/storage tank and State Disclosure Program. A key box must be on the structure; and also advised the applicant to check the location of the gate to the structure and it's width to make sure of accessible.
Committee Member Wallin suggested that the "monopine" could be pushed more toward the corner of the property to minimize space, and the equipment enclosure flipped to face north/south to save one or two parking spaces.
The Committee recommended that the project be continued to allow for revisions to the plan.
MOTION made, SECONDED and CARRIED by all members present, to CONTINUE PRJ03-00026 - ZON03-00004 to the February 20, 2003 meeting to allow the applicant time to resubmit a revise the plan.
ADJOURNED AT 9:30 A.M. AS THE STAFF SITE PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE
RECONVENED AS THE STAFF REVIEW COMMITTEE
Staff Associate Planner Eastman presented the project. This is a two-phase project.
Phase one includes the construction of an 18,860 square foot, 1,000 seat church facility; demolition of an existing priory; relocation and addition of temporary modular offices; modifications to the parking lot and vehicle circulation; and the removal of the existing temporary assembly tents. Phase two will include a 5,152 square feet church expansion, and 200 seats; a 2,080 square-foot addition of office space to the existing parish hall; additional parking areas; and the removal of the temporary modular offices. The project site also contains school buildings, which will not be altered.
Some of the existing driveways will be removed and relocated farther away from the Gilbert/Valencia intersection. The on-site parking and circulation will also be altered. Water Engineering will require lateral upgrades. The Fire Department will want to see turn radius and a fire lane layout between Pine Drive and Gilbert Avenue. There may be a need for an on-site hydrant since the school is not sprinklered.
Committee Member Mullis said that she was concerned with the short throat of the new driveway on Gilbert, especially since cars would be turning into the driveway from a major street. Revisions to the on-site circulation and ingress/egress need to be considered.
Committee Member recommended one permit for both phases.