Loading...
PC Min 07/10/2001CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY JULY 10, 2001 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of July 10, 2001, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Lindstrom, and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Mel Lindstrom Tom Francois George Doorley Elizabeth Gibbons Joseph D. Hernandez Dennis Lowe Commissioners Absent: Commissioner: Brad Jones StaffPresent: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Planner II: City Attorney: Reporting Secretary: Sharon Fierro Geoff I. Bradley Darcy Smith William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Gibbons, the Planning Commission minutes of June 26, 2001, were approved. (3-0-1-3; Commissioner Jones was absent and Commissioners Doorley, Hernandez and Lowe abstained) COMMUNICATIONS. There were no communication items ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. Planning Commission Minutes of July 10, 2001 Page 2 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. PUBLIC HEARING Chair Lindstrom read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record. PLN2001- 20/21/22/75 Costa, M. Continued Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Michael Costa for Site and Architectural Approvals (PLN2001-20/21/22) and a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2001-75) to allow the construction of three new single family residences on properties located at 1555, 1561 and 1573 Van Dusen Lane in an R-l-9 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Planning Commission decision final in 10 days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. (Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of June 26, 2001.) Ms. Darcy Smith, Planner II, presented the staffreport as follows: · Advised that the applicants are seeking three Site and Architectural Approvals to allow the construction of three single-family residences and a Tree Removal Permit to allow the removal of one tree. · Said that the subject properties are locates south on Van Dusen Lane, west of Harriet Avenue. · Added that the properties are surrounded on three sides by single-family residences and by Pollard Road on the fourth side. · Advised that the Community Development Director approved a tentative map creating three lots on June 1, 1999, but that the final parcel map is not yet approved. · Said that the General Plan Land Use is Low-Medium Density Residential allowing less than 4.5 units per gross acre. This proposal equals a density of three units per gross acre. · Said that the zoning is R-1-9 and that this proposal meets all zoning requirements as well as all requirements under the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. · Informed that each single-family residence will have a detached three-car garage. Each home has a distinctive architectural design with varied roofs, entry features and materials and colors. · Said that there were three trees on the property, which are protected under the City's Tree Ordinance. An oak tree will be retained and the design of one of the homes was specifically created to fit with that oak tree. One of the trees, a cedar, was erroneously removed without benefit of a Tree Removal Permit during the demolition of the existing structure on the property. A penalty will be imposed for that tree's removal, calling for the installation of four 36-inch box trees. A third tree, a black acacia, is considered to be in poor structural condition and will be replaced with a 24-inch box tree as a Condition of Approval. Additionally, it is required that each parcel have six trees per the requirements of the STANP. · Advised that SARC reviewed this proposal on June 12th and requested a more significant variety of front elevations for the three homes. SARC reviewed the applicant's revised plans on June 26th and was supportive with the changes. · Suggested that the Commission adopt a Resolution granting three Site and Architectural Approvals to allow the construction of three new single-family residences and adopt a Planning Commission Minutes of July 10, 2001 Page 3 Resolution granting a Tree Removal Permit for the removal of one tree. Added that the Conditions of Approval will be modified to require the planting of four trees in replacement of the improperly removed tree. Commissioner Francois presented the Site follows: · SARC concurred with the staff report. and Architectural Review Committee report as Commissioner Gibbons asked if there is any recourse should the tree slated for retention be damaged and/or destroyed during construction. Ms. Darcy Smith replied that should the tree be damaged, the applicants would have to process a Tree Removal Permit and replace the tree on a one to one ratio. Chair Lindstrom opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Scott Eckerman, 1513 Van Dusen Lane, Campbell: · Stated that the architect has done a wonderful job on the plans. · Advised that he is an adjacent property owner. · Questioned the grading plans for the lot, asking if it would be raised significantly. · Said that there are already significant drainage issues due to the CalTrans property. · Said that the neighborhood is happy to see the old house gone. · Expressed concern about trucks dumping dirt onto the site after dark. Mr. Kirk Miller, Architect: · Advised that the elevation will be the same as it is now. · Added that the storage of dirt on site is a temporary thing. · Assured that per the Building Code, drainage from one site cannot be diverted to a neighboring property. Commissioner Gibbons advised Mr. Eckerman that there are strict construction hours and he should call the police if work occurs after hours. Commissioner Doorley questioned the temporary storage of dirt on site. Mr. Geoff I. Bradley, Senior Planner, advised that staff was unaware that this temporary storage was occurring and that such temporary storage is not permitted within a residential area. Director Sharon Fierro assured the Commission that staff would follow up. Commissioner Doorley expressed concern about the tree removal without benefit of proper permits. Planning Commission Minutes of July 10, 2001 Page 4 Mr. Kirk Miller, Architect, reiterated the importance and value of the oak tree and their commitment to ensuring that this tree is properly protected during construction. This tree has an economic value and enhances the property immensely. Billy Seveta, Project Applicant: Advised the Commission that the tree that was improperly removed was mistakenly not fenced during demolition and removed in error. Commissioner Doorley stated that tree protection standards are common in all local communities and questioned whether this tree removal was not simply a matter of expediency. Commissioner Francois said that he is convinced that this is just a mess up, a mistake, and that the applicants will pay the penalty of replacing this tree with four trees. Chair Lindstrom closed the Public Heating for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Doorley pointed out that it appears that excessive pruning is resulting in many of the Tree Removal Permit requests considered by the City once a tree's structure is compromised. Added that he was not sure how this problem could be dealt with. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission: 1. Adopted Resolution No. 3367 granting three Site and Architectural Approvals (PLN2001-20/21/22) to allow the construction of three new single-family residences; and 2. Adopted Resolution No. 3368 approving a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2001-75) to allow the removal of one acacia tree, On properties located at 1555, 1561 and 1573 Van Dusen Lane, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Doorley, Lowe NOES: None ABSENT: Jones ABSTAIN: None Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Lindstrom and Chair Lindstrom advised that this decision is final in 10 days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Chair Lindstrom read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record. Planning Commission Minutes of July 10, 2001 Page 5 2. PLN2001-64 Smith, R. Public Heating to consider the application of Robert E. Smith, on behalf of Verizon Wireless, for a Site and Architectural Review Permit Approval (PLN2001-64) to allow the construction of a wireless antenna facility on the tower of the Sunnyoaks Fire Station on property located at 485 w. Sunnyoaks Avenue in a P-F (Public Facilities) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Chair Lindstrom advised that this item would be continued to the July 24, 2001, Planning Commission meeting and opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Hernandez, the Planning Commission continued consideration for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN20001-64) to allow the construction of a wireless antenna facility on the tower of the Sunnyoaks Fire Station on property located at 485 W. Sunnyoaks Avenue to its meeting of July 24, 2001. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jones was absent) Chair Lindstrom read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record. 3. PLN2001-71 Nazaradeh, E. Public Hearing to consider the application of Edward Nazaradeh, on behalf of St. Mary's Assyrian Chaldean Catholic Church, for a Modification (PLN2001-71) to a previously approved Use Permit to allow the construction of a mezzanine addition within an existing church on property located at 109 N. First Street in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Chair Lindstrom advised that this item would be continued to the July 24, 2001, Planning Commission meeting and opened the Public Heating for Agenda Item No. 3. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Francois, the Planning Commission continued consideration for a Modification (PLN2001-71) to a previously approved Use Permit to allow the construction of a mezzanine addition within an existing church on property located at 109 N. First Street to its meeting of July 24, 2001. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jones was absent) REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, was accepted as presented with the following additions: Planning Commission Minutes of July 10, 2001 Page 6 · Advised that the Council approved the Shelley Avenue development and reversed the Planning Commission's Condition to reverse the orientation of the site. · Added that Council also approved the parking adjustment for the project at 46 N. Second Street. · Informed that Council directed staff to reply to Mr. Harry Oberhelman's letter in which he requests that Council establish a Moratorium on lot splits in North Central Campbell in regards to residential density, stating that staff has found no justification for such action since only three properties of the 361 in the area have the potential to be split. Therefore, this is not considered to be a significant issue. · Advised that three Commissioners attended the Council Study Session on the General Plan EIR and Housing Element held on July 3rd. This Study Session was limited to one hour. · Advised that staff's current recommendation for the McGlincey and Dell Areas is to retain the existing Land Use Designations and develop tighter architectural controls. Council accepted this new recommendation but feels strongly that these architectural controls are necessary. The establishment of architectural controls will achieve the goals but will take longer. · Advised that staff will schedule a Study Session for the Planning Commission regarding the Housing Element. Added that the Housing Element requires review and certification by the State before it is considered valid. · Suggested that another Study Session be held on Traffic and Parking issues. Chair Lindstrom advised that the Commissioners in attendance at the Study Session felt cut off from asking any questions. Asked if they were included as participants or observers. Commissioner Francois disagreed, stating that Commissioners Gibbons and Doorley both offered input. Suggested that incentives might be needed to help improve the McGlincey Area. Director Fierro: · Advised that there were time pressures for the Study Session, which is the reason why the two Briefing Books were prepared. · Said that this was a Council Study Session and Council was considering big policy issues such as: o Where higher density can be supported; o Whether an Inclusionary Ordinance should be enacted citywide requiring affordable units for projects greater than 10 units, c> Whether the threshold for secondary living units should be dropped from 12,000 square foot minimum lot size to 10,000 square foot minimum lot size. Doing so would create approximately 1,000 more opportunities for secondary living units. These units equal affordable living units. · Added that a Joint Council/Commission Study Session allows more interaction between the two groups. · Promised that the Commission Study Sessions will be in depth, particularly the Housing Study Session. Commissioner Doorley asked about the required housing units for other local cities and how those numbers are derived. Planning Commission Minutes of July 10, 2001 Page 7 Director Fierro advised that the State determines the housing needs and ABAG assigns each city with its regional housing allotment. Campbell actually has a balanced jobs to housing ratio. Commissioner Hemandez asked if the Variance request on Cameo was appealed. Director Fierro replied that the Commission's denial was appealed and overturned by Council. Commissioner Hernandez asked what the basis was for overturning the denial. City Attorney William Seligrnann replied that the applicant set forth a rational that Council accepted. Commissioner Gibbons discussed the distinction in Study Sessions and reflected that they generally offer the Commissioners the only opportunity to provide input to Council. The brevity of the recent Study Session did not allow for adequate dialog and therefore the format of the meeting was unfortunate. Director Fierro assured that the next Study Session would be planned better and agreed that the interaction is important. However, at this time, one hour was all the time that was available. Chair Lindstrom agreed that the Commissioners could not participate fully. Commissioner Doorley disagreed, saying that he did not feel that way. Added that the Commission's invitation to attend was a courtesy. This was not a joint Study Session. Stressed that the dissatisfaction expressed is not a unanimous opinion of the Study Session. Chair Lindstrom advised that he would be on vacation during the next meeting on July 24th. Commissioner Doorley advised that he too would be on vacation. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:27 p.m. to the Planning Commission meeting of July 24, 2001, in the Council Chambers, City ~d-l~ 70 North First California. ~"~x, ,~ Street, Campbell, SUBMITTED BY: k~ ~ ~ Corinne A. Sh~n, Recording Secretary ATTEST: ~~ ~ SCharon Fierro, Secretary