Laserfiche WebLink
3 5 7 <br /> AGENDA (continued) ACTION TAKEN (continued) <br /> SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND PUBLIC HEARINGS SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND PUBLIC HEARINGS <br /> 1. (continued) places provided and whether or not there is <br /> need for all of them; the planned traffic flow <br /> of customers' cars; the possible development <br /> of a loitering problem and the willingess of <br /> the appellant to provide security guard if a <br /> police problem arises; the size of the build- <br /> ing; <br /> the hours of business anticipated; <br /> whether alternatives exist with regard to <br /> placement of the restaurant and the driving <br /> loop; the fact.that Southern Pacific will not <br /> permit construction on the rear 19 feet of the <br /> property; and the ability of the appellant to <br /> meet the conditions imposed by the Zoning <br /> Administrator. <br /> In response to questions, Planning Director <br /> Schroeter described his objections to the <br /> proposed plan unless certain conditions re- <br /> lating to improved traffic circulation and <br /> appearance are met, stating that in view of <br /> previously expressed Council comment objecting <br /> to the large number of fast-food operations in <br /> the City, one of the conditions imposed was <br /> that Council should make a policy judgment as <br /> to whether there were to be any more such <br /> restaurants allowed. <br /> Director of Public Works Addiego advised that <br /> he and the Traffic Engineer had reviewed the <br /> plans and questioned whether the planned turn- <br /> ing radius for access is adequate in view of <br /> 1. <br /> "■ its location at a busy corner. Mr. Addiego <br /> also noted the importance of locating the <br /> order voice-box well on to the property so <br /> that traffic will not back up on El Camino Real. <br /> In further response to questions regarding <br /> access, Mr. Schroeter advised that there is an <br /> electrolier in the middle of the driveway on <br /> which the appellant has shown both ingress and <br /> egress and for which ingress only is suggested. <br /> He also replied that the large trees visible in <br /> the back of the property do not belong to the <br /> appellant. <br /> Mr. Hiller stated that his traffic consultants <br /> do not concur with Mr. Schroeter with regard to <br /> traffic problems which may occur, and advised <br /> that his company is willing to pay for moving <br /> the light standard, recognizing that street <br /> lighting patterns may be affected. He stated <br /> that the Pacific Telephone Company has assured <br /> him that the utility box presents no problems. <br /> In response to question, Mr. Hiller said that <br /> it was suggested by the City's tree expert that <br /> it may not be possible to save the palm tree <br /> on the property. <br /> Mayor Biagi invited anyone else present who <br /> wished to speak to do so. No one wished to <br /> speak. <br /> Reg.Mtg. <br /> 9/22/80 <br /> r., Page 2 <br /> tiro <br /> f <br /> r <br />