Loading...
PC Min - 03/12/2013CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. MARCH 12, 2013 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY The Planning Commission meeting of March 12, 2013, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Reynolds and 1:he following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Staff Present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Interim Community Development Director: Associate Planner: Associate Planner: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: Philip C. Reynolds, Jr. Paul Resnikoff Brian Brennan Pam Finch John Razumich Bob Roseberry Elizabeth Gibbons Paul Kermoyan Steve Prosser Daniel Fama William Seligmann Corinne Shinn Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Brennan, seconded by Commissioner Gibbons, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of February 26, 2013, were approved. (6-0-1; Commissioner Gibbons was absent) Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 2 COMMUNICAII'IONS 1. Desk item for Agenda Item No. 2. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARINGS *** Commissioner Finch advised that she would recuse from Item 1 based on a professional conflict of interest. She left the dais and chambers. Chair Reynold:> read Agenda Item. No. 1 into the record as follows: 1. PLN2013-;t3 Public Hearing to consider an application of Mr. Metrik Masuda Masuda, M. for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2013-23) to establish a dog retail and training center (Zoom Room) within an existing tenant space on property located at 1614 W. Campbell Avenue in a C- 1 (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Steve Prosser, Associate Planner Mr. Steve Prosser, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Reported that the applicant is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit to establish Zoom Room, a dog training and supply business. • Described the project location as being on the south side of Campbell Avenue between Fulton and South San Tomas Aquino Road. It is currently a vacant tenant space that was previously occupied by a British Food Market and is in between a dry cleaner;> and florist. • Explained that the dog training component requires issuance of a Conditional Use Permit whilE: the retail component is a permitted use in the C-1 Zoning District. • Stated that the business would operate as a pet training studio offering an instructional based program in a small group setting. • Said that the floor space includes the dog training open area with retail display, a cahier's station and a waiting area. • Advised th2it the daily business hours would be from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. and the operational hours from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. The maximum class size would consist of 8 animals with their owners and two staff. • Said that staff determined that this use would fit within the C-1 Zoning. The purpose of i:his zoning is to serve surrounding neighborhood and the community at Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 3 large. This location is within walking distance of a surrounding residential neighborhood. • Reported that to ensure that this use is appropriate for this center three conditions have been iincluded as follows: o Property Maintenance. The issue of property maintenance was mitigated and ;addressed with condition that the business owners would be responsible for monitoring the parking area to ensure that no pet waste is left uncollected. Additionally, the owner is required to provide animal waste baggies outside for use in pick up. o Noise: The issue of the potential for noise impacts was considered. Since the operational hours are between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m., the operation is appropriate for its location. These hours are well within the hours of the otherr uses in the shopping center and would not be contrary to the other uses on site. This use does not represent intensification to the previous use of thus space. o Parking: This proposed dog training and associated pet supply sales has a less intensive parking requirement than a traditional retail establishment. It is mostly a studio with a small retail component. Staff has determined that therE: is no parking deficiency and this will represent a less intensive parking demand. • Advised that based on findings, this project can be deemed to be Categorically Exempt. • Recommended that the Commission adopt a resolution approving this Conditional use Permit to allow a dog training facility with retail supply sales. • Stated that the applicant is available for questions. Commissioner Roseberry pointed out that there is a veterinary clinic in the same center. Is that a permitted use? Planner Steve Prosser advised that that business has a Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Resnikoff asked if the maximum number of 8 dogs per class would prevent other owners from bringing their pets along when coming into the store to purchase supplies. Planner Steve Prosser said no. He added that the limit on the number of animals is for extended time on site for classes. Commissioner Resnikoff asked if the business closes at 8 p.m. Planner Steve Prosser said that the last class would start approximately at 7 p.m. to conclude by 8 pp.m. Commissioner Razumich: • Pointed out that this tenant space is 3,300 square feet and that 75 percent of the space is devoted to instructional area. • Stated that this seems like a lot of space for just 8 dogs. • Asked if it might be okay to allow more dogs. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 4 • Questioned) the cost per square foot in rent in relation to this small number of clients allowed atone time. • Inquired if the plan might be to increase that number in the future. Planner Steve Prosser: • Explained 1:hat per this franchise business plan, the program is successful with 8 dogs per class. • Added that if this location becomes extremely successful and wants to increase its number, thE~y would need to come back before the Planning Commission to modify their Use Permit. At that time a re-evaluation of the number of animals would be considered versus any potential impacts of that increase on the center. • Added that this particular location's business plan looks at five animals with owners per class. Chair Reynolds opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Metrik Masuda, Applicant and Business Owner, Zoom Room: • Thanked Planners Steve Prosser and Daniel Fama for being so helpful in explaining and assisting with the Use Permit process. • Thanked the members of the Planning Commission for reviewing his request. • Stated that he is excited to be a part of the Campbell community. • Reported thiat there currently are 14 Zoom Room franchises around the nation and he is looking forward to establishing this location in Campbell. Mr. Dave Perry, CEO, Campbell Chamber of Commerce: • Explained )that the Chamber's offices are located in the same center as the applicant's. • Expressed his support for this Use Permit both as a neighbor and as a small dog owner. • Said he may well become a customer of#his business. • Stated he hopes this request is approved. Chair Reynold:; closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Resnikoff, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4095 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2013-23) to establish a dog retail and training center (Zoom Room) within an existing tenant space on property located at 1614 W. Campbell Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Brennan, Razumich, Resnikoff, Reynolds and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Gibbons ABSTAIN: Finch Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 5 Chair Reynolds advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Commissioner Finch returned to the chambers and dais upon the completion of Item 1. *** Chair Reynolds read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record as follows: 2. PLN2011-154 Continued Public Hearing (from the Planning Commission Text meeting of January 22, 2013) to consider the City-initiated Text Amendment Amendment (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: April 2, 2013. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Associate Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that this item was continued from a hearing held on January 22, 2013. • Reported that at the previous meeting, the Planning Commission provided guidance to staff to exempt the requirement for the undergrounding of utilities for residential remodels but rather to apply the requirement only to additions to new homes or additions increasing a home by 50 percent or more if said home is located on an arterial or collector street. The Commission felt that the Variance process could be considered if necessary. • Stated that staff revised the original draft ordinance that required pole to property undergrounding with any remodel greater than 50 percent increase in square footage. As revised, that standard is the same for all non-residential properties as well as for single-family residences that increase in floor area by 50 percent or more IocatE;d on an arterial or collector street. Homes located on local streets would be e~:empted when small additions are proposed. • Added that the thought behind this was the belief that it is highly unlikely utility poles on local streets would ever be widely removed. • Said that uindergrounding of utilities from pole to property is required for new construction including for new single-family residences and subdivisions. • Said that there is a potential inconsistency. While there is the exemption against requiring undergrounding with additions to homes on local streets, the requirement for undergrounding is in place for new homes constructed on local streets. • Reiterated that the undergrounding requirement applies to all new homes regardless of what type of street it is located on. • Explained that an addition includes the expansion of building floor area. It also includes those additions reconstructed over previously demolished floor area. • Pointed out that the staff report contained the City's diagram for roadway classifications. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 6 • Said that the definition of remodel that comes from the Streetscape Standards is only applicable to commercial. • Reminded 1that the process for Underground Utility Waivers was removed from the Ordinance previously. While the Planning Commission wanted relief from the requirement to be available, they felt the provision to allow someone to apply for a Variance exists, which has required findings per the Variance Chapter. • Said that the relocation of service line was based on length of the relocated line. A new requirement states as long as there is no increase, which is arbitrary. A mid- line drop is an allowable option. • Reiterated that if a unique circumstance comes up, the Variance process is available. • Explained that the frontage utility requirements are unchanged since the last meeting and are limited to arterial and collector streets, to developments with more than five lots and for non-residential developments. • Added that "non-residential" encompasses a wider variety of uses and again the Variance procedure is an option of someone needs relief from the standard. • Said that .exemptions to the undergrounding requirement include if they are precluded bey environmental condition. • Said that they are removing a redundancy from the Subdivision Code. • Said that tlhree finding must be made to support these proposed amendments including: consistency with the General Plan; not detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community; and consistent with Zoning regulations. • Recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending Council adopt an Ordinance revising the requirements for the undergrounding of utilities. Director Paul K.ermoyan: • Advised that staff had folded in the notion of excluding local streets in some of these provisions. • Reiterated i:he belief that it is more likely that poles on local streets will never be removed. • Added that except for subdivisions no poles will have to be removed but the undergrounding will need to occur to the homes from the pole. • Pointed out that drops from a pole have as much opportunity for failure than the lines themselves. • Stated that while PG&E trims vegetation growing along its poles, it does not do so for private property drops. Commissioner IResnikoff asked staff to define "rebuild'. Planner Daniel Fama: • Said that it is when someone takes out walls of an existing home and rebuilds new walls on the old slab. • Added what while in the end that such a rebuild may not result in 50 percent growth in square footage it effectively is new square footage. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 7 Commissioner Brennan: • Said as he recalls waivers for the requirement to underground utilities were most often granted in the past. • Asked if it i:s the proposed changes are adequate to avoid such waivers. Planner Daniel Fama advised that the Variance findings standard is high and set by the State. There is a high threshold to meet in order to allow a Variance. Commissioner Brennan asked about the current standards for an underground utility waiver. Planner Daniel Fama explained that they were based off the old Ordinance and not particularly effE:ctive. Director Paul k:ermoyan: • Said the standard basically was that the waiver could be granted if the applicant said it would cost significantly more to underground utilities than to make a drop. • Advised that the standard for a Variance to the requirement for undergrounding will be tied to uinique topographical constraints that cause a hardship. • Concluded that with that tougher standard fewer exceptions are likely to be granted. Commissioner Resnikoff asked what the cost is for a Variance and how long they take to process. Planner Daniel Fama said that it takes about 45 days to get from submittal. to public hearing before the Planning Commission and costs about $1,500. Commissioner Razumich: • Thanked staff for what he believes is the third iteration of this amendment. • Asked about what constitutes local streets. • Opined that: it appears that not a lot of streets would qualify for undergrounding of utilities. • Inquired whether a secondary dwelling unit would qualify for undergrounding of the main house also. • Suggested that is something to discuss. • Stated that the spirit of the definition is good. Commissioner Finch asked staff to clarify if gross area includes the garage. Planner Daniell Fama replied correct. He added that would include both attached and/or detached garages and comparable accessory structure. Chair Reynolds opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Chair Reynolds closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 8 Commissioner Brennan: • Said that hie didn't think part of the consensus on this issue of local streets being exempted firom the requirement for undergrounding has been included. • Suggested that the requirement for undergrounding should be included simply from a safety perspective. • Pointed out that while some areas may already be predominately remodeled there are still areas in town where more remodeling will be seen in the future. Commissioner Razumich: • Said that hE; recalls the same thing. • Added that the issue of undergrounding can be considered from both a safety as well as an aesthetic perspective. • Said that there is some futility in requiring undergrounding on local streets as so many remodels have already been completed and so many exemptions have already been given. • Stated that the exception would reward those who live on local streets versus arterial and,~or collector streets. Commissioner Roseberry: • Clarified that one part of what is being discussed is the requirement to underground the main line that goes down the street. • Added that what is being discussed as well is the requirement for undergrounding of utilities from the pole (line) to the house. • Said that projects on an arterial street and/or a bigger project (usually commercial) the distribution line on the street would need to underground utilities as well. Commissioner Resnikoff: • Said the he is not convinced that much is accomplished by requiring the undergrounding of utilities on local streets. • Added that he is not firmly against it but not really in support either. • Stated that the $1,500 cost and 45 day process is a severe path for property owners to have to undertake. • Admitted that there are still issues that resound with him. • Reiterated ghat he is not supportive of requiring undergrounding with the relocation of a service panel as written. Chair Reynolds asked the Commissioners if they had any comments on the email submitted by Commissioner Gibbons. Commissioner Resnikoff: • Said that he wants to see flexibility and the possibility for a Variance makes that possible. • Agreed that: garage square footage should be included in the total square footage whether they are attached or detached garages. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 9 Commissioner Finch: • Expressed agreement with Commissioner Brennan that the undergrounding of utilities has to start somewhere. • Agreed that it may not be in "our" lifetime to see removal of all overhead lines but that work tc~ achieve that needs to start somewhere. • Admitted thiat she hadn't considered the possibility of someone accidently hitting their underground utilities when digging in their backyard for some reason such as planting. Director Paul K;ermoyan: • Advised that per Code, when someone digs they are supposed to contact USA (Underground Service Alert) to mark where the utilities are located on a parcel. • Added that underground utility lines are usually down 3 to 4 feet deep and within a heavy conduit. That's unlike gas lines that are not as deeply buried and consist of plastic pvc pipe that is more easily cut into with a shovel. • Reiterated that one should always call USA and they mark the lines. • Assured that digging is not much of a concern. • Pointed out that a typical tree is not planted very deep unless it is a very large tree being plantE;d. Chair Reynolds: • Said that h~e agreed with Commissioner Finch that we have to start somewhere when it comies to undergrounding of utilities. • Added that his concern is the cost to the homeowner. That cost factor is a huge concern of his. • Advised that he understands the safety aspect of taking lines out of the air and placing therm underground. • Admitted th<~t undergrounding reduces outages. • Stated that the possibility of someone digging into undergrounded utilities is an issue that comes with the territory. • Reported that he understands that the General Plan's direction is for the undergrounding of utilities and this decision needs to be based on the General Plan so he must put his personal feelings aside regarding the potential cost and burden. • Reiterated thhat the obligation is to match the goals of the General Plan. • Informed that he would support the proposed Text Amendment as written. Planner Daniel Fama: • Cautioned that as drafted the update exempts undergrounding on local streets. Section B-1-•F would need to be revised by removing, "...' aed-sel~este ... „ Commissioner I~azumich: • Said that everyone has made some great points. • Admitted that he is on the fence and can see both sides of this issue. • Stated that he can support this requirement as long as it is only required for drops and not for primaries running along the street. Campbell Planining Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 10 • Verified that as he understands it the need for undergrounding is for commercial sites and large developments. Planner Daniel Fama replied correct. Director Paul K:ermoyan said that Section B-1 excludes utility poles. Commissioner Razumich suggested that secondary living units should be counted the same as a remodel to an existing home. Planner Daniel Fama pointed out that the references to arterial and collectors are not needed and could be removed. City Attorney V1/illiam Seligmann cautioned that they are still used in B-2. Planner Daniel Fama agreed and rescinded the suggestion to remove the references. Commissioner Roseberry said that if the entire property is already developed and is 50 percent affected by the addition of a secondary unit, there is the opportunity to use the formula there. Director Paul K;ermoyan clarified that if the secondary living unit triggers a 50 percent, utilities for both the second unit and the main dwelling would have to be undergrounded. Planner Daniel Fama added that otherwise only the utilities between the second unit to the main dwellinng would have to be undergrounded but not to the street. Commissioner Brennan said it feels funny to him. He said he agreed with Commissioner Razumich that is not reflected in what's currently written. Planner Daniel Fama asked if he means the current ordinance. He advised that currently undergrounding is required only from the house to the secondary unit. The proposed requiirement is more stringent. Director Kermoyan gave an example of a garage versus and detached secondary living unit. That's why the scenario is proposed to be changed. Commissioner Roseberry clarified that secondary units are not considered to be on separate properties. Planner Daniel Fama said no but that secondary living units are treated as new dwelling units under the Building Code. Commissioner (Roseberry asked if the secondary unit has a separate meter. Planner Daniel Fama explained that there is a sub-panel to the house. A secondary dwelling unit is not allowed to have a separate meter. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 11 Commissioner Brennan asked Commissioner Razumich to comment on Director Kermoyan's point of distinction. Commissioner Razumich: • Said he understands that a new secondary living unit must underground utilities to the main panel • Added that it seems far to require undergrounding from the main house to the secondary unit. • Concluded that utilities for secondary units should always be underground. Director Paul K;ermoyan said that one property just had a secondary unit for their mom constructed on a property near Downtown. Commission Finch said that is a perfect example where they expanded the main house and added a seecondary unit at the back. Planner Daniel Fama: • Suggested that it could be modified so that the percentage of square footage for an single family residential addition could also reference secondary living units. • Proposed tF~e added language, "...and secondary dwelling unit shall be considered under this Section." • Reminded that secondary dwelling units have a maximum size limit of 640 square feet. Commissioner Brennan: • Said that given Commissioner Razumich's panel lengthening questions. he is persuaded 11hat 5 percent increase in line length is arbitrary but he is comfortable keeping at an equal or lesser length. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roseberry, seconded by Commissioner Finch, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4096 recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance 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, with the following amendments: • Modify Section 1-F by removing "arterial and collector streets" and adding "existing and/or new detached garage, secondary dwelling unit and other fully enclosed structures." • Eliminate B-1(b) -Construction of Secondary Dwelling Units, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Brennan, Finch, Reynolds and Roseberry NOES: Razumich and Resnikoff ABSENT: Gibbons ABSTAIN: None *** Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 12 REPORT OF 1'HE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Director Paul K;ermoyan: • Reported treat Council conducted a study session to discuss the mix of uses in the Campbell Downtown. Some members of the Planning Commission did attend. • Advised that Council will consider looking at implementing a Conditional Use Permit requirement for future new restaurants in the Downtown. They have not committed to that idea but will consider it. • Reported that Commissioner Gibbons will be participating in a training program that occurs on Tuesday evenings so she .will miss approximately the next four Planning Commission meetings. • Added that replacement SARC coverage will be necessary during that time. Chair Reynolds asked for discussion on the temporary coverage of SARC while Commissioner Gibbons is unavailable. Commissioner Roseberry said he might have to recuse from the regular PC meeting item due to proximity of the project site to his home. He asked what items SARC would be considering that evening as he may miss the meeting due to that conflict of interest for the item on the agenda. Director Paul k;ermoyan advised that the SARC item is a proposed modification to an existing cell sitE;. Chair Reynolds asked Commissioner Roseberry if he would assume the role on SARC as he is the next on the rotation list for SARC. Commissioner Finch offered to cover SARC for the next several meetings while Commissioner Gibbons is unable to attend. Commissioner Resnikoff pointed out that a moratorium on new restaurants in the Downtown was discussed but Council was against the idea at this time. He pointed out that even if a proposed use meets the requirements, the Commission can still deny a use due to over-concentration. City Attorney William Seligmann: • Cautioned i:hat the Downtown Campbell Alcohol Policy was not developed to prevent oven-concentration. • Admitted that staff may want to obtain more specific direction from Council. • Pointed out that if a use complies with the provisions of the Downtown Campbell Alcohol Policy then they have negated any potential of problems due to over- concentration. • Added that this is a reasonable interpretation of the policy but it is not the only interpretation. • Agreed thair the language of the Code can consider over-concentration when considering whether to grant or deny a use. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for March 12, 2013 Page 13 Commissioner Resnikoff agreed that the issue is open and subjective. He pointed out that over-concentration refers to alcohol and not to issues such as parking, etc. City Attorney V'Villiam Seligmann agreed that the issue of over-concentration is impacts from the service of alcohol. Director Paul I~Cermoyan pointed out that the City has limits on the number of self- storage facilities. Planner Daniel Fama said that the allowed number of storage facilities is based on the percentage of population. Commissioner Resnikoff asked if a restaurant would be able to establish without a Use Permit if it doe;>n't plan to serve alcohol. Chair Reynold:> said that if the Zoning regulations change for the Downtown all future restaurant requiests would come before the Planning Commission. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of March 26, 2013. SUBMITTED BY: Corinne S n, Recording Secretary APPROVED B`~: ATTEST: