Loading...
PC Min 04/13/2004 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2004 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of April 13, 2004, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Doorley and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: George Doorley Elizabeth Gibbons Bob Alderete Tom Francois Joseph D. Hernandez Michael Rocha Bob Roseberry Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Senior Planner: Planner I: City Attorney Public Works Director: Traffic Engineer: Reporting Secretary: Geoff I. Bradley Melinda Denis William Seligmann Robert Kass Matthew Jue Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Hernandez, the Planning Commission minutes of March 23, 2004, were approved as submitted. (7-0; with Commissioner Gibbons abstaining from the vote for the portion of the agenda pertaining to Items 1 and 2 for which she had recused herself.) COMMUNICATIONS 1. Amended Findings and Conditions for Item No.6. 2. City Attorney memo for Item No.6. 3. Fehr & Peers memo for Item No.6. 4. Program materials from League of California Cities Conference. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 2 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS Chair Doorley proposed changing the order of the agenda to accommodate the residents who are present for Agenda Item No.6 (Kohl's project). The revised order would be: Item 5 (86 N. Second Street), Item 3 (1865 S. Winchester Boulevard), Item 6 (525 E. Hamilton Avenue), Item 4 (1457 Hacienda Avenue), Item 2 (243 W. Rincon Avenue) and Item 1 (CIP 2004-2011). ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. *** PUBLIC HEARING Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.5 into the record. 5. PLN2004-17 Hartman, H. Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Holly Hartman, on behalf of Joseph and Olga Moore, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2004-17) to allow the relocation of an existing residence to the adjacent property owned by Joseph and Olga Moore located at 86 N. Second Street in a P-D (planned Development) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days. Project Planner: Melinda Denis, Planner I Ms. Melinda Denis, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the relocation of an existing residence to adjacent property located at 86 N. Second Street. . Described the property as being located on the east side ofN. Second Street, between Civic Center Drive and Grant Avenue, and that the surrounding uses are residential. . Informed that this property reflects two residential lots that were never legally merged. Two separate Assessor's Parcel Numbers were recently assigned to replace the old parcel number. The house currently straddles both parcels. The applicant proposes to relocate the house 16 feet south. . Stated that the Land Use designation is Low Density Residential and the Zoning is P-D (Planned Development). . Said that the existing garage and shed would be demolished and a new 480 square foot detached garage constructed. The house will be placed onto a new foundation. There are no alterations planned for the house. The new garage will match the architectural style of the house. . Reported that the Historic Preservation Board reviewed this proposal and was supportive with the conditions that the stucco is matched and that the profile of the chimney is retained when it is reconstructed. . Recommended that a Resolution be adopted approving this Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Gibbons presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on March 23,2004, and was supportive as proposed. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 3 Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.5. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.5. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3552 granting a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2004-17) to allow the relocation of an existing residence to the adjacent property owned by Joseph and Olga Moore located at 86 N. Second Street, and found this project to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chair Doorley advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk in 10 days. *** Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.3 into the record. 3. PLN2004-16 (PD) PLN2004-20 (TRP) Dudas Public Hearing to consider the application of Mick Dudas and Melany Moore-Dudas for a Planned Development Permit (PLN2004-16) to allow the construction of a new retail/office building of 2,400 square feet and a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2004-20) to remove four protected trees on property owned by Mick Dudas and Melany Moore- Dudas located at 1865 S. Winchester Boulevard in a P-D (Planned Development) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: May 4, 2004. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner Mr. GeoffI. Bradley, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that this project site currently consists of a vacant and boarded up single-family residence and is located on the west side of Winchester Boulevard, backing up to the Campbell Community Center property. The property is zoned P-D (Planned Development). . Described the proposal as a small two-story retail/office building situated along the front property line with access at the north property line via a two-way driveway. . Said that the proposed building would have good retail exposure with lots of glass and several decorative elements. . Stated that there will be lOon-site parking spaces while 11 are required. Due to the small size of this building, staff feels this proj ect is well parked. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 4 . Added that a Tree Removal Permit to remove four trees on the site is also sought. These trees are located within the proposed building footprint and would create a hardship to the applicant to retain. These trees would be replaced at a one to one ratio. Advised that SARC reviewed this project on March 23rd. Recommended that the Commission adopt a Resolution to approve the Planned Development Permit and a Resolution to approve the Tree Removal Permit to allow the removal of four trees. Stated he was available for questions. . . . Commissioner Hernandez asked staff if any concerns are raised by the shortage of parking by one space. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied that this project is to be occupied by the property owners for operation of their business, Shanel' s Dried Flowers. While a straight calculation using Code parking requirements calls for 11 spaces, staff feels that 10 spaces are adequate for this proj ect. Commissioner Alderete pointed out a problem with Condition No.1 O. Senior Planner GeoffI. Bradley suggested an edit to correct the wording of this Condition. Commissioner Gibbons presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed the project on March 23rd. . SARC was supportive after a lengthy discussion regarding parking, placement of building and trees. . Added that good discussions occurred and the applicant was cooperative. . While there were concerns about being one parking space short, the bringing of the building forward on the site, nearer the street, is considered a plus. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Chair Doorley stated that parking may work in this case but expressed concerns that oftentimes parking gets crunched in competition with providing adequate landscaping, saying that the Commission consistently gives in on the issue of parking. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hernandez, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission took the following actions: 1. Adopted Resolution No. 3553 recommending approval of a Planned Development Permit (PLN2004-16) to allow the construction of a new retail/office building of 2,400 square feet and 2. Adopted Resolution No. 3554 recommending approval of a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2004-20) to remove four protected trees on property owned by Mick Dudas and Melany Moore-Dudas located at 1865 S. Winchester Boulevard, and Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 5 3. Found this project to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry None None None NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair Doorley advised that Council would consider this item at its May 4, 2004, meeting for final action. *** Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.6 into the record. 6. PLN2004-07 (S) PLN2004-18 (SA) PLN2004-19 (SA) PLN2004-26 (TRP) PLN2004-33 (UP) Schmidt, S. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Stephan Schmidt, on behalf of The Bergman Companies, for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2004-07) to allow the construction of two new two-story commercial retail buildings; a Sign Program (PLN2004-18); a Sign Application (PLN2004-19) for a freeway-oriented sign; a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2004-26) to allow the removal of 54 trees and a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2004-33) to allow late night uses on property owned by Lynn A. Buzolich et allocated at 525 E. Hamilton Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: May 4, 2004. Project Planner: Melinda Denis, Planner I Ms. Melinda Denis, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of two new commercial retail buildings, a Sign Program for six signs, a Sign Exception for a freeway-oriented sign, a Tree Removal Permit for removal of 53 trees and a Conditional Use Permit for late night uses. . Described the zoning as C-2-S (General Commercial) and the General Plan Land Use designation as General Commercial. . Said that the existing building on the site is 117,911 square feet and was built in 1947 with an expansion in 1969. Surrounding land uses include single-family residential to the north, commercial to the south, commercial and multiple-family residential to the east and Highway 17 to the west. . Described a series of meetings held in preparation for this project including a Planning Commission Study Session on March 9, a Neighborhood Meeting on March 25, a second Planning Commission Study Session on March 30 and a second Neighborhood Meeting on April 8th. . Listed the proposed site plan as including 22 percent building coverage, 14 percent landscaping and 64 percent paving. Building A would house Kohl's. It is proposed as a two-story, 98,540 square foot building located at the north end ofthe property, 25 feet from Almarida and 375 feet from the adjacent single-family residence to the north. Building B Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 6 . would house Breuners and be located at the southern part of the site facing Hamilton Avenue. It would consist of a 59,586 square foot first floor and 13,500 square foot basement for a total of75,086 square feet. Said that staff is recommending that the driveway at the southeast property line be eliminated to provide a landscape buffer to the adjacent residential property. Described the parking as 641 shared parking spaces. Eighteen (18) are handicapped, 257 are compact and 366 are standard spaces. Under the current Code, the parking ratio is one space for every 200 square feet of gross floor area, which equals a requirement 791. Under the new Code, the ratio for retail/warehouse uses would be one for every 300 square feet, which results in a requirement for 560 spaces. Using a retail ratio of one space for every 250 square feet would result in 633 space requirement. The current proposal for 641 spaces equals one space for every 245 square feet, which staff finds adequate to serve this site. Stated that the site was re-landscaped in 1985 but that the trees and shrubs on the property are in poor condition and will be removed, including 53 trees. Fourteen (14) percent of the site will be landscaped while the C-2 zoning requires a minimum of 10 percent. A condition of approval requires that a final landscape plan be submitted. A conceptual plan calls for 274 new trees or a five to one replacement ratio. Two large magnolia trees are to be retained (depicted as Tree #2 and Tree #3 on the Arborist Report. Described the signs as: 0 Sign A, a wall sign that faces Hamilton Avenue at 182 square feet. 0 Sign B, a wall sign that faces Almarida Avenue at 182 square feet. 0 Sign C, a wall sign that faces Hamilton Avenue at 282 square feet. 0 Sign D, a wall sign that faces Highway 17 at 282 square feet. 0 Sign E, a monument sign that faces Hamilton Avenue at 50 square feet and 20 foot high. 0 Sign F, a freeway pylon sign that faces Highwayl7 at 75 feet high and 360 square feet. Staff recommends this sign be limited to 50 feet in height. Explained that Ordinance allows one wall sign except for corner lots where an additional wall sign is allowed if a freestanding sign does not identify a business. Therefore, one 50 square foot sign would be permitted for Building A and Building B facing Hamilton with a second wall sign or freestanding sign based on being a corner lot. Pointed out that many of the requested signs exceed maximums allowed (square foot and heights) by right under Code. Sign D requires a Sign Exception and Council approval for the freeway-oriented sign. Staff recommends that Sign E be reduced to a 14-foot height. Staff finds that the freeway sign can be justified if reduced to 50 feet in height, similar to Fry's, Campbell Inn and Pruneyard Inn. Staff believes the second wall sign for Building A (facing the freeway) is unnecessary. Reported that the applicant is also seeking a Conditional Use Permit to allow late night uses during approximately 30 days during the holiday shopping season in November and December. Staff finds this proposal to be appropriate for retail. A condition will be imposed that requires review if problems with these late hours are raised and the Community Development Director would be able to immediately reduce hours of operation to solve the problems. Explained that a request for proposals was sent for a traffic study for this site. Fehr & Peers was selected to perform a traffic analysis. The Hamilton Avenue/Highway 17 . . . . . . . . . Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 7 . intersection would reach an LOS F during weekday peak P.M. hours, which is a significant impact. Improvements required include widening the southbound off ramp to three left turns, one through lane and one right turn lane. Additionally, the applicant is required to contribute $275,000 to the cost of widening this intersection. A neighborhood traffic analysis was performed and found that there would not be a substantial impact. Measures developed by Planning and Public Works staff include: 0 Install three new "No Right Turn" signs at project driveway. 0 Install two new "No Left Turn" signs at the Elephant Bar driveways. 0 Install new "No Through Trucks" sign at northbound Almarida Drive. 0 Remove existing two speed tables on Almarida Drive and replace with three new speed humps. 0 Design project driveways to discourage right hand turns onto Almarida Drive. 0 Evaluate neighborhood traffic issues six months and one year after store opening. 0 Install perimeter fencing along portions of Hamilton Avenue and Almarida Drive to limit pedestrian access to and from the parking lot from off-site. Advised that several staff members and consultants are also present: Bob Kass, Public Works Director, Matthew Jue, Traffic Engineer, Kristianne Choy, Traffic Consultant with Fehr & Peers, as well as the applicants. Chair Doorley asked whether the 13,000 square feet of basement storage space is counted as usable space. Is it potentially future showroom or retail space. Planner Melinda Denis replied that under the proposal this space is limited to storage. More parking would be required to change that space into useable space. Commissioner Hernandez asked whether the mitigation traffic measure to contribute a dollar amount for the off-ramp expansion is sufficient or if the actual implementation of the expansion is required. Planner Melinda Denis replied implementation would not be required prior to occupancy. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley advised that this off-ramp expansion would be a City- sponsored project that requires interfacing with CalTrans. Commissioner Hernandez asked what the likelihood is that this will actually occur. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley deferred this to the Public Works Department and Traffic Engineer Matthew Jue. Commissioner Hernandez asked what the estimated cost for this off-ramp expansion might be. Traffic Engineer Matthew Jue replied that using the Measure B project as an example, this cost could be approximately $700,000. Commissioner Hernandez asked what would happen if this expansion were not to happen. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied that under CEQA, the City would have to come back with revised mitigation measures and revisit this matter. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 8 Commissioner Hernandez sought clarification that this issue must be revisited under the requirements of CEQA. Senior Planner GeoffI. Bradley replied yes. Commissioner Gibbons sought clarification that the $275,000 provided by the applicant is to finance mitigations to traffic impacts in general. City Attorney William Seligmann replied no. The condition requires the funds to be used on the off-ramp expansion. Commissioner Gibbons mentioned that seven to eight mitigation measures are proposed and questioned how these mitigations are funded. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied that the mitigation measures are proposed for Neighborhood Traffic Management Measures. These are existing problems and issues raised at the two neighborhood meetings. Some would be City funded and some would be developer funded. Commissioner Gibbons pointed out that several previous Conditions requmng CalTrans cooperation have not been met with other projects. Asked if a lack of this off-ramp improvement in the future would prohibit this project in the future. Director Sharon Fierro deferred this question to Bob Kass, Public Works Director. Mr. Robert Kass, Public Works Director: . Explained that if this project is approved by the Commission with a Condition of Approval requiring the financial participation of $275,000 by this applicant, these funds would be folded into the City's Capital Improvement Program as an identified project. With these funds, the City would proceed to do initial engineering plans on this improvement. If it is not possible to implement this off-ramp expansion, the City would have to come back to the Planning Commission to modify the Conditions of Approval. . Assured that staff would be moving aggressively forward to implement this off-ramp expanSIOn. . Pointed out that the Traffic Study is identifying existing conditions and taking into account approved projects to date, not all of which have yet been constructed, including the Creekside Hotel, Marriott Hotel and the Light Rail Station. . Added that a lack of the off-ramp expansion would not impact the approvals already passed. Commissioner Gibbons asked about the LOS (Level of Service) F ranking achieved with this project. Public Works Director Bob Kass replied that there is a projected LOS F with the approved projects, Kohl's and related general growth. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 9 Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley added that there is a 1.5 percent general growth level. Commissioner Gibbons asked whether the dedication of land for the off-ramp expansion is required in the Conditions of Approval. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied yes. Commissioner Gibbons asked about the sign package and clarification on the actual request since Breuner's has a two-line sign. Planner Melinda Denis clarified that the size of the "Breuners" lettering is 132 square feet and the size of the "Home Furnishings" lettering is 50 square feet for a total of 182 square feet. Commissioner Gibbons asked if the temporary signs and banner signs are part of this program. Planner Melinda Denis replied no. No temporary signs are being approved with this action. The signs include building wall signs, monument sign and freeway pylon sign. Commissioner Hernandez pointed out that 50 square feet is the current maximum allowable sign space under Code. Questioned whether the two lines for the Breuners sign represents two separate signs. Planner Melinda Denis replied no. This is considered one sign with the square footage added up. Commissioner Gibbons asked about the size of the Home Depot signs. Planner Melinda Denis said that this data was not brought to this meeting. Commissioner Hernandez asked about the Traffic Study Impact Analysis and how significant this analysis is for this overall project. How much weight should be given to this information. City Attorney William Seligmann replied that the weight given to any of the information provided is at the discretion of the Planning Commission. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley added that this information is considered very important, given the location and existing traffic patterns. This is a large project. Commissioner Gibbons presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on March 23rd and March 30th. The Planning Commission held a Study Session on March 30th. . Reported that SARC's recommendations include the study of an alternative west elevation with articulation and a link to the community. This includes studying additional architectural detail for the Breuners building and reducing the freeway pylon sign to 50 square feet. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.6. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 10 Mr. Stephan Schmidt, Applicant: . Thanked the Planning Commission and staff for their consideration. . Stated that he knows this site well and that it is proposed to house two tenants, Kohl's and Breuners. . Informed that Breuners has been located in Campbell for employment opportunities and serving as a landmark business. family-oriented business with a history of community outreach. revitalize this corner. several decades, giving Kohl's is a newcomer, a This redevelopment will Mr. Bill Parrish, 1227 N. Central Avenue: . Identified himself as a representative of a homeowners association for the neighborhood, with 800 plus households. . Stated his respect for this community and this Planning Commission. . Said that the best use of this land must take into account the interests of the business itself and the residents of the area. . Said that this represents high impact retail with entrances and exits on residential streets. . Declared his disbelief that 357 cars per hour would not have a significant impact on this street. . Opined that the traffic mitigation measures proposed are laughable, just three to four signs and a couple of speed bumps. . Pointed out that people ignore the existing signs already. . Said that this proposal is a bad idea. . Added that he would have no problem with housing or office uses on this lot. . Suggested that the greatest impact would be on David and Central and that it would be a major impact. . Suggested that there be entrance access directly from Hamilton Avenue. Commissioner Gibbons asked whether the Homeowners Association is an active organization and how many households are active. Mr. Bill Parrish replied that he considers them all to be active. They have a newsletter and meetings are held. Commissioner Gibbons asked for the typical attendance at meetings. Mr. Bill Parrish replied between 80 and 100 people. He added that Police representatives from both San Jose and Campbell are invited to attend their HOA meetings. Ms. Nancy Borowitz, 801 Monica Lane: . Gave a personal anecdote whereby she had to wait 11 minutes to accomplish seven-tenths of a mile. She added that at one point there were just six cars at the light and she still did not make that light. . Said that she is very concerned about traffic issues and that none of the Traffic Study discussed cut-through traffic. . Added that she also has concern with the proposed hours of operation and that she feels sorry for all those who live in this area. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 11 . Pointed out that Hamilton Avenue is the only off-ramp from Highway 17 to access the City of Campbell. . Suggested that this off-ramp will become congested like the one at Highway 85 and Almaden Expressway. . Added that the City should not have to pay the costs of widening the off-ramp. Kohl's should pay the entire amount. . Concluded by saying this project would generate too much traffic for this area. Mr. R. Dethlefsen, ll3l Monica Lane: . Said that traffic in his neighborhood is too fast, averaging between 40 to 60 miles per hour. . Advised that traffic is a big problem in the area. Commissioner Gibbons asked Mr. Dethlefsen whether he participated in the two neighborhood meetings. Mr. R. Dethlefsen replied yes. Commissioner Gibbons asked if the proposed traffic mitigations would help alleviate his concerns. Mr. R. Dethefsen replied that people do not pay attention to the existing traffic signs. Mr. Gene Oliverio, 930 Monica Lane, Campbell: . Described his property as being on the corner of Monica and Payne. . Advised that traffic through the area is 60 miles per hour. . Stated that cut-through traffic and Castlemont School traffic are a big problem right now. . Said that there are four stop signs for which no one stops now. An enhanced police presence recently has helped enforce this area. He loves to see that the Police are giving out lots of tickets. . Said that he would love to have a Kohl's in Campbell but that this is not the right place for it. . Informed that his driveway is located off of Payne and that he has almost been hit a number of times while backing out of his property. . Added that the traffic goes by so fast he is unable to take down license plate numbers as suggested by Police so that they can send warning letters out to those drivers. . Reiterated that he has nothing against Kohl's. Mr. Wayne Prescott, 873 N. Central Avenue: . Agreed that Kohl's would be a welcome addition to the City of Campbell but that this is not the best site to locate Kohl's. . Pointed out that the Mervyn's store site is likely to become available soon. . Said that with the average time the Kohl's shopping spends in this store, there is potential for 900 cars at a time accessing this site. . Said that the Code calls for 791 spaces while the proposal is for 640. . Cautioned that the traffic study was done in March and not during a busier period of time. . Asked that the Commission give consideration of traffic impacts during peak travel times. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page l2 Mr. Mark Kennedy, 455 Payne Avenue: . Expressed concern about the almost 2000 additional trips and the impacts on the intersection at Almarida and Hamilton. . Pointed out that even at times where there is no traffic, there is no way to flush cars out at this light and every light backs up on Hamilton. . Said that the Traffic Study is not adequate. Ms. Kathy Stapp, 962 N. Harrison Avenue: . Agreed with the traffic concerns raised. . Reminded that the Almarida to Highway 17 traffic also includes Home Depot traffic. . Advised that she has been told that the lights would not be adjusted due to impacts that would result on Hamilton Avenue. Therefore, traffic will back up into the neighborhood. . Declared it ridiculous to state that there are no impacts. Ms. Virginia Morse, 601 Almarida Drive: . Identified herself as the manager of the Franciscan Apartments. . Said this project will not work here as traffic is bad enough already. Mr. Leo Boyd, 945 Torero Plaza: . Said that other communities have turned down big box stores. . Said that this is a small community and small is good. . Opined that Stoddard's is a white elephant. . Asked if this would be a union store with good paying jobs. . Said that traffic obviously does not work and that he would like to see the Traffic Engineer determine when traffic clogs. Mr. John Salberg, 1254 N. Central Avenue: . Agreed with previous speakers about the traffic problems ofthe area. . Said he lived on Central Avenue his entire life, about 40 years. . Said that Home Depot, Fry's, Santana Rowand Valley Fair have impacted the traffic. . Said that a point is reached when a neighborhood loses its flavor, provision of a safe environment and housing for families. . Said that tax revenue is less important than the potential of having a child hurt or killed as a result of traffic impacts. Mr. Mark Bergman, Applicant: . Said that he has been in development for 27 years. . Pointed out that trips are estimated at peak hours. . Said that a furniture store does not generate the same number of trips. . Advised that the Traffic Study was done independently by a consultant hired by the City. . Said that many meetings have been held and that this parcel is 8.5 acres. While the City requires a minimum of 10 percent landscaping, they are proposing 25 percent. . Said that they are giving as much as any developer would and that alternative uses may be less desirable such as liquor sales or coffee shops. . Said that while conditions are not ideal, this is a commercially zoned property and that Kohl's and Breuners would be preferable to many other potential uses. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 13 Commissioner Hernandez told Mr. Mark Bergman that he appreciates the work done with staff. Asked if the timing of this development is hard or soft. Mr. Mark Bergman replied hard. Commissioner Hernandez asked Mr. Mark Bergman whether an opportunity exists to continue their work with the City and staff. Is this a possibility or out of the question. Mr. Mark Bergman said that it is very possible to continue to work with the City. Added that other alternatives have been discussed and that there are a few alternatives out there. Said that he had thought that the answers were brought forward to answer neighborhood concerns. Commissioner Hernandez asked Mr. Mark Bergman if there is likelihood of exploring a smaller building since the average Kohl's store is 80,000 square feet and what they propose is 12,000 square feet larger. Mr. Mark Bergman said that the site development square footage would be reduced by 30,000 from existing conditions. At the same time, lots of revenues, site enhancements and traffic controls would be implemented. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that the total proposed square footage is 171,500 square feet. Senior Planner GeoffI. Bradley gave the actual proposed square footage as 171,640. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that this is significantly larger than what is currently on site. Mr. Mark Bergman said that most of the existing space is 117,000 square feet. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley reminded that most of this existing space is warehouse space. Mr. Mark Bergman added that the warehousing component of Breuners would be eliminated with this new project. Commissioner Alderete: . Advised that he uses Salmar Avenue to access Highway 17 each day. . Said that it is frustrating to wait for this light at Salmar and that he is sensitive to that situation. . Said that there is a difference between personal experiences versus a traffic study. Mr. Mark Bergman: . Agreed that there is a traffic issue there and that signs, signals and speed bumps exist. . Advised that he drove the area today and has visited the site between 26 and 30 times at various hours. . Suggested that the Hamilton Avenue situation is a timing issue and easier to correct. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 14 . Said that the property owner could offer an easement for the off-ramp at market rates. Said that traffic has been building and did not happen overnight. . Commissioner Rocha: . Said that he wants to see Kohl's engage with the neighborhood regarding traffic concerns. . Said that he has lots of concerns about traffic. . Agrees that a number of things are inherited. Mr. Mark Bergman said that he would not endorse this project if he thought it was wrong. Mr. Larry Langohr, Applicant: . Thanked staff, the Planning Commission and residents for their participation in this proposal. . Said that they have developed 27 different proposals to reach this one and learned from each one. . Said that this site is right at the gate to the City and that this property would benefit from being updated. . Advised that the Campbell community would join 11 communities in the Bay Area with a new Kohl's. . Pointed out that revenues to the City, both development and entitlement fees, would equal nearly a million dollars and the Traffic Impact Fee is $275,000. Sales tax revenues would generate about $400,000 per year. While this won't solve all traffic problems, it can help solve some of them. Money in City coffers help pay for extra Police who can deal specifically with traffic in this area. . Said that this is a good development and hopes in the future everyone will agree. Commissioner Alderete pointed out the three SARC recommendations including alterations to the west elevation, alterations to add architectural details and reduction of the pylon sign to 50 feet in height. Mr. Larry Langohr: . Said that they could work with staff to make adjustments to the architecture and they are willing to tweak the design. . Said that they are also willing to look at the Breuners building eyebrow feature and are willing to make minor adjustments to the architecture. . Stated that he is willing to reduce the pylon sign to a 50-foot height. Commissioner Gibbons stated that many people do not realize just how much effort goes into a development. Mr. Bill Parrish, 1227 N. Central Avenue: . Said that he wished he had $400,000 to put into City coffers himself instead of this project. . Said he does not question anyone's integrity. Some have a financial stake, others get paid to participate, while others live here. . Stated he would prefer an assessment on his property to having a wrong project constructed here. This represents a square post in a round hole. It does not fit. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 15 Mr. John Salberg, 1254 N. Central Avenue: . Said that there is a financial impact at stake. . Said that it does not matter how many revisions the developer has undergone. . Said it is insulting to discuss $400,000 in tax revenues as a rationale to approve this project. . Said that this project affects all who live in this neighborhood. . Stated that there needs to be another alternative. Ms. Nancy Borowitz, 801 Monica Lane: . Stated that restaurants don't bring fast traffic. . Said that no traffic issues on Payne and Monica have been dealt with and suggested that this be reviewed again. . Said that some of her neighbors were on vacation this week and unable to attend this meeting. . Pointed out an incorrect mailing address for her notification. Mr. Wayne Prescott, 873 E. Central Avenue: . Stated that his address was also wrong. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.6. Commissioner Francois asked Traffic Engineer Matthew Jue what the timing cycle is on Almarida Avenue. Traffic Engineer Matthew Jue said it depends on the time of day. The signal allows 30 seconds for Almarida to clear the intersection. Commissioner Francois: . Said that with new trips added, Almarida Avenue will be a nightmare. . Questioned if at the six and/or one year review period problems are determined, what would occur. . Suggested that the re-timing of the signal at Hamilton and Almarida be considered and that the Police Department be involved in enforcing the speeds on these neighborhood streets. Commissioner Gibbons: . Said that the traffic on Hamilton, between Winchester and Bascom, is reasonably okay. . Added that there are backups on Salmar and the Highway entrances and the signal at Almarida. . Asked how many cars can clear the intersection during a 30 second signal. Traffic Engineer Matthew Jue replied if there is no opposing through traffic, approximately 15 vehicles could clear in that time. Commissioner Gibbons pointed out that residents have pointed out that it is difficult for six cars to get through. Asked how long a intersection cycle lasts. Traffic Engineer Matthew Jue replied that the cycles here are two minutes. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 16 Commissioner Gibbons said it is clear that more time is needed. Said that it seems as if traffic would substantially increase at this signal and asked about the Salmar signal. Traffic Engineer Matthew Jue said that Salmar carries more traffic than does Almarida. Chair Doorley: . Stated that Kohl's is a positive thing but not enough is being done to deal with the exit flow. People will not be able to comfortably exit the site and will push traffic onto neighborhood streets. . Said that the off-ramp from Highway 17 is not the problem, getting out of Almarida Avenue is the problem. . Said that other measures need to be measured now as the exit strategy is not sufficient. Commissioner Gibbons: . Said that other issues should be evaluated in addition to traffic including architecture, landscaping, on-site parking ratio, signage, on-street parking and construction recycling. Commissioner Hernandez: . Agreed that there are lots of issues but perhaps the Commission should cut to the chase. The biggest concern is traffic. . Reminded that the entire Planning Commission lives in the City of Campbell. . Said that issues from the Traffic Study that arise include a definition of significant versus non-significant. Data from commercially zoned properties have to be looked at to help solve that equation for the developer and the community. . Said that he struggles with this issue as there are impacts and questions what is an acceptable level oftraffic impacts. . Stated his belief that there is a very high level of significance to this traffic study and that he has a lot of problems with this study, which was based upon Kohl's data from other states (Kansas and Virginia) and is from 1997 (7 years old) and the stores are smaller than the Kohl's store proposed for Campbell. . Said that the whole foundation of the Study is questionable. . Said that it is important to show information that leads us to believe that this data is accurate for the evaluation of this site. . Agreed with the comments that Kohl's would be a good addition to the community but that the evidence to date does not support this use on this site. He is not convinced that the necessary data is in front of the Commission. . Concluded that he does not see how he can support this project. Chair Doorley: . Stated that they would never get a Traffic Study that gets the Commission what it wants to know. These studies use a different language. . Said that he has resigned himselfto more gut check analysis. Commissioner Rocha said that he senses a rush element and that he needs more time to digest the information provided. Pointed out that the Commission has not yet even addressed architectural and site details. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 17 Commissioner Gibbons said that if the Commission wants a postponement she would make such a motion. If the Commission moves forward this evening and turns this project down, it could go to Council on appeal. Council would not have benefit of Planning Commission input in that case. Commissioner Hernandez: . Suggested a continuance only if the likt;:lihood were high that additional useful information would be generated to help make a decision. If not viable or likely, the Commission should simply discuss issues and make a decision tonight. . Said that short of a new traffic study, not enough new information would be provided in his opinion and a decision tonight is preferable. Commissioner Francois: . Stated that wise decision making requires looking at impacts on the community. . Suggested the provision of new traffic data that reflects the actual project rather than data from another state. . Agreed that this is a good project but with impacts that are bad for the neighborhood. If these issues can be worked out, he can support it. Chair Doorley said that he is less interested in another traffic study than the provision of mitigations to solve traffic problems, including addressing the Hamilton and Almarida intersection, Almarida and David. This includes a requirement for specific measures. Commissioner Gibbons asked what could be done if this does not work. Asked if having another lane on Almarida without on-street parking is possible. Commissioner Roseberry: . Said that he agrees with a lot that has been said. . Agreed that there is a sense of being rushed to a decision. . Said that this is a big project with a major impact to the community. . Acknowledged that there are pre-existing traffic problems, which cannot be discounted. This project will make those conditions worse. . Questioned what can be done, are there options available. Stated that there is not enough information yet. Commissioner Gibbons said that the biggest problem is the LOS F rating for the one intersection. Commissioner Roseberry said that the Almarida and Hamilton Avenue intersection is the biggest problem area and that a broader sense of neighborhood traffic issues is necessary. Commissioner Gibbons: . Said that while she recognizes that many of the neighborhood traffic issues are unrelated to this project, the concerns could be expanded with this project. . Added that everyone is aware of the problem of accessing Home Depot from the Highway 17 off-ramp. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 18 . Advised that it is not fair, however, to hold this project hostage to pre-existing conditions but rather to make it into a part of the solution. Director Sharon Fierro pointed out that the Traffic Consultant is also in the audience. Ms. Kristianne Choy, Traffic Consultant, Fehr & Peers: . Informed the Commission that she is the one who prepared the traffic study. . Said that as an alternative to the Kohl's data, she could use the Trip Generation Data Handbook. However, this information does not necessary reflect California or current data. . Said she used the Kohl's data since this is a proposed Kohl's location. Commissioner Gibbons asked what LOS is considered unacceptable. Ms. Kristianne Choy replied that a LOS ofD is acceptable but a LOS ofF is unacceptable. Commissioner Hernandez asked if the data is as close as we can get? How close are we? What is an acceptable level of service and what are working definitions? Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied that while not formally adopted, these are better than using regional standards. Commissioner Hernandez asked if it is acceptable if at full capacity. Ms. Kristianne Choy replied that LOS D volumes are below capacity. Chair Doorley said that he would appreciate the thoughts of the applicant on the idea of a continuance versus a preference for taking a vote tonight that may be for denial. Mr. Larry Langohr: . Informed the Commission that timing of some of the transactions involved are key. . Said that there are several things working against them including the movement in the interest rates. Pointed out that when he began this process, the 10 year Treasury bond rate was 3.69 and is now 4.38. . Added that there is a sandwich lease, which must close. There is no leeway in that transaction. It cannot be extended. . Said if a productive session can be coordinated in a couple of days he could wait. He does not have two to three weeks. Commissioner Alderete: . Stated that he agrees with much that has been said, especially that traffic is the central stickler issue. . Advised that he recently attended a League of California Cities session on the topic of big box retailers. . Stated that Kohl's is a top-notch company and that he is in favor of a company of that caliber coming into Campbell. . Said that he has lived in Campbell for 25 years and grew up in this valley. He is sensitive to congestion and traffic flow issues. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 19 . Said that not all of the possible alternative traffic mitigation measures have been provided. Additional study is required as to what can be done to deal with the flow of traffic in this neighborhood. If the issues can be worked out, he would support the project. If not, he would support a continuance until firm answers can be provided. Commissioner Gibbons asked to which meeting a continuance should occur. Senior Planner GeoffI. Bradley replied April2ih. City Attorney William Seligmann advised that no new legal advertising would be required for this continuance. Commissioner Gibbons asked if this would give enough time to conduct a study session. Commissioner Francois expressed support for the project if traffic problems are properly mitigated. Suggested the possibility of eliminating parking on Almarida, saying that this project will not work like this. Chair Doorley said that he wants to support this project but has concerns. A couple of days won't solve these concerns. If the applicant wants, they can take their chances with Council on appeal. Commissioner Francois said that he does not want to see the applicant hung out to dry. Said that a viable solution should be found. A two-week continuance is not unreasonable. Commissioner Alderete asked why it would take so long. Making decisions about which calming measures should be implemented makes sense. The Commission can revisit some information already prepared. Commissioner Gibbons suggested a Study Session before the next meeting. Director Sharon Fierro pointed out that the next meeting is just two weeks away. Public Works Director Bob Kass: . Stated that staff would bring more information to Council regarding these traffic issues at Almarida regardless of what action the Planning Commission takes. The Salmar and Hamilton Avenue intersection would have significant impacts while the bulk of discussion has been the Almarida and Hamilton Avenue intersection. . Said that mitigations for development impacts have been developed as well as for cut through traffic mitigations. There is not a lot more that can be done at this point. . Added that more measures could be added later if problems come up, including perhaps two left turn lanes out of Almarida onto Hamilton. . Said that there may also be broader concerns and, from a staff standpoint, Salmar can be dealt with as well as neighborhood intrusion issues and Almarida issues. Commissioner Hernandez said that the focus on Almarida is based on the general concern about traffic in the area. Said that a solution is needed now, not is six months time. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 20 Commissioner Roseberry said that it wouldn't really be known what impacts will be until the stores are opened. If Almarida is changed, it may actually increase cut-through traffic from Almarida to reach Highway 17. Commissioner Gibbons said that she supports the motion to postpone to the next meeting with a Study Session to be held to discuss further the issue of traffic. Chair Doorley reopened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.6. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission continued consideration of the development at 525 E. Hamilton Avenue to the next regular meeting of April 27, 2004, by the following roll call vote. AYES: Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: Alderete and Doorley ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None *** Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.4 into the record. 4. PLN2004-30 Sullivan, J. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Jim Sullivan, on behalf of Braddock & Logan Services Inc., for a Minor Modification (PLN2004-30) to a previously-approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2002-95) to allow a change in the approved model for Lot 23 at the Chamberlin Estates development on property owned by Braddock & Logan Services Inc. located at 1457 Hacienda Avenue in an R-I-9 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. A Negative Declaration was previously adopted for this project. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, Planner I Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Modification to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit. . Pointed out that Exhibit #5 illustrates the proposed change in model for Lot 23. . Explained that staff believes enough difference in appearance is achieved and is supportive of this request. Commissioner Gibbons presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on March 23rd and was supportive of this proposed change. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.4. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 21 Ms. Meg Stein, Representative, San Tomas Neighborhood Association: . Stated that the ST ANA has no problems with this proposed change. Mr. Jim Sullivan, Applicant: . Joked that his proposal results in no additional traffic. . Stated that he is happy to work with the City of Campbell and that he has received a wonderful response to this project. . Announced that he is planning to become a Campbell resident in June with his wife, two kids with a third on the way. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.4. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rocha, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3555 approving a Minor Modification (PLN2004-30) to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2002-95) to allow a change in the approved model for Lot 23 at the Chamberlin Estates development on property owned by Braddock & Logan Services Inc. located at 1457 Hacienda Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry None None None NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair Doorley advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk in 10 days. *** Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.2 into the record. 2. PLN2004-08 (ZC) PLN2004-09 (PD) PLN2004-10 (PM) Shakeri, O. Continued Public Hearing (from the meeting of March 23, 2004) to consider the application of Mr. amid Shakeri, on behalf of the Ridgecrest Group, for a Zone Change (PLN2004-08) from R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development); a Planned Development Permit (PLN2004-09) to allow the construction of three townhome units and a Tentative Parcel Map (PLN2004-10) to create three residential lots on property owned by Mr. Hadi Ghafouri located at 243 W. Rincon Avenue in a R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: May 4, 2004. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner Commissioner Gibbons recused herself as she lives within noticing distance ofthis project site. Mr. Geoff I. Bradley, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 22 . Advised that this property currently consists of a single-family residence that will be demolished. The site is surrounded on all sides by residential uses. The Land Use is Medium-Density Residential where four units maximum would be allowed. This proposal is consistent with the General Plan. . Described the application as including a Zone Change from R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development) to allow individual ownership; a Parcel Map and Planned Development to construct three townhome units, which are architecturally detailed in a French Chateau style. The FAR is .74, reduced from the previously proposed .77. . Recommended approval. Commissioner Hernandez presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on two occasions, March 23rd and April 13th. . Advised that the FAR was reduced to .74. SARC was split on the issue of FAR. . Added that the applicant also provide illustration of the window locations on the adjacent properties. . Stated that this project fits in well within this neighborhood. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Mr. Omid Shakeri, Applicant: . Stated that he is available for questions. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rocha, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission took the following actions for property located at 243 W. Rincon Avenue, finding the project to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA, and: 1. Adopted Resolution No. 3556 recommending that the City Council approve a Zone Change (PLN2004-08) from R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development); 2. Adopted Resolution No. 3557 recommending approval of a Planned Development Permit (PLN2004-09) to allow the construction of three townhome units; and 2 Adopted Resolution No. 3558 recommending approval of a Tentative Parcel Map (PLN2004-10) to create three residential lots, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Francois, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Gibbons Chair Doorley advised that Council would consider this item at its May 4, 2004, meeting for final action. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 23 Commissioner Gibbons returned to the Council Chambers and dais to rejoin the Commission. *** 1. CIP 2004-2011 Staff Public Hearing to consider the City of Campbell's 2004-2011 Capital Improvement Plan for citywide projects. These projects are Categorically Exempt. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: May 4, 2004. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that each year a seven year Capital Improvement Plan is developed. . Added that the Commission's focus is to find this plan consistent with the City's General Plan and that the proposed projects ofthe CIP are Exempt under CEQA. . Stated that the majority or the projects represent maintenance of existing facilities. The Animal Shelter will be located in Santa Clara with the City of Santa Clara taking the leadership role. Therefore, no action is required on that project. . Stated that an environmental assessment was done and that staff is recommending that the CIP be found to be Categorically Exempt. Commissioner Roseberry asked if he should recuse himself, as one project is located within his property, the Smith Creek Improvements. Smith Creek runs right through his property. City Attorney William Seligmann said that the Commission could either segregate that project out and Commissioner Roseberry could recuse himself from that one item or he could simply recuse himself from voting on the entire CIP. Commissioner Roseberry recused himself and left the dais and Council Chambers for the remainder of this item. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3559 finding the 2004-2011 Capital Improvement Plan to be consistent with the City's General Plan and recommending that Council find the projects of the CIP to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez and Rocha NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Roseberry Chair Doorley advised that Council would consider this item at its May 4, 2004, meeting for final action. Planning Commission Minutes of April 13, 2004 Page 24 *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, was accepted as presented with the following additions: . Advised that Council took second reading of the Zoning Code Update. The Code will be in effect on May 6, 2004. . Announced that the Animal Shelter agreement with the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority will be located in an existing building in Santa Clara. . Said that the April 2ih meeting will include three items, including the continuation of the Kohl's project. . Reminded that she leaves for vacation on Friday. . Asked the City Attorney to discuss the Brown Act. City Attorney William Seligmann said that since this subject is not on the agenda he would be willing to have individual discussions with the Commissioners about any questions regarding compliance with the Brown Act. It can also be added to the next agenda for further discussion as a Commission. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:58 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of AP; 27, 2004~... SUBMITTED BY: ~Á/I\ orinne A. ShInn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: ATTEST: