Loading...
PC Min 08/27/2002CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY AUGUST 27, 2002 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of August 27, 2002, was called to order at 7:32 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Acting Chair Doorley, and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Acting Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: George Doorley Bob Alderete Elizabeth Gibbons Brad Jones Commissioners Absent: Chair: Vice Chair: Tom Francois Joseph D. Hernandez Staff Present: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Associate Planner: Planner II: Planner I: City Attorney: Reporting Secretary: Sharon Fierro Geoff I. Bradley Tim J. Haley Darcy Smith Stephanie Willsey William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Jones, the Planning Commission minutes of August 13, 2002, were approved. (4- 0-2; Commissioners Francois and Hernandez were absent.) COMMUNICATIONS. There were no communication items. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. Planning Commission Minutes of August 27, 2002 Page 2 ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARING Acting Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record. PLN2002-80 Munteanu, A. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Adrian Munteanu for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2002-80) to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on property owned by Adrian and Mariana Munteanu at 1146 Steinway Avenue in an R- 1-10 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley Associate Planner. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicant is seeking a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on the south side of Steinway Avenue. · Said that the applicant received an approval for the same residence in April 2000. · Added that while the Public Works Department had recommended deferral of street improvements in 2000, now they are recommending the installation of rolled curbs immediately. This rolled curb is intended to transition to the vertical curb already in place on the adjacent property. · Informed that the proposal is consistent with the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. · Recommended approval. Acting Chair Doorley asked about the proposed density at 3.9 when the allowable is 3.5. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley explained that this is a legal lot of record although it is smaller than the 10,000 square foot minimum required with the R-l-10,000 Zoning. This lot consists of 9,392 square feet. However, since this is a legal lot of record, the owner is entitled to construct a dwelling unit on this lot. Acting Chair Doorley asked for clarification that this proposal does not represent an Exception. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied that density generally comes into play with subdivisions rather than development of a single lot. Acting Chair Doorley presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · SARC reviewed this proposal on August 13, 2002, and was supportive with the requirement to add trees in the rear yard to buffer the flag lot. Acting Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Planning Commission Minutes of August 27, 2002 Page 3 Mr. Larry Gratton, 1136 Steinway Avenue, Campbell: · Stated that he found the proposed home design to be okay. Said that when he subdivided his property about 18 years ago, he was required to install curbs, gutters and sidewalks. · Asked that this project also be required to do so as he had been assured in the past that these improvements would be required with future development. Acting Chair Doorley advised that SARC had discussed these improvements at its meeting and that it is a "hot topic" overall in this area. Asked staff for additional information. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley advised that the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan calls for curbs and gutters but not sidewalks. Originally, this area required sidewalks. Director Sharon Fierro added that Steinway had local flooding problems. The original requirement for full curbs, gutters and sidewalks was overturned after public comment during review of the STANP against having such improvements. Added that any deviation from the STANP would have to come from Council and not the Planning Commission. Commissioner Gibbons mentioned that this decision on improvements was made following a prolonged public hearing process. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley clarified that this project will require rolled curb with gutter but no sidewalk. Mr. Larry Gratton said that he would like to see a straight up vertical curb rather than a rolled curb. Acting Chair George Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Alderete asked about the proposed tree to be retained and where it was situated on the property. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley admitted that he was not certain. Commissioner Alderete asked if the FAR proposed includes any allowances for being a substandard sized lot. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley advised that the FAR is the same for R-l-9 and R-l-10 and no allowances are being made in allowable FAR. Commissioner Alderete asked if staff rounds FAR numbers up or down. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied down. Acting Chair Doorley added that this neighbor could appeal the condition for rolled curb to Council. Reminded that the Commission does not have the authority to deviate from the STANP. Planning Commission MinuLcs of August 27, 2002 Page 4 City Attorney William Seligmann agreed that an appeal of the condition for the rolled curb would be an option. Commissioner Gibbons asked if the FAR reflected at .45 reflects the actual size of the lot or the Zoning allowance. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied the actual lot size. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Jones, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3450 granting a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2002-80) to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on property owned by Adrian and Mariana Munteanu located at 1146 Steinway Avenue and found this project to be Categorically Exempt, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Gibbons and Jones NOES: None ABSENT: Francois and Hernandez ABSTAIN: None Acting Chair Doorley advised that this action is final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Acting Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record. 2. PLN2002-82 Kelly, P. Public Heating to consider the application of Mr. Patric Kelly, on behalf of 46 N. Second Street Partners, for a Reinstatement/Extension of Approval (PLN2002-82) of a previously-approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2001-52) to allow an office conversion and addition to a residential structure located on property owned by 46 N. Second Street Partners, located at 46 N. Second Street in the C-3-S (Central Business District) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicant is seeking a Reinstatement of a previous Site and Architectural Review Permit and a one-year Extension to allow the conversion of an existing residence into an office with an addition. · Said that the applicant received original approval on June 12, 2001. · Added that Council approved a Parking Adjustment. · Informed that the original approval expired on July 3, 2002, although the applicant has submitted plans to the Building Division. · Said that there are no proposed changes from the original approval. Planning Commission MinuL,~s of August 27, 2002 Page 5 · Recommended approval of a Resolution granting a one-year Reinstatement/Extension of Approval for PLN2001-52. Commissioner Gibbons asked if there will be a replacement for the tree that has died. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley advised that there is a Condition of Approval requihng a Landscape Plan that will include a replacement tree of substantial size. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley reiterated that plans are in for plan check now. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that there is now the huge parking structure directly across the street and questioned if this impacts the number of parking provided versus required. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley informed the Commission that this applicant is required to pay for two spaces in the garage. Acting Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Acting Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3451 granting a Reinstatement/Extension of Approval (PLN2002-82) of a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2001-52) to allow an office conversion and addition to a residential structure located at 46 N. Second Street and found this project to be Categorically Exempt, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Gibbons and Jones NOES: None ABSENT: Francois and Hernandez ABSTAIN: None Acting Chair Doorley advised that this action is final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Acting Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record. Planning Commission 1Vlinutcs of August 27, 2002 Page 6 3. PLN2002-81 Nelson, J. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Jon Nelson for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2002-81) to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on property owned by A.W. and Helen Pegg located at 1490 Van Dusen Lane in an R-l-9 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, Planner I. Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicant is seeking a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow a new single-family residence at 1490 Van Dusen Lane, located on the east side of the street, across from Highway 85. · Added that the existing single-family residence will be removed. · Said that the proposed density at 3.3 units per gross acre is consistent with the General Plan. · Added that the proposal is consistent with the R-l-9 Zoning and San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan requirements. The new two-story single-family residence will include an attached three-car tandem style garage that gives the appearance of a two-car garage. The home will include typical elements to the area including hip and gable roof, use of composition shingle roofing and wood siding. There is no proposed removal of protected trees. Six new trees are required to be planted on site and are shown on the landscape plan. A Tree Protection Plan has been prepared. Acting Chair Doorley presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · Reported that SARC reviewed this proposal on August 13, 2002, and was supportive as presented. Acting Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Acting Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Alderete, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3452 granting a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2002-81) to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on property owned by A.W. and Helen Pegg located at 1490 Van Dusen Lane and found this project to be Categorically Exempt, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Gibbons and Jones NOES: None ABSENT: Francois and Hernandez ABSTAIN: None Acting Chair Doorley advised that this action is final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Planning Commission MinuLcs of August 27, 2002 Page 7 Acting Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No. 4 into the record. PLN2002-89 Kakebeen, R. Public Heating to consider the application of Mr. Rene Kakebeen, on behalf of Legacy Bank, N.A. (Proposed), for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2002-89) to establish a bank within an existing commercial building owned by Mr. Abbas Haghshenas located at 125 E. Campbell Avenue in the C-3-S (Central Business District) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Project Planner: Darcy Smith, Planner II. Ms. Darcy Smith, Planner II, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit with Parking Adjustment to allow the establishment of Legacy Bank (Proposed) within 6,153 square feet of an existing commercial building. · Added that this site was formerly occupied by Bank of America who vacated in 1997. The building was remodeled and two other buildings constructed. A Parking Exception was granted for Legacy Bank (Proposed) at another Downtown Campbell location. · Pointed out that this new bank can use existing vault and teller counters in this space. A new ATM machine will be installed on the exterior of the building. · Added that this proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use and the Central Business District Zoning, which allows banks with a Conditional Use Permit. · Advised that the applicant will need to obtain a Parking Adjustment, as required under the Campbell Municipal Code. In March 2002, Council found bank uses to be more similar to retail than office. The parking requirement difference between the two types of uses is 4.5 spaces. · Recommended approval of a Conditional Use Permit and the forwarding of a recommendation for Council to grant a Parking Adjustment. Acting Chair Doorley opened the Public Heating for Agenda Item No. 4. Mr. Frank Leamy, Applicant's Representative: · Stated that Legacy Bank (Proposed) is honored to be a part of Campbell and that they feel fortunate to have their bank in Campbell. Acting Chair Doorley closed the Public Heating for Agenda Item No. 4. Acting Chair Doorley asked staff to clarify why the Commission should consider this use by retail standards rather than the previous office standard. Planner Darcy Smith: · Replied that while the space is currently approved for office use, a bank functions more like a retail space than an office space. The current parking standards were based on practices 20 years ago. Today, most people use ATM machines, conduct on-line banking, use direct deposit services and/or cash checks at their local supermarket. With those Planning Commission Minutes of August 27, 2002 Page 8 reductions in people coming on site, a bank is more like retail than office use. The retail parking requirement is one space for every 300 square feet of space in the Downtown. Said that the proposal does not meet current office parking standards. However, there have been no complaints over parking at this location. Stated that a parking survey was recently conducted at the Gateway project. There were no complaints by the apartment residents. Acting Chair Doorley added that the new public parking structure is reasonably close now. Pointed out that the most recent use of this space was by a church. Planner Darcy Smith: · Agreed and pointed out that the site has been vacant for a while now. She added that Stacks Restaurant serves breakfast and lunch and not dinner, which limits its impact on the residents of the building. · Advised that the entire project site requires 82 parking spaces with 53 provided. However, the parking garage is now available. Acting Chair Doorley pointed out that local merchants could walk to this bank. Planner Darcy Smith said that local merchants are a target audience for this bank. Acting Chair Doorley asked who would control the proposed community bulletin board proposed for the existing window area in the current building. Planner Darcy Smith said she would defer this question to the applicant. Mr. Rene Kakebeen, Applicant, Legacy Bank (Proposed): · Stated that the big window in the former (and now future) vault area will be replaced with a bulletin board. The vault will be sealed up and secured again for vault use. However, they wanted to retain the illusion of a window for architectural interest from the street with the installation of this bulletin board. · Assured that the bulletin board would be for community use and that the bank would post the items and manage the timeliness of materials posted on it. Acting Chair Doorley asked what percentage of the bulletin board would consist of bank advertising information versus community and local events. Mr. Rene Kakebeen: · Replied that mostly the information posted would be community items and events. · Added that the bank will also have a Community Meeting Room that they will make available to local groups for after hours meetings. · Stressed that their intent is to be a "community" bank. · Described the number of clients they might see in a day as averaging between 20 and 25, each staying five to ten minutes. On a busy day, the number might be between 30 and 40 clients. · Stated that they will offer on-line banking, courier service for the pick up of deposits and automatic banking. Planning Commission Minutes of August 27, 2002 Page 9 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Gibbons, the Planning Commission took the following action: 1. Adopted Resolution No. 3453 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2002-89) to establish a bank within an existing commercial building owned by Mr. Abbas Haghshenas located at 125 E. Campbell Avenue 2. Adopted Resolution No. 3454 recommending approval of a Parking Adjustment to allow reduced parking space requirements for on-site parking spaces in conjunction with a Use Permit (PLN2002-89) to allow the establishment of a bank at 125 E. Campbell Avenue; and 3. Found the project to be Categorically Exempt, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Gibbons and Jones NOES: None ABSENT: Francois and Hernandez ABSTAIN: None Acting Chair Doorley advised that this action is final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Acting Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No. 5 into the record. 5. PLN2002-72 Collins Public Hearing to consider the Appeal of Ms. Jill Bakich Collins, on behalf of Equity Office - The Pruneyard, of an Administrative Decision by the Community Development Director for a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2002-72) to remove a 13-inch in diameter Chinese Elm tree on property owned by Equity Office located at 1875 S, Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Project Planner: Geoff I. Bradley, Senior Planner. Mr. Geoff I. Bradley, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the request is to remove a tree located within a raised planter bed in a plaza area surrounded by Hobee's, Camera Cinema 7, Boswell's and Campbell Coffee Roasting. · Described the tree as a 13-inch Chinese Elm tree, 20 feet high with a 45-foot canopy per Barrie Coates' arborist report, which also states the tree is in excellent health although it has had poor pruning done in the past. · Informed that the stated objectives for removal are that the tree limits the area for theater queuing and visibility of the theaters. · Outlined the three required findings. Two outright cannot be made, that the tree is diseased or a danger and/or that there is the potential for damage. The third required finding must Planning Commission Minmcs of August 27, 2002 Page 10 be that the tree results in a loss in economic enjoyment and causes financial hardship. Staff cannot make the hardship finding either. · Added that staff believes that space can be made in the plaza area by better managing the outdoor seating. · Informed that staff has offered additional signage along the entrance drive in front of the theater to help identify the location of the theater. · Recommended denial and advised that SARC considered this request at two meetings held on July 23rd and August 13th. · Said that the Commission has three potential actions it can take: adopt a Resolution upholding the appeal, adopt a Resolution denying the appeal or continuing the item to a future meeting. Acting Chair Doorley presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · SARC reviewed this item on July 23rd and August 13th. At the July 23ra meeting, SARC asked the applicant to provide an arborist report on the required pruning as well as a queuing analysis. At the August 13th meeting, there was no arborist report but photos depicting the proposed pruning were provided as were proposed queuing alternatives. · Stated that SARC's recommendation was to support necessary pruning and additional signage to help locate the theater for vehicles passing alongside the plaza area in which it is located. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that if the outdoor seating is pushed back to where it is supposed to be there might be enough room for the proposed queuing since the planter area they are proposing to remove is only 11 by 14 feet in size. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley said that the queuing would still not lay out as proposed even with that change. Acting Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 5. Ms. Jill Collins, Applicant, Equity Office, 1875 S. Bascom Avenue, Campbell: · Pointed out that there are seven trees total in this plaza area, six Olive trees and the one Chinese Elm they are proposing to remove. · Said that the Chinese Elm is located dead center of the area they need to work with, as presently the theater is unable to queue more than 65 people. · Advised that they have moved everyone's outdoor seating back where it belongs. · Stated that there are 3,000 to 4,000 people in this courtyard every day and there are six retailers sharing this plaza area. The issue is not just need for signage visibility but also how to move 3,000 people in this area. · Explained that this tree removal is seen as a solution to add visibility and room to queue. · Added that this tree does not match the Mediterranean style architecture of this shopping center. · Advised that the theater holds 1,100 people. Commissioner Alderete: Planning Commission MinuL,~s of August 27, 2002 Page 11 · Pointed out that the central theme to the applicant's argument for this tree removal seemed to be visibility according to letters submitted. Now the issues of lining up moviegoers and general congestion in the area are being raised. · Said that he finds it difficult to accept that congestion in the area is due to this tree itself. · Said that the center needs to manage "people" traffic and even with the removal of this tree, the same problems could exist. Ms. Jill Collins said that they are working with the retailers and plan to have a master plan for outdoor fixtures developed. Added that they had tried using the placement of flower boxes to control the placement of outdoor seating areas and said that the center will make its tenants match their approved outdoor uses. Commissioner Alderete said that there is general congestion as the plaza area has outdoor seating for several businesses. Ms. Jill Collins agreed and pointed out that there are people in the plaza area from 7 a.m. to 2 a.m. every day. Added that she needs to find an architect to design the uses for the plaza. Pointed out that the fact the plaza and center are so congested reflects the fact the Pruneyard is doing so well. People like to be where other people are. Commissioner Gibbons asked if the theater staggers movie start times. Ms. Jill Collins replied that the film start times are staggered by 10 to 15 minutes. Commissioner Gibbons reminded that this space was occupied by a theater before. Ms. Jill Collins agreed but said that the previous theater consisted of three screens. Additionally, there are fewer seats today with the seven current screens than there used to be with three screens. Mr. Jim Zuur, Owner, Camera 7 Cinemas, Pruneyard: · Said that the theater has seven screens, two that seat 300. · Added that they opened with one commercial film, Austin Powers, in a test run. They have been open only one month. However, between Christmas and March they will have four first run commercial films playing at a time as well as three art and foreign films. The lines will get bigger. With the removal of the tree, they can get more people into the plaza and it will still be a great place. · Advised that he has received feedback from patrons that they are having a hard time finding this theater. · Stated that he can plead hardship if he does not get an area for queuing. Commissioner Gibbons stated that she has patronized this theater and is glad it is here in Campbell. Offered that the bottleneck occurs where tickets are bought. Added that this tree could actually provide shelter for those in line. Asked if there are plans to improve the ticket sales process. Planning Commission Minm,~s of August 27, 2002 Page 12 Mr. Jim Zuur advised that there are three ticket stations. Having a combination of commercial and art/foreign films is an experiment for Camera Cinemas. Said that the while they appreciate staff's offer of additional signage, they need queuing space and visibility more. Acting Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 5. Commissioner Alderete: · Said that he was unsure if removing this tree is a solution and said he doubted the problem would go away. · Added that he would feel terrible if it was discovered following the removal of this tree that it made no difference. · Said that he likes having the theater there as it is great for Campbell. · Suggested the need for architectural plans for the plaza instead of simply a request to remove this tree. Commissioner Gibbons: · Agreed with Commissioner Alderete's remarks. · Said that she would love to see the tree remain and cannot justify its removal at this point. · Added that a visible line of theatergoers is actual a sign to passers by of where the theater is located. · Said she has a hard time making the finding for hardship in this matter or support this request now. Commissioner Jones proposed a continuance to allow the Pruneyard to obtain an architect to design the plaza in such a way to solve the problems there. Added that he likes the tree and feels that it adds to the environment. Acting Chair Doorley: · Stated that from a visibility perspective, the theaters are located along a one-way narrow street. · Reminded that SARC and staff were willing to allow an additional sign on the access road to identify the location of the theater. · Added that he would like to see an architectural framework to assure him that this plan for the plaza area can and will work. · Said that he can appreciate the fact that the applicant does not want to get caught at the last minute once business picks up with more commercial films at the theater. · Said that he still needs more convincing to support the removal of this tree. · Expressed support for the idea of a continuance. Commissioner Alderete said that he is not in favor of a continuance and stressed that the applicant has not demonstrated any economic hardship as a result of this tree that warrants its removal. Acting Chair Doorley asked staff if findings must be made for a continuance. City Attorney William Seligmann replied that no findings are required to support a continuance. Planning Commission Minmcs of August 27, 2002 Page 13 Ms. Jill Collins said that they are in favor of investing in the preparation of architectural plans but want to make sure that the Commission is sufficiently open minded to be willing to consider implementation. If not, this expenditure for the architect would be a waste of money. Said that they had investigated moving the tree but the cost was $16,000 and there is no assurance that the tree would survive the move. Commissioner Gibbons said that the Commission would need to see a substantive demonstration of hardship and what is proposed in place of this tree. This would include not just a rendering but also a fully defined plan for the plaza area. Added that while there is potential for Commission support, it is not a guarantee. Acting Chair Doorley asked Ms. Collins if they would prefer a continuance or a denial, which seems to be the direction the Commission is headed. Ms. Jill Collins asked for further elaboration on what she would need to bring back. Commissioner Alderete said that he would prefer to see the matter worked out this evening. Plans for the plaza should have been submitted to substantiate the Tree Removal Permit. Acting Chair Doorley advised Ms. Collins that the Commission seeks greater specificity. It appears that three Commissioners are leaning toward supporting a continuance. Commissioner Gibbons said that she would not support a continuance and feels the Commission needs to answer the question as it is posed. The applicant could come back with a full layout and plan for the plaza area under a new application other than this Tree Removal Permit appeal. The Commission would be open to considering the new plan. Acting Chair Doorley asked staff what the cost and time factors are between a continuance and the need to reapply for a new proposal. Director Sharon Fierro replied that the applicant paid a $100 fee to appeal an administrative denial. There was no initial fee for the Tree Removal Permit application. To appeal the Commission's decision to Council would cost an additional $100 in appeal fees. Acting Chair Doorley clarified for Ms. Jill Collins that with the continuance the Pruneyard will need to make a solid and specific case that the retention of the tree creates an economic impact that is detrimental to the future of the theaters and the surrounding businesses. Asked her what option was easier for her. Ms. Jill Collins asked how far into the future a project is continued. Since she has not yet secured the architect to design the plaza space, she most likely could not be ready in two weeks. Director Sharon Fierro replied that typically, an item is continued out two meetings away or in this case to the September 24, 2002, meeting date. Commissioner Jones expressed concerns that the intent of the Tree Ordinance is not to be overly onerous when someone seeks to remove a single tree. Planning Commission Minu,¢s of August 27, 2002 Page 14 Director Sharon Fierro advised that all trees that are part of a Site and Architectural approval are protected trees because they were required as part of the approval. Commissioner Jones suggested that a study be done, as he is concerned about the adverse impact of the Tree Removal Permit process. If it becomes too onerous, developers will not chose to include trees on their sites to avoid trouble removing those trees at a future date. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that a developer would not be able to develop a site without incorporating trees. Added that the Tree Ordinance speaks for itself and the Commission needs to abide by it. The Commission must read it, interpret it and go with it. Commissioner Jones: · Reminded that when the Tree Ordinance was developed, he voted against it. · Suggested that it should be interpreted liberally. Campbell is a "Tree City" and there was no shortage of trees even before the adoption of this Tree Ordinance. · Declared that this Tree Ordinance represents over-governmental regulation and is not necessary. Mr. Jim Zuur, Owner, Camera 7 Cinemas: · Asked if it would be possible to further trim the tree as long is it does not kill the tree. Acting Chair Doorley expressed support for more aggressive pruning and encouraged Mr. Zuur to come to the City with a pruning recommendation and proposal for additional signage. Director Sharon Fierro suggested that an arborist evaluate the tree before any additional trimming is performed. It is important that the shape of the tree not be compromised so much that it ends up looking so odd it would be better removed. Commissioner Gibbons agreed that potential damage to the tree is not just physical but also aesthetic. Acting Chair Doorley asked the preference of the Commission. Commissioner Gibbons replied a vote on the motion before the Commission. Acting Chair Doorley handed the gavel to Commissioner Gibbons so he can make the second to the motion. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Doorley, the Planning Commission made the motion to uphold an appeal and overturn an administrative denial of a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2002-72) to remove a 13-inch diameter Chinese Elm tree on property owned by Equity Office located at 1875 S. Bascom Avenue and found this project to be Categorically Exempt, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Doorley and Jones NOES: Alderete and Gibbons Planning Commission Minu~,~s of August 27, 2002 Page 15 ABSENT: Francois and Hernandez ABSTAIN: None The motion failed. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3455 denying an appeal and upholding an administrative denial of a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2002-72) to remove a 13-inch diameter Chinese Elm tree on property owned by Equity Office located at 1875 S. Bascom Avenue and found this project to be Categorically Exempt, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley and Gibbons NOES: Jones ABSENT: Francois and Hernandez ABSTAIN: None Acting Chair Doorley advised that this action is final in 10 calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. 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 the Commission will have three items on its next agenda. Informed that Council will conduct interviews and fill the Planning Commission vacancy at a special meeting held on September 3, 2002. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. to the next Regular Public Hearing on September 10, 2002, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. Connne A Sh~nn, Reco~dcretary APPROVED BY: Geo~e Doorley, Acting ~ ATTEST: ~ ~~,~"'"' Sharon Fierro, Secretary