Low Graphics Version Home | Contact Us | FAQs | Service Request | eLists | Site Map
City of Fullerton
Community Dev
Home ... > 2003 > September 4, 2003
Shortcuts
State College & Raymond Grade Separation Updates
Downtown
Water Bill Payment
City Employment
Agendas & Minutes
City Services
Classes
Emergency Preparedness
Online Services
Permits
Public Notices
Staff Review Committee Meeting Minutes September 4, 2003

COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM FULLERTON CITY HALL
THURSDAY, 9:00 A.M., SEPTEMBER 4, 2003

CALL TO ORDER:Chair Rosen called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:Rosen, Tabatabaee, Thompson, and Wallin
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:Maynard and Mullis
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:Eastman, Kusch, Sowers, and Norton

MINUTES:

August 21, 2003 approved as written. (Tabatabaee abstained because he was absent)

INTRODUCTIONS - COMMITTEE AND STAFF MEMBERS:

ACTION ITEMS:

PRJ03-00504 - ZON03-00049. APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER: CRV CLASSIC PROPERTIES, L.P. A request for a tutorial school measuring approximately 1,650 square feet on property located at 2270 Rosecrans Avenue (southeast corner of Rosecrans Avenue and Gilbert Street) (O-P zone) (Categorically exempt under Section 15301 of CEQA Guidelines)

Those present representing J.E.I. Learning Center are: Jong-in Chung, Sunghwa Han, and Justin Hong. Neighboring residents present at the meeting are: John Bingham and Raquel Bingham, and Mark Greenhalgh.

Chairman Rosen advised the applicant that there is a 10-day appeal period where any action by this Committee can be appealed to the Planning Commission and ultimately to the City Council. The request may be approved subject to conditions. Minutes of the hearing and a Resolution will be prepared.

Assistant Planner Kusch advised the Committee that the applicant wishes to open a tutorial school. In 1999, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a personal service facility (beauty salon). Based on the tenant mix, a surplus of four parking spaces was identified. The current parking requirements for a medical use, such as a dentist, have a lower parking ratio than what was calculated in 1999. The proposed school would occupy a two-story tenant space and have hours of operation between 10 a.m. - 7 p.m. The school would service students between kindergarten and 12th grade.

The existing tenants of the property include a previously approved tutorial business. The existing tutorial business was approved with evening hours of operation between 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. Additional conditions of the tutorial businesses approval included the designation of a drop-off and pick-up area on the site subject to the review and approval of the City's Traffic Engineering Division. There were also standard conditions of approval related to complying with Building Code and Fire Code regulations. The same conditions of approval would pertain to the new tutorial school.

Assistant Planner Kusch indicated that he received a telephone call from a concerned neighbor regarding the lack of property maintenance on the south slope of the property. Currently, there is no fence separating the subject property from the adjacent residential properties.

Assistant Planner Kusch stated that there does not appear to be a parking problem at this time, but would recommend review of the new tutorial business after six months of operation. If a parking problem exists after six months, a public hearing would be scheduled for reconsideration of the schools approval and, if warranted, modify the conditions of approval.

The applicant stated that they have 24 locations in Southern California. The goal of the center is to help children in terms of assessing their needs. The program consists of Math and English and is a self-learning system. The classes are held once a week and students walk, or are dropped off by a parent or an older sibling. There are three classrooms downstairs and each classroom is limited to five students per classroom. An office is located upstairs and is used for the purpose of parent conferences.

Committee Member Wallin asked what provisions have been made for children whose parents are late for pick up, and Chairman Rosen asked if the parents are required to check their children in and out. The applicant stated that the children would be kept inside until a parent arrived. Checking in and out is not a school requirement, but there would be no objection to a check-in procedure. Associate Planner Eastman wanted to make sure the school was not licensed as a day-care center. The applicant assured him that they were not.

Committee Member Tabatabaee asked the applicant what would be done with the open space on the second floor that is not fully closed off. The applicant replied that when he visited the location recently, the opening was completely closed. Committee Member Tabatabaee advised the applicant that the Building Division would need to make sure that the construction was permitted, and that working drawings prepared by a licensed architect showing disabled access were submitted.

Public Hearing Opened To Public Comments

Residents who spoke were John and Raquel Bingham, 2295 El Rancho Vista, and Mark Greenhalgh, 2285 El Rancho Vista.

Mr. Bingham who lives down the slope said he was not opposed to the school, but he has safety concerns. Over the years he has had to call the Police because of students loitering by the high voltage electrical box while waiting for their parents. They leave trash and throw rocks, and he is afraid that a student will fall down the steep slope and become injured. He passed around photos of the area in question. Mr. Bingham said he would like to see a block wall built to keep the kids from this area. The property owner does not maintain his property. There once was a small fence around the air conditioning units behind the property, but it has fallen down and was never replaced. Mr. Greenhalgh said the neighbors would be willing to work with the property owner to rebuild the fence. Mrs. Bingham mentioned that she has repeatedly spoken to the teachers about the student's loitering and their conduct, but they were unresponsive. She did not feel that a check-in procedure would work being that there is another school in that Center. Being that there are two schools in the center, it is difficult to tell which school the students attend who are causing the problems.

Public Hearing Closed to Public Comments

Associate Planner Eastman said the fencing was part of the original site plan approval. Some other conditions may also apply that were previously established. Staff will require that the slope be landscaped.

The applicant stated that safety is one of their first concerns. Children would not be allowed to run around outside. A waiting room would be provided, and whatever is necessary to maintain control of the children.

Committee Member Wallin commented that there is nothing stopping a resident from building a wall along their property line and If Edison had no objections, he would recommend that a chain link or wooden fence, to include a gate, be built to keep students away from the slope.

Chairman Rosen advised the neighbors that they should file complaints about trash and loitering with the City's Code Enforcement Department.

The Committee had no further comments and moved the request be approved.

MOTION made and SECONDED, and CARRIED by all members present, to APPROVE PRJ03-00504-ZON03-00049 (Resolution No. 338) subject to the following condition(s).

  1. All corrections generated through the plan check and inspection processes are incorporated by reference as conditions of approval. This will include any requirements generated by the Engineering Division.

  2. The applicant shall obtain a Change of Occupancy permit from the Building Division and submit a complete floor plan including handicapped access created for the tenant space by a licensed architect.

  3. Installation of a fence at the backside of the office building next to the property's south slope. Other than for Edison access to existing electrical equipment, the fence will preclude access to the back slope area. The fence will include a gate for Edison access to existing electrical equipment. The design of the fence, including materials, will be reviewed and approved by the Director of Development Services prior to installation.

  4. A fire alarm shall be installed according to Fire Department standards.

  5. There shall be three classrooms with a total of no more than five children per classroom. No classrooms shall be allowed on the second floor.

  6. A drop-off area shall be designated on the plans, and be subject to approval by the City's Traffic Engineering Division.

  7. No loitering shall be allowed. Students shall be kept on the first floor when waiting for pickup and shall be supervised at all times.

  8. Water service and water meters shall be upgraded to meet the present standards of Water Engineering.

SPECIAL EVENT. APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER: SAINT MARY'S SCHOOL. An annual school festival including rides, games, entertainment, food and alcohol, to be held from 12:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on October 17, 18, and 19, 2003. It will be located in the Church's parking lot at 400 W. Commonwealth Avenue (between approximately 414 and 499 feet east of the Richman Avenue centerline, with overflow to the Senior Center property). This event was reviewed at a special Redevelopment meeting on August 12, 2003, at which time Community Services and Police approved the proposal with conditions. (Zoned C-2 and P-L) (Categorically exempt under Section 15304 of CEQA Guidelines).

Present were Florence Plummer, 1400 Richman Knoll, and Randy Plummer, 2022 Vista Del Rosa, owners of the adjacent property.

Associate Planner Eastman presented the request stating that St. Mary's has met with the City to discuss some of the issues. There was some discussion in terms of parking. St. Mary's will have some members of the church who are police officers on hand to monitor the event. There will also be two uniformed Fullerton police officers on duty. The majority of the parking will be available at the Senior Center, at the public parking structure on Amerige Avenue, at City Hall, and the employee parking lot on Amerige Avenue. The City has asked that the crosswalk be monitored to prevent people from jay walking.

Staff did receive a telephone call from Ms. Plummer, an adjacent property owner, who is present at the meeting today. She has issues with overflow parking and kids throwing bottles, jumping over the block wall, and loitering each year during the event.

In an effort to address overflow parking, Planning would like to ask the applicant to provide at least two staff people, one at each of the entrances to the adjacent property owner's driveways to redirect cars to established parking lots. In addition, if the applicant could specify where the parking areas are when advertising, and provide a temporary sign that says "no carnival parking". Ms. Plummer felt that two people would not be enough to man the driveways; there are three entrances. Committee Member Wallin asked Ms. Plummer if she would be opposed to closing off one of the driveways. Possibly the one by the church could be closed. Associate Planner Eastman suggested charging a fee to park, or work out an agreement with the church that would be a win/win situation for both parties.

Chairman Rosen stated that rather than to try to solve all of the issues today, given the applicant is not present, it might be better to continue the item until the next meeting in two weeks. Committee Member Wallin made a motion to continue the item and require the applicant to meet with the adjacent property owner to resolve pending issues.

MOTION made and SECONDED, and CARRIED by all members present to CONTINUE the Special Event to the September 18, 2003 meeting.

ADJOURNED AS STAFF SITE PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE:

10:10 a.m.

FacebookTwitterYouTube
RSS for Fullerton NewsFullerton eLists
Home | Contact Us | FAQs | Service Request | eLists | Site Map | Disclaimer & Privacy PolicyCopyright © 2000 - 2014 Community. Development, 303 W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92832. 714-738-6547