Loading...
PC Min - 05/23/2017CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. MAY 23, 2017 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY The Planning Commission meeting of May 23, 2017, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Acting Chair Rich and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Chair: Staff Present: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Associate Planner: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: APPROVAL OF MINUTES Yvonne Kendall Paul Kermoyan Daniel Fama Stephen Rose William Seligmann Corinne Shinn Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Young, seconded by Commissioner Rivlin, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of May 9, 2017, were approved as submitted. (5-0-1-1; Chair Kendall was absent and Commissioner Reynolds abstained) Michael L. Rich Cynthia L. Dodd JoElle Hernandez Philip C. Reynolds, Jr. Andrew Rivlin Donald C. Young Acting Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Cam~b~ll 1=~lar~r~i~1g Coi~~tf~lissiorl Minufos for M~~y 2~, 2017 Page 2 COMMUNICATIONS Director Paul Kermoyan advised that a bundled package of public correspondence relative to Agenda Item 2 was forwarded to the Commission via email. He added that another piece of correspondence that arrived afterwards was distributed this evening as a table item. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS None ORAL REQUESTS None *** PUBLIC HEARINGS Commissioner Young advised that he must recuse from Item No. 1 due to a campaign conflict. He left the dais and chambers for the duration of the hearing. Commissioner Hernandez said that about three years ago she spoke at a public hearing on an application for this address. It was as a private resident. That was a different application and a different time. She assured she could have an open mind on this requests and could participate in this hearing. Acting Chair Rich read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows: PLN2017-129 Public Hearing to consider the application of Oddwalle Campbell, LLC, fora Modification (PLN2017-129) to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit (PLN2014-47) to legalize an unpermitted DJ stage within an existing restaurant with approved live entertainment, late-night hours, and general alcohol sale, on property located at 280 East Campbell Avenue. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 ten calendar days. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Acting Chair Rich asked if there were questions of staff. Commissioner Reynolds noted that there were no comments from the Campbell Police Department. Are there any issues? Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 3 Planner Daniel Fama replied no. Commissioner Reynolds pointed out that CPD has an opportunity to comment on such applications. He pointed out that the issue is the entertainment permit rather than the CUP. Planner Daniel Fama clarified that live entertainment as a land use is allowed via a CUP while individual operators receive a Live Entertainment Permit directly from the Police Department through Council. Commissioner Reynolds asked if Council could deny future owners from retaining this site's Live Entertainment Permit. Planner Daniel Fama said he would defer that question to the City Attorney. City Attorney William Seligmann said that while there are some grounds for approval there are narrow grounds available for denial. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Reminded that the original CUP was approved for another restaurant. • Added that the current restaurant (Willard Hicks) that assumed the tenant space and CUP but modified the live entertainment component from what the approval was by installing a DJ booth. Those changes resulted in the requirement to establish a new CUP. • Reminded that the Police Department looks at the "operator". Commissioner Reynolds pointed out that there is always the condition in place that upon three verifiable complaints a CUP can be brought back to the Commission. Planner Daniel Fama said that is correct. Acting Chair Rich opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. John Razumich, Applicant: • Introduced Molly Adams, a co-owner of Willard Hicks. • Reported that he had just discovered the oversight on the lapsed approval for the live entertainment at this location. • Added that they have since been working with staff to correct the situation. • Stated that the focus is the DJ booth that was added to Willard Hick's establishment. • Pointed out that there are lots of restaurants in Downtown Campbell that have speakers over which music is played without issuance of a Live Entertainment Permit. • Said that the policy is designed as a framework. The Planning Commission can have discretion. • Assured that the intent of Willard Hicks is to be a responsible restaurant establishment ~~~r~p~~l~ ~~~~ ar~in ~.:c~~ni~nissior~ Minutes f®r May 23, 2017 Page 4 • Reminded that the Planning Commission has the ability to modify the provisions of an existing use permit if there are verifiable complaints against it. Molly Adams, Co-Owner, Willard Hicks: • Said that about 3 '/2 years ago they came up with a concept for a dinner house. This model existed elsewhere and they thought that it would work here in Campbell as well. • Assured that they never intended their restaurant to be a location considered a performance venue. Rather it is fully a restaurant with a different and fun environment. • Added that while the music is amplified, all music goes through the house speakers, from which her husband controls the sound levels. • Stated that the DJs work only between the hours of 6 and 10 p.m. Acting Chair Rich closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Reynolds: • Said that he supports this request. • Admitted that he hasn't been in Willard Hicks for quite some time. • Added that he didn't know they had DJ music there. You can't hear it from outside. • Reminded that PD has no problems. • Gave examples of other types of "live entertainment" such as a magician or someone who twists balloon animals for kids. Do those activities require a Live Entertainment Permit? • Opined that Willard Hicks is a good neighbor. There have been no complaints. • Reiterated that there are the standard protections in place. If there are problems resulting from the use of the DJ booth, their use can be brought back before the Planning Commission. • Stated that it seems there were errors on both sides, the City's and the applicant's. • Concluded that he would support the applicant's request. They will be okay. Commissioner Dodd: • Said that she does go to Willard Hicks and likes it a great deal. • Said that having music there is fine with her. • Admitted that the concern is that the use runs with the land and not the specific operator. • Reminded that the Council's desire was to have live entertainment that includes up to four musicians. • Stated that she is leery of saying yes to this request. It would be hard to monitor it. Commissioner Rivlin asked what precludes a use from using speakers in a shop or restaurant venue. What is the concern with use of a DJ? Commissioner Hernandez said that is a good question. Planner Daniel Fama: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 5 • Said a DJ booth is not hypothetical. There is someone there operating the booth and music. • Reminded that a restaurant can change ownership. • Added that a DJ has interaction with a crowd. Commissioner Hernandez: • Said that she has dined many times at Willard Hicks and it has always been a good experience. They have excellent food. • Admitted that making this decision is a difficult choice. • Pointed out that the Code is very clear. The Downtown Alcohol Policy is also very clear. • Stated that a DJ does not qualify as Live Entertainment. • Reminded that the CUP goes with the land and can be transferred to other users. • Stated that enforcement actions take a long time to garner results. • Pointed out that there is one restaurant that is still open even though we (PC) revoked their CUP. • Added that it is unfair to put a burden on the Police Department to deal with when we allow these activities. • Said that what worries her more is that it sets precedent (allowing a DJ booth as a form of Live Entertainment). Others will say, "They have one. Why can't we?" • Concluded that she supports the staff recommendation for denial. Acting Chair Rich: • Said that he has gone to Willard Hicks and loves the place, the music, the ambiance and the use of the DJ and music booth. • Added that however it is not about what he likes. A DJ booth is not live entertainment. • Reminded that the Commission has guidelines it must adhere to. • Reiterated that he loves when he goes there and likes what he hears. • Said that if the Commission disregards Codes and guidelines, that is not a good direction or practice to take. • Concluded that he would go with the staff recommendation. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hernandez, seconded by Commissioner Dodd, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4381 DENYING a Modification (PLN2017-129) to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit (PLN2014-47) to legalize an unpermitted DJ stage within an existing restaurant with approved live entertainment, late-night hours, and general alcohol sale, on property located at 280 East Campbell Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Dodd, Hernandez, Rich and Rivlin NOES: Reynolds ABSENT: Kendall ABSTAIN: Young Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 6 Acting Chair Rich advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Acting Chair Rich read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record as follows: 2. PLN2017-85 Continued Public Hearing (from the meeting of April 11, PLN2017-86 2017) to consider the adoption of the Campbell Village Neighborhood Plan (PLN2017-85) and associated Text Amendment (PLN2017-86), to revise various sections of 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: June 20, 2017. Project Planner. Stephen Rose, Associate Planner Mr. Stephen Rose, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Acting Chair Rich asked if there were questions of staff. There were none. Commissioner Hernandez disclosed that she had met with one of the neighbors of the Campbell Village Neighborhood and talked about setbacks. Commissioner Reynolds said he also spoke to a neighbor. He advised that he had taken the time to watch the April 11, 2017, Planning Commission meeting that he was absent from, in preparation for the continued hearing to occur this evening. Commissioner Young said he also met with a couple of the neighbors from the Campbell Village Neighborhood. Planner Stephen Rose advised that some properties could be more impacted than others by the proposed changes. That includes corner lots and cul de sac properties that often have unusually-shaped lots. Commissioner Young asked staff could quantify with a percentage the number of impacted lots. Is it between 11 and 17 percent? Planner Stephen Rose responded that was a fair enough estimate but the number could be lower and went on to say that for some properties it will be harder to move the house out on the first floor and easier to go up to a second story due to the unique lot configuration. Acting Chair Rich opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Jo-Ann Fairbanks, Resident on Hacienda Avenue: Campbell Plar7~~ir?c~ ~`;~~r~r~P~~i~=~,ic~Pl f;.~li~r.d~~. ~ ~~~9~ C~~i~~~,, ~:3, ?C)~1 ~ ~'~~;~e 7 • Suggested that the Commission consider either revisions to or a continuance of this draft plan. • Held up a 1979 draft copy of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan that she personally had typed out on a typewriter. • Stated that mandatory specifics don't work. • Expressed concerns about privacy impacts. • Cautioned that this plan will come back to "bite" the Planning Commission and the community. There are missing items. Director Paul Kermoyan said it is unclear where the Commission will go this review tonight. The plan may ultimately be continued for future consideration and modification. Jo-Ann Fairbanks said she would forward some of her additional thoughts in writing to the staff for their donsideration. Sang Luu, Resident on Erin Way: • Stated his support for setbacks as they are currently defined as half the wall height. • Opined that larger setbacks are not needed, this would unduly restrict their options. • Reiterated that the current setback standards are adequate. It's not broken. • Said that changing it could make things worse not better. Mike Krisman, Resident on Sweetbriar Drive: • Stated his support for 20-foot rear setbacks. • Pointed out that the 20-foot was actually a compromise from a proposed 25-foot. • Reported that there have been at least a dozen remodels in the last few years. Those included public noticing and a review process. • Added that under the proposed CVNP, there would be no Site and Architectural Review for additions 1,000 square feet or less. There will be different conditions moving forward. • Reported that he submitted a letter that demonstrates that between 20 and 25-foot rear setbacks are the standard for most of the other nearby communities. Lisa Dow, Resident on Stonehurst Way: • Stated her concern about changing the rear setback standard. • Recounted that she and her husband were the first to come to City Hall on the first day their neighborhood was formerly in Campbell after the Annexation was completed to submit their remodel plans for review. • Cautioned that if this 20-foot minimum rear setback had been in place, they would not have been allowed to build their new bathroom on the first floor but rather would have had to go up to a second story. • Displayed photographic exhibits that demonstrate the views, as seen from her home, of the two-story homes that surround her property and the associate privacy impacts from them. "They are watching over us in our yard," she lamented. • Said that they all fought so hard to come into Campbell. Kristen Johansen, Resident on Normandy Drive: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 8 Said that her home is just 1,200 square feet on a 9,300 square foot lot. Suggested that this is a silly restriction and is not necessary and equates to a pitfall for others. Stated that there are differing styles of home throughout their neighborhood. That is what the flavor and character of their neighborhood equals. However, on her side of the neighborhood, they still do need a renaissance. Steve Rapa, Resident on Sweetbriar Drive: • Said that there are a lot of red flags here. Things that need to be addressed. • Stated that this needs to be revisited. These rules are not right. • Asked that these proposed rules not make an affect on all of their properties. Anne Souza, Resident on Central Park Drive: • Advised that she has an R-1-6-zoned property with an R-1-8-zoned property right behind hers. That property has a garage located just five feet back from their shared property line. • Admitted that she would hate to see a portion of her rear neighbor's house situated just five-feet away from their rear property line. Imagine her back neighbors overhearing casual conversations that occur in her backyard. • Said that while she is okay with afive-foot side setback, she is not okay with afive- foot rear setback. • Stated that she likely would not be able to grow anything in her backyard as a result of daylight losses that could result from having a back fence residence built up to a five foot distance to her property. • Concluded that would be a loss of property value. Patrick King, Resident on Shamrock Drive: • Gave a quick overview of the history of the annexation process to get the former Cambrian 36 into Campbell rather than San Jose. • Recounted that 12 years ago, the State acted to require County pockets be annexed into assigned cities. • Said that after eight years of meeting between residents and representatives' of both San Jose and Campbell, San Jose was persuaded to let Campbell annex Cambrian 36 (now known as the Campbell Village Neighborhood. • Pointed out that former Mayor Evan Low has stated that this successful annexation was the accomplishment of which he was most proud. • Said that 99 percent of Cambrian 36 voters supported higher property tax rates for their neighborhood to help offset the financial losses to San Jose from giving up the pocket to Campbell. Randee McQueen, Resident on Sweetbriar Drive: • Suggested that R-1-6 and R-1-8 properties remain unchanged. • Reported that the last four meetings were led by Public Works and created distrust in the neighborhood between those who want changes versus those who don't. • Admitted to feeling betrayed. Steve Klise, Resident on Erin Way: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes l'c~~ M~v ~3. 2~'1 ~ ~'~~e 9 • Said that he can understand that a neighborhood will grow. • Added that he also can understand the need for more housing. • Stated that he disagrees that R-1-8 lots should have to meet R-1-6 standards. • Suggested a simplified permit process and using the same setback standards as used in the rest of our City, including maintaining the R-1-8 setbacks. • Reported that 75 residents signed a petition supporting a reduction of rear setbacks in R-1-6 to five feet. • Concluded that he is happy to be a Campbell resident. Lisa Harmer, Resident on Briarwood Drive: • Stated that text amendment would change the situation whereby there would only be an administrative review regardless of lot size. • Pointed out that the average home size is 1,400 square feet. This draft plan would basically allow a doubling in home size without notifying anyone. • Thanked everyone for their consideration. Chris Whitaker, Resident on Sweetbriar Drive: • Thanked the Commission for hearing the residents. • Pointed out that other nearby jurisdictions require a minimum 20-foot rear setback for R-1-8 zoned properties and a 10-foot side setback for R-1-8. • Said that supporting the best practices of the rest of Campbell and other nearby cities honors the promises made to them when Campbell annexed this neighborhood. • Suggested the Commission approve the same R-1-8 setbacks utilized for the rest of the City. "Good fences make good neighbors." Kevin Paskett, Resident on Sweetbriar Drive: • Said that he loves Campbell. "It's great! • Said it was important to have simplified processes for getting approvals for additions while still offering some freedom for changes without excess process. There is a difference between a 1,000 square foot addition versus a 500 square foot addition. Marty Sexton, Resident on Dallas Drive: • Said that the architectural design of every house within their neighborhood is unique. He has a home with a metal roof to one side of his home and another with a red the roof on the other side. • Added that both open and closed fencing should be allowed. • Stated that no action is required on the subject of columns. • Pointed out that there are few balconies in their neighborhood. • Suggested that no more setback restrictions are necessary. Few homes will be torn down in this neighborhood in order to be completely rebuilt. Rather most will simply be adding on to their homes. Carrie Whitaker, Resident on Sweetbriar Drive: • Said that she has lived in her home since 2003. • Added that she was part of the annexation efforts. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 10 • Stated that she loves living in Campbell. • Said that specifics of the Campbell Village Neighborhood Plan seem to have created conflicts within their neighborhood. It seems to be a battle of personal interest rather than overall neighborhood benefit. • Said that her home is within an R-1-8 zoned neighborhood and she went through the County's review process. • Agreed that if rear setbacks are allowed to be reduced to five-feet, neighbors will be able to hear conversations occurring on their neighboring property. • Suggested perhaps having a Variance opportunity for any "funky-shaped lots". Mike Jacoby, Resident on Briarwood Way: • Reported that he has been living in this neighborhood for 20 years. • Stated that describing a neighbor's house as "gross" is not a nice thing to say when using a photograph to demonstrate it as an bad example. • Said that the process of drafting this plan is "ripping this neighborhood apart." • Pointed out that there are multi-million dollar homes here. This is the third major change in their area over afour-year period. • Opined that the CVNP seems to be a "second cousin" to the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan (STANP). However, the STANP neighborhood is nothing like their neighborhood (CVNP). He'd like to avoid that comparison. Jim Brantley, Resident on Stonehurst Way: • Reported that he moved into the neighborhood two years ago with his wife and three small children. • Advised that his property is an odd-shaped lot. It is "pizza" shaped with the house situated at the back of the property. • Stated that the CVNP will adversely impact his property, which is frustrating and disappointing to him. • Suggested staff figure out how best to mitigate impacts of the CVNP standards on odd-shaped lots. • Asked that the CVNP not be approved until that issue is addressed. • Agreed that the development of the plan seems to have torn this neighborhood apart. He's not so sure the benefit will be worth the cost. Thomas Peterson, Resident on Shamrock Drive: • Said that his property is zoned R-1-8. There are odd spaces on his property such as where there are zero setbacks to garages that are on his neighbors' properties. Everything is grandfathered in. • Advised that he has a red the roof on his home. He is putting a deposit on a red the that includes solar. With that model they won't be required to have those large solar panels. • Stated his support for having the same setback standards for R-1-6 and R-1-8 zoned property. • Added that he has great neighbors on all sides. These are people who are acting responsibly. All are investing a lot in their respective properties and want their values to go up. He has a granny unit on his property that helps them to add value to Campbell. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 11 Maggie Ostrowsky, Resident on Cambrian Drive: • Said that she is the new President of the Campbell Village Neighborhood Association. • Thanked the Commission for its work. • Pointed out that an odd-shaped lot is restrictive with a required 20-foot rear setback. Corner lots are unnecessarily restrictive. Autumn Chin, Resident on Normandy Drive: • Said that she moved into her home two years ago and it is an R-1-8 corner lot. • Agreed that this topic is tearing the community apart with differing personal opinions. • Stated that she really likes her neighborhood. There are large lots and privacy is good. • Added that the former owner of her home remodeled 10 years ago and she wants to keep it the way it is. Acting Chair Rich closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Commissioner Dodd: • Assured those in attendance that the Commission truly hears what the residents are saying. • Added that she is sorry to hear that the issues are causing strife and upset. • Stated that she is happy to hear so many of them identify this is "my neighborhood". It is clear that everyone feels strongly about their neighborhood. • Asked Director Paul Kermoyan if given the fact that there will be specific lots adversely impacted no matter what is decided, is a Variance or Exception process possible to deal with those? Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that an area plan was desired by the residents. It will be implemented by Council's adoption of an Ordinance. • Added that an area plan provides the ability for some relation to the Code. A "standard" is a written requirement while an "exception" is a process. • Suggested that perhaps there could be a reference in the CVNP to a Variance process and/or to some other process. Commissioner Hernandez suggested some sort of reference in the CVNP to an option for unique-shaped lots. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Cautioned that the idea of a "perfect" set of standards will not occur. • Reminded that they want their standards to be "like the rest of the City's". Commissioner Dodd asked if there is potential for a Variance on a case-by-case basis. Director Paul Kermoyan acknowledged that certain lots are more restrictive base on their size and shape. Additionally, corner lots have two front yards. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 12 Commissioner Hernandez asked if it is necessary to have separate standards for R-1- 6 and R-1-8 zoned properties or could they be the same. Planner Stephen Rose: • Reminded that the previous draft established separate standards for both zones. • Added that after several meetings, the decision was to have one set. Commissioner Hernandez asked about the R-1-8 standards. Director Paul Kermoyan advised that the only other R-1-8 zoned lots are located within the STANP area boundaries. Commissioner Reynolds: • Thanked all the neighbors for their participation and input. • Recognized the efforts of those who were there from Day 1 working to have this pocket come into Campbell. • Reported that he was there at the Camden Community Center when the efforts began. • Pointed out that this small group of residents took on the 10t" largest City and they won. • Said that what he sees after reading the materials, hearing comments made tonight and watching the last meeting, is that a percentage of the folks want to see something new while the other side wants to preserve what they have and don't want change. • Stated that what we have before us is critical and we have to get it right. He doesn't want to rush the process and make wrong decisions. • Said that our obligation is to put a recommendation forth to our Council that retains the charm and feel of their community. • Agreed that the biggest topic of concern seems to be setbacks. Including whether we should allow property owners to build closer to their rear property line when in the past it wasn't allowed. That changes character. • Said that he doesn't buy that allowing afive-foot setback will prevent an owner from still choosing to go with a second story. • Concluded that we have to make it fair for everyone. Acting Chair Rich asked Commissioner Reynolds to elaborate what he means by "character". What specific attributes? Commissioner Reynolds: • Started with the 20-foot rear setback. • Cautioned that he doesn't want to see McMansions. • Said that he would like to retain the beauty of that neighborhood. Commissioner Young: • Said that the objectives were very clear. • Added that for the first four objectives, there are no arguments. • Said that the fifth objective is what everyone is talking about. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 13 • Reminded that the Commission had proposed additions of 500 square feet or less but Council preferred upping that to additions 1,000 square feet of less under an administrative review. • Admitted that he doesn't want to take away flexibility for things such as allowing consideration of adding a second story to an existing single-story residence. • Said his preferences are as follows: o Architectural Style -Option 2 o Roof Design -Option 3 o Building Materials -Option 2 (No restrictions). If there are concerns they will come before the Planning Commission. Acting Chair Rich asked if anyone could specifically call out what materials should be restricted. They should be listed. Commissioner Young: • Continued his preferences as follows: o Stories /Building Height -suggested using the staff recommendation. Admitted he was hesitant to set limits as he doesn't know the situation. Staff will bring it to the PC when deemed necessary. Director Paul Kermoyan reminded that these additions 1,000 feet or fewer have no discretion. They will be processed via a building permit. Commissioner Young: • Continued his preferences as follows: o Fences and Tall Entry Features -deferred this to others o Privacy - 20 feet versus 5 feet ^ 20 feet -Option 2 • Said that there are a lot of irregular lots as seen while he was walking through the neighborhood. Commissioner Rivlin: • Said that the side setbacks include a greater setback for the second floor. That step back also serves as a privacy feature. • Agreed that it is nice to have space and air in the backyard. • Stated he understands peoples' need to hold on to something that is valuable. Acting Chair Rich asked the Commissioners to pick their preferred option on: • ARCHITECTURAL STYLE: o Option 1: Reynolds o Option 2: Young, Hernandez, Rivlin, Dodd and Rich • ROOF DESIGN: o Option 3: Reynolds, Young, Hernandez, Rivlin, Dodd and Rich • BUILDING MATERIALS: o Option 2: Reynolds o Option 3: Young, Hernandez, Rivlin, Dodd and Rich • STORIES /BUILDING HEIGHTS: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 14 0 35 feet / 2 '/2 stories: None 0 28 feet / 2 stories: Reynolds, Young, Hernandez, Rivlin, Dodd and Rich • UNIQUE DEISGN FEATURES /FENCES: o Option 1: Reynolds, Young, Hernandez and Rich o Option 2: None o Option 3: None o Option 4: Rivlin and Dodd • TALL ENTRY FEATURES: o Option 1: Reynolds, Young, Hernandez, Rivlin, Dodd and Rich o Option 2: None o Option 3: None • BALCONIES /SECOND FLOOR DECKS: o Option 1: Reynolds, Young, Hernandez and Dodd o Option 2: None o Option 3: Rivlin and Rich Commissioner Rivlin said that balconies and second floor decks are an appropriate feature in this area. Commissioner Dodd said that it would be important to make sure they are not impacting others. Director Paul Kermoyan said that balconies have the greatest potential to create privacy impacts. He suggested created an objective standard such as; • Shall not face side yards • Rear yards when screened by a wall • Minimum 20 foot setback. Commissioner Dodd: • Said that she liked the idea of an obscuring wall on a balcony that restricts views from the side onto adjacent properties to help retain privacy for those neighbors. • Added that she would not be supportive of a balcony on the side elevations. Commissioner Hernandez agreed with no balconies on side elevations. Commissioner Reynolds said he could support balconies on the rear elevation as long as they are set back at least 20 feet. Commissioner Rich said he would also be okay with a balcony on the front. Acting Chair Rich asked the Commissioners to pick their preferred option on: • CARPORTS / 3-CAR GARAGES: o Option 1: Young o Option 2: Reynolds o Option 3: Hernandez, Dodd, Rich and Rivlin Commissioner Hernandez said she would discourage carports. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 Page 15 Commissioner Reynolds said he would prohibit 3-car garages and carports. Acting Chair Rich asked the Commissioners to pick their preferred option on: • PRIVACY STANDARD: o Option 1: Reynolds o Option 2: Young Acting Chair Rich: • Stopped the polling to suggest continuing this issue as well as setbacks. • Pointed out that they are the most contentious and vocal issues. Commissioner Dodd said that lot coverage was also a big issue as it relates to setbacks and privacy. Commissioner Young asked if there is anything further that the Commission would like staff to provide at the next hearing. Commissioner Rivlin asked if there is an analysis of properties that do not have a minimum 20-foot setback. Planner Stephen Rose replied no. Acting Chair Rich listed the issues to cover at the next hearing as being: Lot Coverage (40 versus 45 percent), Privacy and Rear Setbacks (minimum of 5 versus 20). Director Paul Kermoyan: • Said that there are many reasons people in the neighborhood wanted to come into Campbell. One was that Campbell is a smaller city than San Jose. Another was anticipating an easier process for permitting construction. • Added that there is not one uniform reason why. • Admitted that he is not sure how much more analysis staff can do at this point. Acting Chair Rich asked whether it might be possible to resolve the lot coverage issue this evening. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Explained that a greater FAR creates more second stories. • Said that the suggestion is to align the FAR and lot coverage at .45 percent. • Reported that people at the community meetings agreed but it was not all residents in the neighborhood who were there. • Added that there was a desire to have an ability to seek relief. • Added that a compromise might be to have large setbacks (20 feet) and create a way to relax if the findings make sense. Commissioner Dodd asked if staff could come up with something that actually says that. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for May 23, 2017 F'~cre 16 Director Paul Kermoyan said that staff can draft that. Acting Chair Rich asked the Commissioners to pick their preferred option on: • LOT COVERAGE: 0 40 FAR/40 Lot Coverage: Reynolds 0 45 FAR/45 Lot Coverage: Hernandez, Young, Rivlin, Dodd, and Rich • Reiterated his suggestion to continue privacy and setbacks to a date uncertain. Director Paul Kermoyan suggest continuing to a date certain instead and proposed the June 27th meeting. He said that staff would return with a provision to relax standards based upon certain findings. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rivlin, seconded by Commissioner Young, the Planning Commission CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2017, consideration of the adoption of the Campbell Village Neighborhood Plan (PLN2017-85) and associated Text Amendment (PLN2017-86), to revise various sections of Title 20 (Campbell Subdivision and Land Development), and Title 21 (Zoning) of the Campbell Municipal Code to implement the plan, with the request that staff bring additional information on the issues of privacy and side/rear setbacks. (6-0-1; Commissioner Kendall was absent) *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Director Paul Kermoyan had no additions to his written report. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:47 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting a 13, 2017. SUBMITTED BY: Corinne Shinn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: / ~ '~t~ Michael Rich, Acting Chair ATTEST: Paul K r o an, Secretary