Loading...
PC Min - 04/11/2017CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. APRIL 11, 2017 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY The Planning Commission meeting of April 11, 2017, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Kendall and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: _ Commissioners Absent: Commissioner: Commissioner: Staff Present: Community Develops Director: Senior Planner: Associate Planner: Planning Technician: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: Yvonne Kendall Michael L. Rich JoElle Hernandez Andrew Rivlin Donald C. Young Cynthia L. Dodd Philip C. Reynolds, Jr. gent Paul Kermoyan Daniel Fama Stephen Rose Naz Pouya William Seligmann Corinne Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Young, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of March 28, 2017, were approved as submitted. (5-0-2-0; Commissioners Dodd and Reynolds were absent) Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 2 COMMUNICATIONS 1. Director Paul Kermoyan advised that there is a desk item containing several emails received for Agenda Item 3. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS None ORAL REQUESTS None *** PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Kendall read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows: 1. PLN2017-98 Public Hearing to consider the application of Alex AI-helew for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2017-98) to allow a motor vehicle sales (retail/wholesale) establishment on property located at 125 E. Sunnyoaks Ave., Ste. 215. Staff is recommending that this item be deemed Categorically Exempt under . CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner. Daniel Fama, Senior Planner. Mr. Daniel Fama, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Kendall asked if there were questions of staff. Commissioner Rich asked staff if there is a limitation on the volume of cars to be sold from this site. Planner Daniel Fama explained that per the conditions there can only be two vehicles for sale on the property at any given time. There can be no cars for sale parked on the street and/or public right-of-way. Commissioner Rich asked for an explanation of the difference between wholesale and retail auto sales. Planner Daniel Fama advised that wholesale auto sales is allowed as an office use. Chair Kendall opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. e, Chair Kendall closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 3 Commissioner Rich: • Said that this seems like a similar business as had been conducted there in the past. • Stated that he finds no issues of concern. • Added that this is a small space with an anticipated small volume of activity. • Concluded that he has not concerns and is supportive of this request. Chair Kendall asked for verification that the number of spaces on site doesn't limit the number of cars they can actually sell. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Young, seconded by Commissioner Rich, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4375 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2017-98) to allow a motor vehicle sales (retail/wholesale) establishment on property located at 125 E. Sunnyoaks Ave., Ste. 215, subject to the conditions of approval, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Hernandez, Kendall, Rich, Rivlin and Young NOES: None , ABSENT: Dodd and Reynolds ABSTAIN: None Chair Kendall advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Kendall read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record as follows: 2. PLN2017-62 Public Hearing to consider the Appeal (PLN2017-62) of Nicole and Nicholas Rauschnot of an Interpretation of the Community Development Director that the removal of a protected Ash Tree without a Tree Removal Permit requires payment for the value of the unlawfully removed tree, on property located at 216 Radford Drive. Staff is recommending that this item be deemed not a project under CEQA as an administrative activity of the City. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner.' Naz, Pouya, Planning Technician. Ms. Naz Pouya, Planning Technician, presented the staff report. Chair Kendall asked if there were questions of staff. Commissioner Rich: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 ~ Page 4 J • Said that as he read this report prior to the meeting this seems to be pretty straightforward. • Stated that a question that he did have was regarding the definitions of damages to support tree removal: structural, home, shed, bricks and how those are evaluated. City Attorney William Seligman: • Cautioned that the original decision itself not to allow the tree removal as requested is final. • Reminded that there was no appeal of the decision by the property owners/appellants. • Advised that what is under consideration with the Appeal this evening is whether the Planning Commission agrees that the fine issued is warranted and if the imposed amount is appropriate. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Advised that when the Tree Protection Ordinance was updated a few years ago, discussion was had regarding to what extend a tree could be destroying property before allowing its removal. • Reminded that the Tree Protection Ordinance's intent is to protect trees. • Said that the Planning Commission at that time felt that the penalty amount for an improperly removed tree needed to be substantial. • Explained that damage to a house or pool could be viewed as sufficient to warrant removal of a tree. • Reported that a lot of tree removal requests don't proceed. Other ways of dealing with a problem tree are often discovered without need for the removal of said tree. • Stated his agreement with the comments of the City Attorney. Commissioner Young asked if the 2015 arborist report had any bearing upon the final decision. Planner Naz Pouya said that it was prepared after a decision had been made and was not made available to staff until their appeal was filed in February, 2017. Chair Kendall opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Nicholas Rauschnot, Appellant, Owner of 216 Radford Drive: • Explained that he and his wife and son reside at their home at 216 Radford Drive. • Said he would like to add to the timeline of events: • Reported that in June 2015, they purchase their new home. At the time they talked with the original owner about the tree in question. They were told that tree was not deliberately planted but rather was a volunteer. At that time he asked the original owner if he would be able to remove that tree and she said yes. • Continued that in June 2015 they started work on the removal but the City stopped their work almost immediately. He was told he would have to apply for a tree removal permit prior to removing this tree. He applied and was denied via letter dated July 8, 2015. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 5 • Advised that arborist Walter Levinson evaluated the tree. They decided not to appeal the denial of the tree removal permit. • Added that later they were consulting with their contractor who suggested they once again request a tree removal permit with their submittal of plans to the Building Department. He noted that large roots were found during construction. They had their final inspection done in May 2016. • Stated that they hired a landscaper (Bonfante Landscaping) early in 2017 who indicated the risk of this tree falling down and who recommended its removal. The landscape contractor recommended a tree service and the removal was scheduled in January. • Admitted that he acted on impulse as a concerned father for the safety and well- being of his family. • Said that he strives to be a good neighbor and to get along with his neighbors. • Stated he is asking that the imposed penalty be re-evaluated by the Planning Commission. • Suggested that the value of the tree at its time of removal was lessened since the tree had significantly deteriorated. • Said that there is a financial burden with the requirement to plant two large 36-inch box trees not to mention the large fine also imposed. Chair. Kendall closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Commissioner Hernandez: • Stated that the issue is very clear. They knew the requirement for a removal permit and they chose to do the removal without one. As such they must take on the consequences by paying the fine: • Said that trees are beautiful living things. • Advised that she would vote to uphold the Director's decision and deny the appeal. Commissioner Young: • Said he followed the timeline provided. • Pointed out that when the decision was appealed and an arborist evaluated the replacement value of the removed tree, the price came out higher than that which had been imposed by the Director in his decision. • Added that the findings of the report are right on point. • Admitted that as much as he'd like to do something to assist this homeowner, this matter is pretty clear. Commissioner Rich: • Said that he concurs with the other Commissioners. . • Added that since the arborist actually came up with a higher value for the removed tree he also justified the $7,219 fine amount initially imposed by the Director. Planner Naz Pouya clarified that the $7,219 value was decided by the Director. The consulting arborist later valued the removed tree at $8,600. She added that the Administrative Citation also imposed a $1,000 fee. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 6 Director Paul Kermoyan: • Stated that it is important to explain the methodology. • Reported that Naz Pouya is a Landscape Architect. , • Added that a lot of assumptions were considered when valuing a tree. Usually above 50 percent is the model in establishing a value. When given the initial value using 50 percent, he asked Ms. Pouya to re-calculate and using 30 percent and she came back with $7,219. • Said that the appellants then appealed and made a deposit to pay for secure an expert's valuation. That arborist came back with a higher value of $8,600. Planner Naz Pouya advised that staff would accept the original valuation if the Planning Commission feels it is appropriate to go with the $7,219 rather than the arborist's valuation of $8,600. Commissioner Rivlin: • Said that he can sympathize with the appellant as he too is a family man. • Stated that he has to side with the staff recommendation. • Concluded that the City's calculation should be upheld with the $7,219 valuation. Commissioner Rich said that is his position as well. Commissioner Young: • Said that he agreed but referenced page 6 of 9 that indicates that the arborist's appraisal prevails. • Added that if staff says it's okay to go with its lower valuation of $7,219, he can support that amount. Commissioner Rich said staff indicates that it can be left to the Planning Commission's discretion. Commissioner Young cautioned that doing so could set precedent if the arborist's valuation is reduced. Chair Kendall: • Said she was in favor of the Administrative Citation fee and the $8,600 valuation established by the consulting arborist. • Pointed out that this tree was taken down in full knowledge that to do so was illegal. • Reminded that this Commission has had conversations that went on for hours on issues of preserving trees. • Stated that an older tree lends value to more than the property owner of the parcel it's on. It also serves surrounding properties in terms of oxygen and screening. • Recounted that her trees had also suffered during the drought but then the rain came and those trees have become leafier and larger. • Said that she would vote to deny the appeal and is not inclined to reduce the valuation total set by the arborist. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 7 • Suggested that perhaps a payment plan can be established between the City and the appellant. Commissioner Rich said there is no debate on the merits of the appeal. Just on the fee that should be imposed. He asked staff if there is a process for how payment is handled. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that offering a payment plan is an unusual process although it has been done in the past. • Gave as an example a park in-lieu fee. At first they made the payments but then they stopped. City Attorney William Seligmann advised that such issues of how payment is paid is managed at the administrative level and not the Planning Commission. Commissioner Rivlin asked about the tree replacement fund. Is that always the process? Planner IVaz Pouya said that per Code, the penalty fees taken in are directed toward planting new trees in the public right-of-way. Perhaps some could be directed to this neighborhood. Director Paul Kermoyan advised that Public Works has a budget for the "urban forest" that encompasses street trees. Adding new trees within the City helps replenish the canopy that was lost with the improper removal of this tree. Commissioner Hernandez pointed out that it appears it would have been better if the appellant had accepted the Director's initial assessment. Instead they insisted in another evaluation being prepared by an arborist. That's now owed to the community. Commissioner Young: • Said he supports denying the appeal. • Added that for him the amount of the penalty is the question. • Admitted that he finds that the staff recommended amount of $7,219 is enough. Commissioner Rivlin asked if that is exclusive of the Administrative Citation amount of $1,000. City Attorney William Seligmann advised that the $1,000 Administrative Citation penalty is not before the Planning Commission. That is managed under a different procedure. There is an appeal process available there for Administrative Citations but those hearings are done before a hearing officer and not the Planning Commission. Commissioner Rich said he was in favor of the staff proposed penalty of $7,219 and for denying this appeal. Commissioner Rivlin: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 8 • Stated that was where he was leaning as well. • Said that the appeal process exists as part of the City's Municipal Code process. • Added that this appellant has taken advantage of the legal process that exists. • Reminded that $7,219 was the valid and reasonable amount as determined by staff and he's leaning in that direction. Chair Kendall reminded that the $7,219 penalty is what is being appealed. Commissioner Rivlin recounted how he received a traffic ticket as a young man. He fought that ticket and lost. He just had to pay the ticket. IVo added penalty. Chair Kendall said it seems they didn't understand that the penalty amount could come back as a higher number than the original set by staff. Commissioner Hernandez: • Said that is true. It was their desire to get a professional to weigh in and tell with this removed tree was worth. They were begging the question. • Added that it could have been evaluated higher or lower per the arborist's evaluation. Director Paul Kermoyan: Advised that the appellants felt no fine was substantiated. Added that upon their appeal, they were required . to provide a deposit against which the fee for an independent arborist's evaluation would be covered. Reminded that this was stemming from an unlawful tree removal. Commissioner Hernandez: Pointed out that if the arborist's estimate had been lower than staff's estimate then the appellants would have paid the arborist's estimate over staff's. Stated that it was appropriate for them to pay the full amount as set by the arborist. Chair Kendall stated her agreement. Commissioner Young referenced page 6 again saying that he both supported denial of the appeal and would support whatever penalty amount the Commission proposes. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hernandez, seconded by Commissioner Young, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4376 DENYING an Appeal (PLN2017-62) by Nicole and Nicholas Rauschnot and upholding the Director's Interpretation that the removal of a protected Ash Tree without a Tree Removal Permit requires penalty payment for the value of the unlawfully removed tree in the amount of $8,600, on property located at 216 Radford Drive, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Hernandez, Kendall and Young NOES: Rich and Rivlin ABSENT: Dodd and Reynold Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 9 ABSTAIN: None Chair Kendall advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Kendall read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record as follows: 3. PLN2017-85 Public Hearing to consider the adoption of the Campbell PLN2017-86 Village Neighborhood Plan (PLN2017-85) and associated Text Amendment (PLN2017-86), to revise various sections of Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic), Title 20 (Campbell Subdivision and Land Development), and Title 21 (Zoning) of the Campbell Municipal Code to implement the plan. Staff is recommending that this item be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: May 2, 2017. Project Planner. Stephen Rose, Associate Planner Director Paul Kermoyan gave an introduction. Mr. Roger Storz, Land Development Engineer, Public Works Department, gave a presentation. Mr. Stephen Rose, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Kendall asked if there were questions of staff. There were none. Chair Kendall opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Marty Sexton, Resident on Dallas Drive: • Said that he had never felt "neglected" when his property was under County jurisdiction. • Advised that the residents of his neighborhood preferred being annexed into Campbell rather than to San Jose.. • Expressed his support for a setback standard of five feet or half the wall height, whichever is larger. • Cautioned that a limited setback would make people push up additions into a second story rather than continuing with a first floor addition. • Thanked staff for their efforts with the neighborhood meetings. • Opined that probably only 10 percent of the homeowners were represented a1 these meetings due to busy schedules that prevented some from participating. • Said that there were lots of feelings regarding setbacks. • Added that on the issue of paved surfaces, lots of properties have circular driveways using permeable pavers. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 10 • Suggested that it is not necessary to reduce the allowable front paved areas any further. • Stated that on the issue of limiting number of garage doors, his neighbor has three. They are acarriage-style garage door and they look really nice. • Advised that the Campbell Village Neighborhood doesn't need a lot of restrictions. The existing City standards will protect it sufficiently. Maggie Ostrowski, Resident on Cambrian Drive: • Thanked staff for its work with her neighborhood. • Stated that there are a lot of great things in the draft plan to help maintain the rural look without sidewalks. • Asked the Commission to reconsider the proposed rear setbacks. The allowed lot coverage standard is 40 percent and the allowed FAR (Floor Area Ratio) is 45 percent. • Said that a minimum of five-feet or half the wall height setback standard is helpful with unusually-shaped lots. She likes how the Campbell Municipal Code is currently written on this issue. • Suggested the Commission further think about the proposed standard for front yard fencing (open picket). That seems more like an HOA (Homeowner's Association) type restriction. • Reported that design standards are not what the neighborhood association was created around. • Said that in general the draft plan addresses specific concerns. • Thanks everyone for their participation. Mike Jacoby, Resident on Briarwood Way: • Announced that he was a big fan of Campbell and owns three homes in the City of Campbell. • Agreed that some good points have been made by previous speakers. • Stated that "less is more." . • Added that he "loves the effort". • Admitted that the biggest thing that frightens him is the 20 foot setback. • Said that would leave things crowded in. • Advised that he has a 1,000 square foot garage behind his home. • .Cautioned that he wants to watch the restrictions imposed. • Said that he loves the work that has been done. • Added that allowing lesser setbacks is a good thing. Lisa Harmer, Resident on Briarwood Way: • Listed some issues she has that have not been raised in the draft plan under review. • Stated that one issue is the intersection of Curtner and Salerno. The homes at this intersection and located within Campbell while the intersection itself is in San Jose. • Added another issue is Curtner Avenue, which she sees as a hot spot for speeders. She proposed Campbell PD provide some speed enforcement efforts on that street. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 11 i J • Another issue is residential properties that border onto commercial properties. She'd like to see notations restricting future. changes to the commercial properties. • Said that in regards to the McGlincy properties that are zoned Light Industrial, the volume of traffic to that area, specifically large delivery trucks and early morning dumpster service be taken into consideration as a part of the Campbell Village Neighborhood Plan. • Reported that the intersection at Bascom and Union has three corners located within San Jose and one within Campbell. She suggested that Campbell request to be included in future when changes are proposed for that.intersection. Thomas Keller, Resident on Erin Way: • Said his concern is with reducing setbacks. • Reported that he has resided in his home for the last 21 years. • Added that his property serves as a registered bird sanctuary. With reduced setbacks he would lose that sanctuary status. Chris Whitaker, Resident on Sweetbriar Drive: • Said that he has lived on his property for the last 14 years. • Advised that he remodeled his home under County regulations. • Added that he was involved with the annexation efforts. • Stated that he appreciates staff's work. This is not an easy process. • Said that he is involved with the CVNA and is its current Vice President. • Reported that the CVNA has a consensus of what they wanted to do. • Reminded that their neighborhood and voluntarily assessed themselves. They were told that an area plan was necessary in order to apply for funds. . • Admitted that he is disappointed with the draft plan especially allowing building permit additions of up to 1,000 square feet. • Stated that he thinks up to 500 feet is large enough. • Added that it seems that change is being "stuffed down their throats." • Said that some people want big giant houses while others want their neighborhood to stay as it is. • Said that he is a strong believer in setbacks and feels that five-feet is close. • Said that utilizing review for Exceptions is a good way to deal with lots that have strange shapes. • Stated that in general they want to maintain the look and feel they have as a neighborhood. • Reminded that this process was originally about trees and traffic. • Opined that the plan goes too far on making things easy. • ~ Thanked everyone for their time. Brenda Frederick, Resident on Shamrock Drive: • Thanked everyone for what has been done to this point. • Asked if there is any way that undergrounding utility poles is a possibility or a pie in the sky idea. • Said that while the staff recommendation is to postpone action on the CVNP, she encourages that it not be delayed unnecessarily but rather be allowed to move forward as soon as possible. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 12 Chair Kendall thanked all participants for their input, particularly from the members of the community. Chair Kendall closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Commissioner Rich: ~~ • Said that there is a lot of information to digest and great points to consider from common design to objective standards. • Stated that the plan should be a fair balance. • Said that he wanted to see some flexibility and suggested the plan not limit a garage to two-car if it is possible to accommodate more. • Said that there are lots of great points and feels comfortable. Chair Kendall suggested a quick break and adjourned the meeting. Chair Kendall reconvened the meeting at 9:52 p.m. Commissioner Young said that upon listening to staff's report, he agrees that a 70-foot minimum lot width is good. Commissioner Hernandez agreed that keeping it at 70 feet is good given that a majority of the lots in the area are that wide. Commissioner Rivlin said that seems fine. Chair Kendall asked about subdividing a lot. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that subdivision could happen perhaps on a larger corner lot that would have two streets on which for each home to have required street frontage. • Added that some cities have minimum lot depth as well as widths. Chair Kendall asked about someone selling off a half of their lot. Planner Stephen Rose: • Reminded that there is a minimum lot size that has to be met. • Added that flag lot configurations require the front parcel meet the minimum lot size for the zoning and the back lot to be 10 percent larger exclusive of the access driveway. Director Paul Kermoyan said an owner could buy two adjacent parcels and merge the lots into one larger parcel. Chair Kendall: • Said she agrees with the minimum 70 foot lot width. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 13 • Asked the Commission to discuss the 2"d issue, which is exceptions to side setbacks. Commissioner Young: • Said that the Community Development Director can look as specific situations and determine when an exception is warranted. • Added that he agrees with the staff recommendation. Commissioner Hernandez asked the current side setback for this area of Campbell. Planner Stephen Rose replied five-feet or half the building wall height. Director Paul Kermoyan said that a proposal with the need for a side yard exception becomes an Administrative Review process with public noticing. Chair Kendall: • Said she agrees with the staff recommendation. • Asked the Commission to discuss the third issue, rear setbacks. • Reminded that the staff recommendation is to remove Option 3 from the draft. Commissioner Young: • Said that if Option 3 is removed they will have no relief. Commissioner Rich: • Said that to have some relief available it is best to include Option 3. Commissioner Young pointed out that irregularly shaped lots need Option 3. Planner Stephen Rose: • Said that Option 3 allows potential for reduced setbacks for special lots such as those abutting commercial properties. • Admitted that it may require more evaluation by staff of existing conditions. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that he is hearing a couple of things from the public. • Added that one thing is the concern that a bigger setback creates problems. • Stated that one question is if a property owner wants to build closer to an adjacent commercial property, should they be allowed to do so. • Opined that requires some ideology and discussion to determine if they should be allowed to be closer to their commercial adjacencies. Chair Kendall clarified that they'd still have to maintain required yard space on the lot. Planner Stephen Rose said that some feel it should be five feet or half the wall height. Others want a minimum 20 foot setback. Director Paul Kermoyan: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 ~ Page 14 • Said that staff's recommendation for a larger setback is for fostering the neighbor to neighbor relationship. • Added that Option 3 is not a bad idea but to what extend is it a good idea. Right now it is too vague and should be removed from the draft or the Planning Commission could create a number. Commissioner Rich asked whether just removing it outright means there is no standard. Planner Stephen Rose replied no. There would be Options 1 and 2 available. Commissioner Rivlin asked staff to explain why options exist. Planner Stephen Rose replied that they provide the "minimum" standard Commissioner Rivlin: • Said that with Option 3, it could create situations .we wouldn't want, such as small setbacks. Director Paul Kermoyan replied that there could be some form of "danger" having a residence located too close to commercial. He added that one potential impact could be complaints from residents based on noise impacts from their proximity to a commercial use. Commissioner Rivlin asked, "Even if they built the addition located so close to the adjacent commercial property?" Director Paul Kermoyan replied, yes. It happens all the time. Commissioner Hernandez asked about the 20-foot standard. Planner Stephen Rose advised that there are two standards, a 20-foot-standard and a 10-foot-standard. The alternative is a Variance, which is not advisable unless there is a special circumstance with the conditions of the property. The bar for a Variance is high. Commissioner Rich reminded that staff's recommendation is to strike Option. Commissioner Young said that Option 3 could make sense in some cases and as such he is willing to keep Option 3 in the draft plan. Keep it now. It can still be removed later. Chair Kendall: • Said that it seems retaining Option 3 and having the five-foot or half the wall height as setback standards. Commissioner Hernandez asked if staff sees other options. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 ~ Page 15 Director Paul Kermoyan said the Commission can keep Option 3, restructure it, perhaps as a five-.foot or half the building wall height as the standard. A standard is not an exception. Commissioner Rich asked if staff was okay with that. Planner Stephen Rose said that staff's recommendation is a continuance. Even at the next meeting, more changes could be possible. This plan will ultimately be decided by the City Council. The Planning Commission will forward its recommendation on to Council. Chair Kendall: • Advised that it appears keeping Option 3 in the draft is the consensus with five-foot or half the building wall height as the standard. • Said that the fourth issue is extensions to existing non-conforming building walls. • Stated that she likes staff's recommendation. Planner Stephen Rose said that as written anon-conforming setback could continue as long as the minimum setback is four feet. Director Paul Kermoyan said that staff would redraft that language. Chair Kendall raised the fifth issue, front yard paving, for discussion. Commissioner Hernandez said she was okay with that. Director Paul Kermoyan said that the standard may end up encouraging homeowners to build closer to the street, which may not be a good thing. Roger Storz, Public Works Engineer, reminded that if there is 10,000 square feet of impervious surface on a parcel, that parcel must then meet standards for on-site water retention. Often people will utilize pervious pavers over a crushed rock base to remain under that number. Director Paul Kermoyan asked if this issue is intended to deal with permeability or aesthetic appearance. Commissioner Rivlin said that the City's standard is 50 percent paving on the front of properties. This plan proposes to reduce that to 40 percent. Chair Kendall • Said that she likes the 40/60 ratio with a maximum 40-percent hardscape to 60 percent landscaping with the first 20 feet at 45 percent. • Added that this brings green living things at the front of a house. Commissioner Rich said he likes the 20-foot standard. Commissioner Rivlin agreed. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 16 Chair Kendall:. • Agreed. • Advised that the next issue is landscaping. Commissioner Rivlin asked if grass pavers count against the 60 percent landscaping standard. Planner Stephen Rose said that would have to be looked at on a case-by-case basis. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Cautioned that use of pervious pavers .doesn't tend to work in commercial application. It works a little better in residential application. • Added that having grass separating bands of concrete drive are called Hollywood Driveways. Those tend to work: Chair Kendall introduced the next issue -fencing. Commissioner Hernandez suggested striking this issue from the draft. Allowing flexibility in fencing would be better as long as the maximum height limitation of 3.5 feet is met. Commissioner Rich asked what about a brick wall Commissioner Hernandez said that she loves a brick wall. Planner Stephen Rose reiterated that the maximum height for a front fence is 3.5 feet. Commissioner Rich pointed out that hedges could be planted to create a natural wall. Those hedges could grow to be tall perhaps as high as six to eight feet. Planner Stephen Rose said that he would remove that section and simply refer back to the Campbell Municipal Code Section on fencing. Director Paul Kermoyan said that the neighbors who were supportive of this more restrictive open-style fencing for front yards didn't want to see awalled-off community. Chair Kendall said the next issue is common design characteristics. Commissioner Rich stressed the need to have objective standards. Commissioner Hernandez suggested additional outreach to gather design characteristics that the neighborhood wants to see retained and/or not to be allowed moving forward. Planner Stephen Rose said he would have to do an analysis. He added that the Commission could direct staff to do that research. Campbell Planning Commission IVlinutes for April 11, 2017 Page 17 Chair Kendall raised the next issue -building orientation and/or maximum garage width. Commissioner Rivlin said that staff's recommendation to recess by five feet is fine. He said that alternatively perhaps this section should be renamed -garage. Chair Kendall raised the next issue -privacy preservation. She said she is okay with it as is. Commissioner Hernandez said she is fine with the staff recommendation. She reminded that while the Planning Commission had recommended athree-tier system, Council elected to make it a two-tier system. Chair Kendall said that a good idea of undergrounding utilities was raised by a member of the public who spoke this evening. Roger Storz, Land Development Engineer, Public Works: • Said that PG&E returns funds to local communities for undergrounding of utilities. It's not a lot of money so the City has done Winchester and Campbell Avenue with such funding. • Cautioned that it would talk a long time to get to neighborhood streets. • Warned that it is exorbitantly expensive to underground utilities. As an example, he reported that undergrounding W. Hacienda at the time Green Street Project was underway would have cost $5 million dollars. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that at the time of the Cambrian 36 Annexation, the intersection at Curtner/Salerno was discussed. At the time, there was no interest in doing another detachment of a part of San Jose for annexation into Campbell. • Said that at this point, staff's recommendation is to continue this item to a date uncertain. Chair Kendall asked if there was anything else not covered by the discussion. Planner Stephen Rose replied only the design of the document overall and public comments heard this evening. Chair Kendall noted the design was fine and called for a motion. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Rivlin, the Planning Commission- provided direction to staff to revise the Campbell Village Neighborhood Plan (PLN2017-85) and associated Text Amendment (PLN2017-86) to incorporate recommendations provided this evening and continued consideration of this item to a future meeting date uncertain, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Hernandez, F(endall, Rich, Rivlin and Young NOES: None Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 11, 2017 Page 18 ABSENT: Dodd and Reynolds ABSTAIN: None *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Director Paul Kermoyan had no additions to his written report. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:57 p.m. to Planning Commission Meeting of April 25, 2017. SUBMITTED BY: rinn Shinn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY 1 ~~ nne endal ,Chair ,- ~~ the next Regular ATTEST: l'~~ Paul er oyan, Secretary