Loading...
PC Min - 11/13/2012CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting of November 13, 2012, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Reynolds and the following proceedings were had, to wit: NOVEMBER 13, 2012 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Philip C. Reynolds, Jr. Paul Resnikoff Brian Brennan Pam Finch Elizabeth Gibbons John Razumich Bob Roseberry Commissioners Absent Staff Present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES None Interim Community Development Director: Associate Planner: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: Paul Kermoyan Daniel Fama William Seligmann Corinne Shinn Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Brennan, seconded by Commissioner Finch, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of October 23, 2012, were approved. (5-0-0-2; Commissioners Gibbons and Razumich abstained) Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 2 COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications items. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. *** PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Reynolds read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows: 1. PLN2011-154 Public Hearing to consider the staff initiated Text Amendment Staff (PLN2011-154) to amend the Campbell Municipal Code (Sec. 21.18.140 -Undergrounding of Utilities and Sec. 20.36.150 - Utilities), to clarify provisions pertaining to the undergrounding of utilities. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: January 7, 2013 Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Associate Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Said that this is a Text Amendment to modify the Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance. • Provided a background. For a long time before 2004, undergrounding was required just for commercial and larger residential projects. In 2004, a Zoning Code Update took into account a 2001 General Plan strategy to develop an Ordinance for the undergrounding of utilities. The Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance was drafted that requires new and existing lines to be placed underground. Prior to that, it was new but not existing. Anew process for Underground Utility Waivers was created to allow exceptions to the undergrounding requirement. In 2006, another Zoning Code Update clarified the process of review of utility undergrounding as an administrative action that is not appealable. In the years between 2004 and 2010, all new homes and any addition/remodel that included relocation of a service panel required undergrounding. During that timeframe, nearly 90 percent of the applications for a waiver were granted for several reasons including the fact that undergrounding was more costly; that the pole was located across the street; and/or that there was a limited likelihood that the neighborhood would ever achieve significant levels of utility undergrounding. Therefore, undergrounding was usually only required if a pole was located directly in front of the home. • Reported that in February 2011, then Director Kirk Heinrichs developed an interpretation that any addition that represented a 50 percent increase would Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 3 require utility undergrounding. Underground Utility Waivers were discouraged as having little likelihood of approval. Of the five requests that came in since, four of them were denied a waiver of the requirement. In 2011, an Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance update was included on the department's work plan. • Explained that the proposed amendments reflect four areas. One is when undergrounding is needed. Two is what grounds can warrant a waiver. Three is when the pole is located in front of the property. Four is miscellaneous changes. • Said that the need for undergrounding kicks in with the construction of a new structure; with an expansion of 50 percent of existing square footage; remodeling with a job valuation of 50 percent of existing value or more; and with subdivisions. • Said that one specific waiver criteria necessary to grant a waiver is that the undergrounding represents more than 15 percent of the total project cost. An example of a situation where a waiver may be justified is if a pole is located in an adjacent property owner's backyard and trenching would destroy their yard. Other reasons for a waiver could include topography and/or soil conditions, which are both highly unlikely conditions in Campbell. Reiterated that the undergrounding is for frontage utilities. • Stated that currently undergrounding is required for commercial, industrial and new subdivisions. Undergrounding is required only for arterial streets where utility poles will likely some day go away. The threshold for residential subdivisions is currently more than five units (effectively six units). However staff is proposing that the language read "five or more units". Undergrounding is expanding to more types of non-residential development. Currently, schools and churches are precluded and those uses will be captured with these amendments. • Said that two other amendments are proposed including a clarification to exceptions. Staff is recommending that service panel relocations be allowed without requiring undergrounding as long as existing line length does not increase by more than 25 percent. • Reported that Text Amendments require Planning Commission and City Council to find the proposed changes to be consistent with the City's General Plan; that the amendments are not detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community; and that they are consistent with the City's Zoning Code provisions. • Said that these amendments will require undergrounding of utilities more consistently and more often. This premise is consistent with a specific Land Use policy of the City's General Plan. Eventually over time there will be fewer overhead utilities. • Recommended adoption of a resolution that recommends Council adopt this Text Amendment to Undergrounding of Utilities and Utilities Ordinances. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Offered a "big picture" explanation of why this issue is before the Commission. • Reported that the City's General Plan offers a vision. Within the General Plan there is a specific policy directing the undergrounding of utilities. However, despite the adoption of an Ordinance requiring the Undergrounding of Utilities, what was actually being implemented was that undergrounding was being circumvented by waivers. With 95 percent waived, it was clear that something was wrong with the Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 4 Ordinance. That's why this matter is under discussion - to reestablish new provisions to clearly implement the policy. • Added that there has to be enough of an investment to warrant the expensive improvement of undergrounding utilities, which can cost $15,000 or more. • Said that the proposed draft amendments to the Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance is before this Commission now. However, the Commission should not feel obligated to pass it now. If there are suggestions for improvements, please let staff know what they are. Those suggestions could be incorporated into the draft and brought back to a future meeting. Commissioner Brennan asked staff how an administrative action is not appealable or not. City Attorney William Seligmann: • Said that there is a legal interpretation as well as a policy concern. From a legal standpoint, there is a significant amount of discretion that calls for hearing and right to appeal. • Explained that if there are objective standards, a ministerial process can be utilized that requires neither a hearing nor an appeal process. From a policy consideration, there must be solid objective standards. If the standards are less well-defined, a hearing is required. Commissioner Brennan asked what percentage of projects might have exemptions. Planner Daniel Fama said that now they are relatively I'~imited and the undergrounding requirement is being applied more consistently. He added that the valuations for development are pretty consistent as the Building Department has a process of establishing valuations for construction. Commissioner Razumich asked about homeowners who are slowly upgrading their property by adding hot tubs or an electric car charger requiring service upgrades. Would that minor a project require undergrounding? Planner Daniel Fama replied no. That is currently the case and will remain the case. Chair Reynolds opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Chair Reynolds closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Roseberry: • Said that this Ordinance update is a great idea and that the undergrounding of utilities is a good thing. • Added that his only question is about frontage undergrounding. • Questioned how the vision for undergrounding along streets such as Winchester fits in with these amendments. • Asked about the possibility of in-lieu fees to allow for future undergrounding when it makes more sense to install them. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 5 Planner Daniel Fama: • Said that the Text Amendments will ensure consistency. • Pointed out that the frontage requirement can be waived as part of a discretionary review. • Added that if an in-lieu fee is appropriate, that can be determined on a case-by- case basis. Commissioner Roseberry asked if there is a structure in place for in-lieu fees. Planner Daniel Fama said no. There is broad discretion on the part of the Planning Commission and City Council's part. Commissioner Roseberry asked how in-lieu fees could be determined. Planner Daniel Fama replied on advice of the City Engineer. In-lieu is unusual and usually an exception to the rule. Commissioner Roseberry said that it might make sense to take in in-lieu fees in some cases. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that common sense is taken into consideration. • Added that utility poles are not always placed where it makes sense to underground until later. • Said that it is not codified and doesn't really need to be. • Reminded that the frontage undergrounding is limited to arterial/image streets and not residential streets. Right now, it is all streets. • Added that if the Commission wants to implement an in-lieu fee component that could be included. Commissioner Roseberry said he just wanted to raise the idea. Director Paul Kermoyan pointed out that what may need to be determined is what the cost may be right now compared to what it might be five years later. Commissioner Roseberry: • Clarified that on a residential street with new residential development where there are more than five new units; undergrounding of the frontage will occur even if not on an arterial street. However, in other cases, frontage undergrounding is only required on collector and arterial streets, which the Public Works Department believes makes the most sense as far as potential for extensive future undergrounding of utilities. Commissioner Gibbons: • Expressed agreement with many of the points raised by Commissioner Roseberry. • Added that the Ordinance is intended to be simple. • Said that it is important to consider bonds, in-lieu fees and deferred agreements. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 6 • Listed a couple of arterial streets as Hamilton and Winchester and a couple of collector streets as Westmont and Hacienda, which serve as an illustration of both categories. • Stated that the standard of 50 percent of value sounds goods. • Questioned the 50 percent cost versus assessment. • Suggested the elimination of the 50 percent of assessment and retain the 50 percent of area. • Stated that power lines cross panel to get to another. Director Paul Kermoyan said that even if the pole is on an adjacent parcel, it is usually fairly easy to underground from the pole to the house. It becomes a judgment call if a trench must cross two properties. Commissioner Gibbons asked what if the pole is across the street. Director Paul Kermoyan said that backyards are more sacred. In front yards, easements are available and open to the public for the installation of undergrounding utilities. Chair Reynolds said that utilities are his area of expertise. He cautioned that this represents a Geo95 violation. They are not allowed to cross property lines but are required to cross only on easements. What if the property is situated mid-span. Director Paul Kermoyan said that could create complications. However, there is usually an easement at the front to accommodate undergrounding of utilities. He added that a 50 percent expansion is a definite call for undergrounding, including 50 percent of floor area. An owner removing half a structure and replacing it with new space of a similar size is one reason why assessed value is considered versus cost. Commissioner Razumich: • Said that it is a great idea to underground utilities when it makes sense to do so. • Added that it is expensive but he has done it many times with projects. • Stated that it can be reasonable and fair. • Echoed Commissioner Gibbons' comments about assessed values. He added that it is not a strong indicator of value and is not an accurate measure. • Said that the standard is offered of no more than 15 percent of a project's cost for the undergrounding of utilities. • Suggested perhaps a minimum project cost of perhaps $200,000 to require the undergrounding of utilities. Commissioner Finch: • Echoed the comments made by Commissioners Razumich and Gibbons on the issue of assessed values. • Suggested an increase of 50 percent or more of the original square footage as a standard. If existing square footage is demolished and rebuilt that could be taken into consideration. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 7 Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that establishing a concise definition of a "remodel" is part of the Planning Department's current work plan. • Said that if just one wall of an existing structure is left that is considered to be a new house. • Added that new residences trigger undergrounding as there is enough investment to warrant it. • Agreed that establishing a dollar value of the remodel/addition could make sense. • Concluded that taking into consideration a 600 square foot house versus a 3,000 square foot house, the dollar value may not be proportionately equal. Commissioner Roseberry: • Said that either dollar value or percentage could be used. • Suggested a residential exclusion for frontage undergrounding unless the residence is located on a feeder/arterial street. That way they only have to underground on their property. Director Paul Kermoyan said that is the way the Code is written today. He said that Planning asked Public Works if they envision poles being removed. They believe only on arterial and/or collector streets and not on residential streets. Commissioner Roseberry asked if pole removal will be required. Planner Daniel Fama replied that frontage undergrounding will only be required for residential developments with more than five units and not for one single-family residence. Director Paul Kermoyan said that risers run up poles to help facilitate the undergrounding of one home within an area with above-ground utilities. Commissioner Gibbons said that the following requirements appear to trigger undergrounding: being on either an arterial or collector street; an increase in area by 50 percent or more; a new development with five or more residences; all commercial and everything else. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Reminded that undergrounding is from existing poles rather than altogether. • Said that the amended Ordinance offers: o A-1 =undergrounding drops o A-2 =Remove poles and undergrounding of all utilities. • Agreed that the language could be made clearer. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that it would be clearer as follows: o On arterial and collector streets; o New: A-1 & A-2; removing poles Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 8 o Remodel 50 percent of area plus five percent of distance of box change; o Exception = 15 percent of value of remodel cost o All utilities included Planner Daniel Fama said that there are standards for pole to property utility undergrounding including for new buildings; additions more than 50 percent and/or with a value increase of 50 percent or more. Commissioner Gibbons asked what if the pole is located across a street. Planner Daniel Fama said that they would need to trench across the street. Director Paul Kermoyan reminded that on image streets the poles would be removed altogether. Commissioner Roseberry: • Said that these changes appear pretty clear as they require pole and service drops. • Reiterated that there is no requirement for residential properties to remove frontage poles unless it is part of a residential development. Instead they would underground the drop. Commissioner Gibbons: • Suggested than an opportunity be available to enter into a deferred agreement. • Pointed out that on her street about 70 percent of the nearby homes have already been recently remodeled. Only a few have not. • Questioned the wisdom of having separate drops. Director Paul Kermoyan pointed out that there are some streets for which Public Works will not allow cut and patch to occur. Commissioner Gibbons asked about other utilities. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that the undergrounding applies to all utilities involving cables. • Added that the main premise is that there has to be enough investment to warrant imposing the cost of undergrounding utilities. • Said that in a case where a service box needs to be moved by just two feet, the Code as written would have required undergrounding. That didn't make sense, which is why waivers were granted. Commissioner Gibbons suggested that out of fairness if 60 percent of homes in a neighborhood are already remodeled, it may not be fair to require the last few homeowners who want to remodel their homes to have to underground their utilities. Director Paul Kermoyan cautioned that the same logic can be used with sidewalk installations. Over time, the area fills in. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 9 Commissioner Resnikoff pointed to Attachment #4 in the report A-1 representing the portion from the pole to the property and A-2 representing the removal of poles along frontage. Planner Daniel Fama explained that A-1 pertains to pole to property and A-2 to frontage utilities that run parallel with the property. A-2 is imposed on subdivisions and commercial properties. Commissioner Resnikoff: • Questioned the dollar value as it applies to small expansions. • Said that the requirement to underground may create inconsistency. • Added that the Commission is here to help clarify the process with apro-active review to determine the effect and/or impact of undergrounding and the number of projects for which undergrounding is now required. Planner Daniel Fama: • Explained that since 2011 more undergrounding of utilities has been required. • Added that this Text Amendment will codify the current criteria for undergrounding that includes 50 percent of value added. • Said that the Text Amendment will result in undergrounding of utilities as the General Plan requires. Commissioner Resnikoff asked if there were more waivers in the past. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Stated that previously waivers were granted simply because the cost to maintain overhead lines was less than the cost to underground. • Said that once the Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance was adopted, the cost of installing utility poles versus undergrounding at time of construction was compared. • Added that as part of the Subdivision Ordinance, undergrounding is required. • Said that a waiver requirement was created for properties located within a built out neighborhood. • Pointed out that it will always be cheaper to keep overhead utilities versus undergrounding utilities. Commissioner Resnikoff said that this Amendment is not just to update the Code but also to reduce waivers and to make requirements for undergrounding stricter. Director Paul Kermoyan said that the goal is to develop objective standards that are known in advance. Commissioner Resnikoff said that implementing changes will result in most waivers being denied. He added that he thought that these changes were to be more consistent and/or rigid in its standards and removing the reasons for waivers. Planner Daniel Fama said that the Ordinance wasn't working. It was broken given the number of waivers granted until 2011. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 10 Commissioner Resnikoff said that the amendments are more complex than he had originally thought. Director Paul Kermoyan said that this update can be brought back with modifications or moved forward as the Commission prefers. Commissioner Brennan suggested using actual construction cost versus 50 percent of the structure's assessed value. Commissioner Razumich agreed that using assessed value is not the way to go. He also questioned what percentage of cost for undergrounding makes sense. Director Paul Kermoyan said that perhaps the standard of 50 percent of altering an existing structure. Planner Daniel Fama said that precedent exists when considering streetscape improvements. Those are based on the square footage of the remodel. Commissioner Razumich asked if 15% of the overall cost of construction is a fair standard. Commissioner Roseberry said that the Commission has given staff great direction. He agreed that permit values is a great place to go. He suggested that this Text Amendment be revised and brought back with better criteria for imposing undergrounding of utilities. Commissioner Gibbons pointed out that some communities, such as Dublin, CA, have established square footage valuations for both remodel and new construction. Commissioner Resnikoff supported establishing a square footage cost or increasing square footage by 50 percent of the existing or more. Commissioner Brennan supported establishing a dollar amount. He added that square footage is a way to capture cost. Director Paul Kermoyan said that staff could return with a revised Ordinance removing the 50 percent rule on assessed value and using the project cost instead. He added that perhaps a minimum construction cost of $200,000 or more could be the standard to trigger undergrounding. Commissioner Roseberry asked that staff come back with definitions on triggers for undergrounding. Director Paul Kermoyan said that it is policy within the General Plan for undergrounding to occur with new construction and a substantial remodel. What needs to be better defined is what represents a substantial remodel. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 11 Commissioner Finch asked about the waiver process and agreed that it is an excellent idea to establish a cost per square foot standard as Commissioner Gibbons recommended. Chair Reynolds pointed to page 4 of the report that mentions cumulative increase in floor area over afive-year period. He suggested that permits for additions be recorded on a deed so new owners are aware. Commissioner Gibbons pointed out that the San Tomas Area Plan has the same five- year cumulative time frame. She asked staff if there have been problems with enforcing it. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that staff typically researches for any history of additions for every new project under review. • Added that when building permits are issued the valuation is provided by the contractor and the Building Official reviews and accepts it. • Questioned whether requiring an appraisal is being suggested. • Advised that conditioning recordation can be considered. It is done for covenants and/or deed restrictions against a property. • Stated that architects could be asked to put language on plans to reflect what percentage an addition represents as a part of the 50 percent maximum allowed prior to requiring undergrounding. Planner Daniel Fama said that deed restrictions for accessory structures and secondary living units are specifically allowed for under the Zoning Ordinance. Chair Reynolds asked if the preferred action of the Commission this evening is for a continuance. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Brennan, seconded by Commissioner Resnikoff, the Planning Commission continued to a date uncertain the consideration of a Text Amendment (PLN2011-154) to amend the Campbell Municipal Code (Sec. 21.18.140 - Undergrounding of Utilities and Sec. 20.36.150 - Utilities). (7-0) *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Interim Director Paul Kermoyan advised that there were no additions to his written report. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 13, 2012 Page 12 ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of December 11, 2012 (the meeting of November 27, 2012 will be cancelled). SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY: ATTEST: Corinne inn, Recording Secretary