Low Graphics Version Home | Contact Us | FAQs | Service Request | eLists | Site Map
City of Fullerton
Community Dev
Home ... > 2004 > October 13, 2004
State College & Raymond Grade Separation Updates
Water Bill Payment
City Employment
Agendas & Minutes
City Services
Emergency Preparedness
Online Services
Public Notices
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

OCTOBER 13, 2004


The meeting was called to order by Chairman Stopper at 7:00 p.m.


COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Stopper, Commissioners Bailey, Francis, Griffin, Hart, Price, and Savage

Senior Planner Mullis, Engineering Director Hoppe, Assistant Planner Sowers, Assistant Planner Kusch, and Recording Secretary Baker


Commissioner Hart


Commissioner Bailey asked that he be shown as present and Commissioner Francis be shown as absent.

MOTION by Commissioner Savage, seconded by Commissioner Griffin and CARRIED unanimously that the Minutes of September 22, 2004, be APPROVED AS AMENDED, with Commissioners Hart and Francis abstaining.




Staff report dated October 6, 2004, was presented pertaining to a revised site plan for a major development project to construct a new 3,100-square-foot restaurant with a drive-through window (Farmer Boys Restaurant) on property located at 1446 North Harbor Boulevard (east side of Harbor Boulevard, approximately 600 feet north of the Harbor/Brea Boulevard divide) (C-3 zone) (Categorically exempt under Section 15332 of CEQA Guidelines) (Continued from September 8, 2004)

Assistant Planner Kusch reported that the applicant had revised the site plan to address the Planning Commissions concerns stated on September 8, 2004. Assistant Planner Kusch displayed aerial photos and several site photos of the property at 1446 North Harbor Boulevard. He explained that the revised plan accommodates a non-removable electrical equipment enclosure on the south side of the proposed drive aisle. The drive-thru allowed eight car lengths, the revised plan allows six car lengths, therefore reducing the stacking distance. The Planning Commission had been concerned with on-site vehicular circulation and the accident history of that area. Mr. Kusch reported that six accidents have occurred in the vicinity over the last two years. Staff suggested moving the trash enclosure closer to Harbor Boulevard to reduce any potential conflicts with trash trucks and customers.

The previous site plan was displayed and the main concerns with that site plan were the one-way parking aisle at the northerly drive aisle, and the exit along Harbor towards the northern portion of the property. The applicant proposed to relocate the exit-only driveway on Harbor Boulevard driveway south of the previous location. The drive aisles in the parking area are two-way throughout the property. A new walkway is proposed adjacent to the parallel parking spaces along the northern property line. The applicant was concerned with meeting scenic corridor design goals, and whether the trash enclosure being relocated closer to Harbor Blvd. could be sufficiently landscaped to screen it with the relocation of the trash enclosure, the walkway serving the trash enclosure could be replaced with landscaping to screen the telephone equipment vault.

The public hearing notice was mailed originally for the September 8, 2004, hearing to property owners within a 300-foot radius. Staff received a number of concerns, which were forwarded to the Planning Commission for its consideration. One inquiry concerned noise and loitering in the parking area. Assistant Planner Kusch said that the restaurant was required to comply with the Citys noise ordinance. Staff suggested mounting the speaker lower on the menu board to deflect noise from traveling westward.

Assistant Planner Kusch stated that after the previous staff report was prepared, staff received a petition signed by 33 neighbors who reside mostly along Marelen Drive. He showed the locations of those who signed the petition. The petition pertained to potential noise associated with the operation of the restaurant, loitering, and incompatibility of the proposal with the neighboring residences. The project is consistent with adjacent land uses in the area. Staff recommended approval, subject to the conditions and findings contained in the report.

Commissioner Francis asked for staff to describe the ingress and egress to the property. Assistant Planner Kusch showed on the site plan that the existing driveway serving the Fullerton Financial Towers, south of the subject property, would be the entrance. He stated that the Traffic Engineer recommended the existing driveway entrance along Harbor Boulevard be closed, and that all ingress to the site be via the main driveway serving Fullerton Towers.

Commissioner Price asked if the trash enclosure was moved to the northwest corner, would there be a net loss of parking. Assistant Planner Kusch said that, dimensionally, two standard parking spaces, that would otherwise be lost, could fit into that area.

Commissioner Savage asked if customers could enter along Brea Boulevard, and Assistant Planner Kusch answered affirmatively. Commissioner Savage also asked if there would be any difficulty for vehicles exiting the two spaces adjacent to the telephone vault. Assistant Planner Kusch said that it dimensionally met code, and there would be no difficulty.

Chairman Stopper referred to page 128 of the minutes from August 11, 2004 (attachment 2 of the staff report dated September 8, 2004) regarding the hours of operation. Mr. Kusch stated that he was not aware of the specific hours of operation when the first staff report was written. The Commission discussed the hours and a silent menu board.

Public hearing opened.

Michelle Alfieri, applicant for Farmer Boys, did not feel that the area adjacent to the trash enclosure would be large enough to provide two standard vehicle parking stalls and they are currently at the parking count. Senior Planner Mullis stated that based on the scale drawing there is sufficient space. Ms. Alfieri reiterated that they are not desirous of using compact vehicle parking spaces and they are right at the minimum parking count. Farmer Boys had agreed to all of staffs comments and conditions, and would like to see this progress to the next phase.

Allen Wishard, architect for the project, explained that the trash enclosure was 16 ft. 8 inches wide, a standard car space is 9 ft. wide and a compact car length is 16 ft. The two parking spaces they are replacing could be replaced with two compact spaces. Farmer boys did not like using compact spaces, and felt that the public did not appreciate compact parking spaces, so they would like keep them to a minimum. He did not think that the trash enclosure located in the northwest corner of the property is appropriate so close to North Harbor Blvd, because it is a general nuisance, and should not be so close to the street. He also felt that not much would be gained by more landscaping by the utility building. His recommendation was that the trash enclosure should stay where it was currently shown.

Commissioner Francis asked the architect what the problem would be if the trash enclosure was moved. Mr. Wishard stated that there was a loss of two standard spaces and only three feet next to the telephone utility building. He did not think it was a good trade-off.

Commissioner Bailey asked for a description of where the landscaping is proposed around the vault building and would it be tall enough to screen the buildings. Mr. Wishard described where all landscaping would be, but stated that the landscaping plans had not been finalized yet. He stated that it could be taller to hide any obtrusive buildings.

Marlene Cantrell, 1503 Marelen Drive, stated that:

  • Her property was built in 1950 and she has lived there since 1968
  • She was concerned with ingress and egress on Harbor Blvd.
  • There were many accidents when the proposed site was occupied by a restaurant in the past
  • Noise from the restaurant rises and disturbs the neighborhood
  • She objects to a drive-thru at the proposed site
  • She was not notified of this meeting

Chairman Stopper asked staff about notification requirements. Senior Planner Mullis stated that staff was only required to notify the property owners of the September 8, 2004 hearing--this item was continued to the meeting on October 13, 2004. She stated that if there was a significant amount of time between dates, a courtesy notice is sent, but this was not the case. Ms. Cantrell indicated she had spoken with Assistant Planner Kusch after the September 8, 2004 meeting, but did not recall that there was a specific date set for this item.

Commissioner Bailey asked Ms. Cantrell what bothered her specifically about the restaurant. Ms. Cantrell answered that it was the drive-thru and requested that a noiseless menu board be used.

Commissioner Francis felt that this restaurant would not generate as much noise and problems as the former Red Onion restaurant. He also suggested that Farmer Boys try the noiseless ordering menu board and if it does not satisfy the residents, to try another device.

Commissioner Savage asked if the Red Onion had a drive-thru. Marlene Cantrell stated that they did not, however, they were open until 2 a.m.

Georg Finder, 1430 Marelen, stated that his backyard is directly across the street from the proposed site. With the contour of the land, he is at the top of a perfect amphitheater where the sound travels. He asked that a drive-thru not be allowed because of potential noise and was also concerned with crowds loitering in the parking lot.

Commissioner Bailey asked Mr. Finder if the Velvet Turtle restaurant was there when he moved in. He said it was and he had no problem with them. He felt that late hours are a problem.

Commissioner Hart asked Mr. Finder if his concerns were with a restaurant there, or a drive-thru, and Mr. Finder confirmed that it was the drive-thru.

Commissioner Bailey discussed the hours of operation with Mr. Finder. Mr. Finder did not like the 6 a.m. opening hours.

Cathy Royer, 1424 Marelen, explained that she grew up at 1420 Marelen and was familiar with the noises caused by the Red Onion customers and speakers announcing seating availability. She was concerned with traffic flow and suggested possibly constructing a sound wall. Commissioner Bailey asked what year she bought her house. Ms. Royer stated that she bought her house in 1998. She added that the customers at the National Sports Bar were not disruptive or a disturbance.

Commissioner Savage asked to review the old site plan and asked how high the berms were. Senior Planner Mullis stated that they were only two to three feet high. He was concerned with the view of the telephone equipment building.

Commissioner Price asked if the landscape plan would be reviewed by the RDRC. Assistant Planner Kusch answered affirmatively and added that some members are landscape architects.

Commissioner Griffin asked the applicant if she was familiar with the silent order menu board. Ms. Alfieri stated that she was not aware, however, she believed that Farmer Boys would be agreeable to using it. She also stated that this was a family restaurant which serves no alcohol, and she did not feel there would be many noise problems.

Commissioner Griffin proposed beginning with an audio system and then conditioning it to come back and recommending a noiseless menu board if the audible system was too loud. He had major concerns with circulation last time and felt it would not work, however, he is more comfortable with the revised site plan. He felt while it is not perfect, it works. He visited Farmer Boys in Brea at 10:30 p.m. and saw that it was not a hangout for teens. He also spoke with the Police Department in Chino and there were no concerns with kids at the Farmer Boys restaurant in Chino. He indicated he would be supporting the project.

Commissioner Savage was not familiar with a noiseless ordering system and asked for an explanation.

Bob Veriato, real estate manager for Farmer Boys, introduced himself and said that he was familiar with the noiseless ordering system which displays a limited video menu board. It requires the order taker to acknowledge the customer initially and requires a response from the customer. The customers voice is not amplified. The screen reviews the order and asks for verbal confirmation. It is more expensive, but they are willing to provide this.

Public hearing closed.

Chairman Stopper asked for the percentage of customers that use the drive-thru versus the sit down restaurant, and for the proposed hours. Mr. Veriato was not aware of the hours Mr. Lowinger stated. Mr. Veriato stated that the restaurant is open 7 days a week, Sunday through Thursday, 6 a.m. 10 p.m. and Friday and Saturday, 6 a.m. - 11 p.m. He stated that 20 25% of their business is drive-thru because the items are not prepared until ordered and it takes longer. The restaurant provides 90 items on their menu inside and it is a family style coffee shop, not fast food.

Commissioner Hart was concerned with the cost of construction and wondered if it was more economical to use a soundless board immediately. Mr. Veriato was not opposed to that.

Commissioner Price stated that it makes sense to go forward with a noiseless menu board and to keep the trash enclosure at its proposed location.

Commissioner Savage agreed they should leave the trash enclosure where it is proposed and have full-size parking spaces. He recommended moving forward with the project.

Commissioner Francis heard the neighbors concerns and realized that Harbor Boulevard was close to their homes, and there is a possibility for more business in the future. He would not support anything that would bring more business than a Farmer Boys restaurant. The zoning was correct and he would support the project with the trash enclosure where it is proposed, and using the noiseless menu board.

Commissioner Bailey agreed with the location of the trash enclosure. He believed that Farmer Boys will try to keep the customers as quiet as possible, and with the noiseless menu board, everyone should be happy.

Chairman Stopper suggested to the residents that if there is a noise disturbance, they can call authorities to handle the problem.

Chairman Stopper reiterated that the project was zoned appropriately. He sympathized with the neighbors, because he can also hear noises where he lives. He felt that the noise control was the responsibility of the patrons and the management. He was concerned with the layout and the possibility of headlights shining into oncoming traffic on Harbor Boulevard. He supported the project with the recommended conditions.

The title of Resolution Number PC-04-32 APPROVING site and architectural plans for a new 3,100 square foot restaurant (Farmer Boys) with a drive-thru window on property located at 1446 North Harbor Boulevard was read and further reading was waived. MOTION by Commissioner Francis and seconded by Commissioner Hart, passed unanimously by members present, that said Resolution be ADOPTED AS AMENDED.


A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow an approximately 130-seat church use in a 4,280 square-foot tenant space in an existing industrial park on property located at 1100 East Valencia Drive (southwest corner of Valencia Drive and Raymond Avenue) (M-G zone) (Categorically exempt under Section 15301 of CEQA Guidelines)

Assistant Planner Sowers reported that Cornerstone Christian Church had purchased property in the Fullerton East Business Park, located on the southwest corner of Raymond and Valencia. They are desirous of operating their church, which requires a CUP. The majority of their operations are on Saturday and Sunday from 8:30 4:00 p.m. They are expecting 130 individuals and there are five parking stalls assigned to the church. Thirty-three separate units are individually owned and an owners association governs the use. A total of 237 parking stalls are allocated among the condo units and the use of additional parking would require an agreement from the owners association. Staff felt there was adequate parking for the weeknight and weekend uses, based on a survey of current uses. There are certain findings required for the church use CUP, however, it is a conditionally permitted use in this zone. They would be operating concurrently with few other uses.

Staff recommended adoption of the resolution of approval, with conditions. Assistant Planner Sowers noted that one condition was that the project shall conform to the plans that were submitted. This includes the specific services proposed, days, times and attendance counts. If this were to change significantly, the applicant would need to return to the Planning Commission for its review. This condition addressed some of the concerns expressed in a letter staff received. Prior to obtaining necessary building permits, to change to the assembly occupancy, the applicant would need an agreement from the owners association for shared parking. The permit was subject to revocation, if the use became a nuisance, a public hazard, or if it receives three or more code or police complaints registered within a 12-month period.

Chairman Stopper reported that 14 residents signed a letter of petition and submitted it to the Planning Commission for the record.

Commissioner Price asked where the church was currently operating. Assistant Planner Sowers told him that they are using another church facility on Orangethorpe.

Commissioner Hart asked if it was a private association for a condo complex. Assistant Planner Sowers explained that the Fullerton East Business Park is governed by an owners association with C C & Rs. Because parking was available on-site and not occupied with other uses during their hours of operation, it could go forward but would need the shared parking agreement in place before issuing building permits.

Commissioner Savage stated for the record that he had previously owned units 1108 and 1110 and also owns property adjacent to the complex. He did not see any posted notices of the Planning Commission meeting. Staff stated that it was procedure to post signs in the area. Assistant Planner Sowers stated that notices were sent to all owners in addition to the tenants and the property was posted. Chairman Stopper added that he saw posted notices.

Commissioner Bailey asked if the CUP was granted, could the Association impose their own rules in addition to that. Assistant Planner Sowers answered affirmatively.

Chairman Stopper asked if the Fire Marshal had provided occupancy limitations. Assistant Planner Sowers stated that this had not been done yet and that Condition #3 includes complying with permit and occupancy requirements of the building department and Condition #5 includes any other corrections generated in the plan check process.

Commissioner Francis discussed the amount of people allowed per square foot. Senior Planner Mullis stated that it depends on the number of exits, etc.

Public hearing opened.

Tim De Fiesta, applicant and Pastor of Cornerstone Christian Fellowship, told the Planning Commission that currently they are renting a church facility at 1465 W. Orangethorpe Ave., approximately three miles west of Raymond. He asked the Planning Commission to consider their application, because the church would improve the community and bring good values. Since 1992, they have rented five different facilities. The composition of the church membership was predominantly Filipino with 81% of their members living in Orange County, 26% living in Los Angeles County and 3% in Riverside County.

Commissioner Price asked Mr. De Fiesta if he agreed with the recommended conditions of approval and asked what the association has told him about Condition #2, regarding parking. Mr. DeFiesta said that the association was willing to work closely with him if he needed to approach the Board of Directors for a shared parking agreement. Commissioner Price asked if he was aware of the 20 out of 33 tenants/owners that signed a letter of opposition. Mr. De Fiesta stated that he knew about only one person in opposition.

Commissioner Francis wondered why Mr. De Fiesta did not get the parking agreement first before paying the CUP fee. Mr. De Fiesta had read the C C & Rs and referred to the common area mentioned and felt that would satisfy his parking needs.

Commissioner Griffin asked why they were relocating from the Orangethorpe site. Mr. De Fiesta stated that the facility they are renting can seat only 85 90 people and they will require more seating. He also stated that they hoped to own their own building.

Commissioner Bailey asked if they offer Sunday school classes for children. Mr. De Fiesta stated that there are Sunday school classes for adults and children. There is a youth program one Friday per month for kids aged 15 18 years old, with adult supervision and youth workers. The worship service on Sunday includes the children also because the Sunday school classes begin after the worship service.

Tom Whitney, owns the E J Whitney Company which occupies 529 and 535 S. Raymond in the Fullerton East Business Park. He also owns a business at 1128 E. Valencia. He was not opposed to churches, but he was opposed to churches in industrial sites. He was concerned that there would be restrictions on the level of noise generated from his business which could possibly affect the church services. He was also concerned that the police would not be as diligent in checking people occupying the units at odd hours like they are now, because of the number of people who will be in the complex at odd hours. He was concerned with additional litter and the extra burden put on the tenants because they now share the costs of cleanup. Parking is also a concern, especially because it is an industrial area and the shifts do change.

Commissioner Price asked how many spaces were assigned to each tenant. Mr. Whitney said that he is assigned five numbered spaces, three in the front and two in the back.

Commissioner Francis asked if Mr. Whitney would be willing to allow church members to use his spaces. He said that he is opposed to that because he is responsible for paving and painting and it would cause extra wear and tear.

Chairman Stopper asked if Mr. Whitney knew anything about the previous owner, and Mr. Whitney said that he was not familiar with them.

Jack Abouchar, resident of Fullerton, has owned three units in this park for 27 years. He has 14 assigned parking spaces, and pays $100 extra a year for employee parking. Parking is in demand. He discussed the proposal for new asphalt and swales, for which the tenants are responsible to pay. They have been saving up for four years to cover the cost. He feels that bringing more people into the complex will accelerate the deterioration, requiring the repair to be done sooner than expected. He felt that this could be a dynamic church that will quickly outgrow the complex. He had previous experience with a church he attended that used an industrial complex for their services.

Denise Easton, owns two units in Fullerton East Business Park. She said she did not have an opinion yet on the impact the church will have on the complex. She had questions regarding:

  • What is written into the CUP regarding what recourse will business owners/tenants have if the ministry grows and additional parking is being used
  • Limiting the times/days the church can use the facility
  • Would the police address the issue of potentially becoming lax in checking people during odd hours once the church begins operation and numerous people are using the facility at odd hours
  • Two previous burglaries of her property and her desire to have the police patrol more often

Commissioner Savage asked if their back doors are open during operating hours and has she considered the potential for curious children to wander into her business. Ms. Eastin stated that they do have their doors open at operating hours and she had not thought about the potential of people gaining access through the open doors.

Doug Brown, designer of project and the Consultant for Cornerstone, stated that he reviewed the staff report and the conditions and had the following comments:

  • Condition #2 obtaining a use agreement for parking

  • In the event they are not able to work out a parking agreement with the owners, he requested that after the words church use the phrase or shall secure other parking as permitted by the Fullerton Zoning Code be added.

  • Condition #9 he asked that it be reworded if the Fullerton Code Enforcement, Police or Fire Department have received three or more complaints in a 12 month period which upon investigation by the subject agency are determined to be founded violations of City ordinances or regulations, caused as a direct and proximate result of the proposed use such three violations should be grounds of revocation of the CUP.

  • Noise problems Railroad is close by and very noisy so he felt other tenants should not be concerned with and restrictions regarding noise.

  • Litter problems could be handled through Code Enforcement, but the church would address it and self-police it

  • Parking construction not according to Caltrans regulations. The church should not be held accountable for poor planning on the construction of the parking lot.

  • Willing to accept the restraints regarding working out a parking agreement

Lynn Abouchar, part owner of three units in the complex, stated that she felt the problem was that the building was sold with only five parking spaces. She believes that the church would grow and hopes they would, however, it would cause more parking spaces to be used. She supported churches, but felt that it was in an inappropriate area for a church to operate. She felt it was presumptuous to purchase a building without getting a parking agreement.

Commissioner Bailey asked Mrs. Abouchar if she would object to the church if people were bussed in and only parked in the five assigned spaces. She said that would be acceptable.

Commissioner Francis stated that he would not be able to support this project. He was concerned that 25 out of 33 tenants were opposing the project being in this zone. He felt it would be a mistake to put a church there because it is an industrial zone, even if parking could be secured off-site.

Commissioner Savage agreed with Commissioner Francis, and would not be supporting it for safety reasons. Open doors at the industrial units present possible attractive hazards to children attending the church. He felt that churches bring good things to communities and supports them 100%. When he owned one of the units at this location, he did not have sufficient parking and there were many deliveries of large trucks loading and unloading materials.

Commissioner Hart discussed the normal procedure of reading the C C & Rs prior to closing the sale of property, which would alert the applicant of the parking issue. The Association was responsible to their tenants and their desires and the majority is not in agreement with this. She stated that she could not support the church use unless it was supported by the owners association and the other tenants.

Commissioner Price agreed with Commissioner Savage that there are safety issues with the businesses having their back doors open at all hours. He stated that everyone likes the church, but it does not seem to fit into this area and could not support it as presented.

Commissioner Bailey said that he did not have a problem with the application. He felt that the church should be able to operate if it does not adversely affect the area. The CC & Rs should handle any concerns that would arise. If they are able to secure parking, they should operate however they want. If they meet the restrictions and conditions, he would have no problem with the church use as proposed.

Commissioner Griffin said that he will not be supporting the project and had the same concerns as other Planning Commission members. He felt that off-site parking would not work as there would be no way to restrict the use of the open on-site spaces. He did not feel it was a compatible use.

Chairman Stopper felt that it was a significant risk to not have the shared parking agreement before purchasing the property. Since the owners/tenants were not in agreement, unless they submit agreement in writing, he would not support the project. He supports the church, just not in this location.

Commissioner Price asked staff what the options were if it was denied without prejudice. Senior Planner Mullis stated that the Planning Commission could deny the application and the church could not reapply for six months or deny it without prejudice and the church could reapply at any time or continue the item to give the applicant time to get a shared parking agreement.

Commissioner Price thought perhaps they could come to an agreement with the Association regarding parking and it might be prudent to deny without prejudice so that the church could.

Commissioner Francis asked if the church would have to pay the fee again. Senior Planner Mullis said that reapplication would require that they only pay one-half of the fee.

Commissioner Bailey discussed that this was private property and whether the compatibility was appropriate for this location. Senior Planner Mullis stated that a CUP is required for a church in any area.

Mr. Brown requested that the public hearing be opened again.

It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to not reopen the public hearing.

The title of Resolution Number PC-04-38 DENYING without prejudice a Conditional Use Permit to allow an approximately 130-seat church use in an existing industrial park, including findings regarding the lack of parking at the site and the incompatibility of the use at this location, on property located at 1100 East Valencia Drive was read, and further reading was waived. MOTION by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Francis and CARRIED by a 6 1, with Commissioner Griffin voting no, that said Resolution be ADOPTED AS AMENDED.

Commissioner Savage said that he reluctantly agreed. Senior Planner Mullis stated, even if they were to apply, it does not lock you into a future decision because there are Commissioners who still have issues other than parking.

Commissioner Bailey felt that this denial without prejudice would allow the applicant to go back to talk with the neighbors and the Association. He supported the denial without prejudice.

Chairman Stopper supported denying without prejudice. He encouraged the neighbors to work together.

Commissioner Griffin was concerned about not having a resolution prepared. Senior Planner Mullis stated that the Planning Commission never sees the resolution, only the staff report including the findings and conditions. Staff reads the resolution by title and highlights the findings. The Planning Commission discussed that the applicant can appeal the decision to the City Council.


Staff memorandum was presented pertaining to a request for a major site plan to construct a 4,473 square-foot bank building (Bank of America) and a Zoning Adjustment to reduce by 20% the required building setback along Valencia Mesa Drive from 10 feet to 8 feet, on property located at 2101 North Harbor Boulevard (northwest corner of Valencia Mesa Drive and Harbor Boulevard) (C-2 zone) (Categorically exempt under Section 15332 of CEQA Guidelines)

This was continued to a date not specific.


A request for the abandonment of two alleys located approximately 140 feet east of Lemon Street; and between 790 to 1090 feet and between 1110 to 1450 feet north of the centerline of Chapman Avenue (P-L zone) (Categorically exempt under Section 15312 of CEQA Guidelines)

Engineering Director Hoppe stated that this was a straightforward abandonment. He also said that this is related to two previous abandonments on Fullerton College property.

The title of Resolution Number PC-04-39 RRCOMMENDING to the City Council the abandonment of approximately 300 feet of the alley south of Nutwood Place and 340 feet of the alley north of Nutwood Place, east of Lemon Street was read and further reading was waived. MOTION by Commissioner Savage, seconded by Commissioner Griffin and passed unanimously by all members present that said resolution be ADOPTED AS WRITTEN.



    Staff advised the Planning Commission of upcoming community meetings, noting the time and locations.


    Senior Planner Mullis gave a brief update on recent City Council meetings.


    There was no one from the public who wished to speak on any matter within the Commissions jurisdiction.


    The next regularly-scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be October 27, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Staff reviewed the proposed items listed in the agenda forecast: The Downtown Analysis and Outdoor Dining Guidelines.


There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:31 p.m.

RSS for Fullerton NewsFullerton eLists
Home | Contact Us | FAQs | Service Request | eLists | Site Map | Disclaimer & Privacy PolicyCopyright © 2000 - 2015 Community. Development, 303 W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92832. 714-738-6547