Loading...
PC Min 09/28/2004 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 28, 2004 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of September 28, 2004, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Doorley and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: George Doorley Elizabeth Gibbons Tom Francois Joseph D. Hernandez Michael Rocha Bob Roseberry Commissioners Absent: Commissioner: Bob Alderete Staff Present: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Associate Planner: Planner I: Planner I: City Attorney Redevelopment Manager: Recording Secretary: Sharon Fierro Geoff I. Bradley Tim J. Haley Stephanie Willsey Melinda Denis William Seligmann Kirk Heinrichs Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission minutes of September 14,2004, were approved as submitted. (6-0-1; Commissioner Alderete was absent) COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications items. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no modifications or postponements. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 2 ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARING *** Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record. 1 PLN2004-95 (ZC) PLN2004-96 (PD) PLN2004-97 (TS) Warmoth, J. Continued Public Hearing (from the Planning Commission meeting of September 14, 2004) to consider the application of Mr. Jeff Warmoth, on behalf of Campbell Avenue Associates, LLC, for a Zone Change (PLN2004-95) from C-3-S (Central Business District) to C-PD (Condominium Planned Development); a Planned Development Permit (PLN2004-96) and Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2004-97) to allow the construction of a three-story mixed-use building accommodating 22 residential condominiums, 11,240 square feet of retail and 4,760 square feet of retail mezzanine space on property owned by the City of Campbell Redevelopment Agency located at 175-201 E. Campbell Avenue in the C-3-S (Central Business District) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that a Negative Declaration be adopted for this project under CEQA. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: October 18, 2004. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner. Commissioner Gibbons advised that she would have to recuse herself due to an employment relationship with this project's architect. She left the dais and the Council Chambers. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicant is seeking approval for the development of a vacant site on the corner of Second and E. Campbell Avenue, adjacent to the City's parking garage. · Explained that this property was designated as a Master Development Site by the Redevelopment Agency in 1998. · Reminded that the previous proposal for this site, by Barry Swenson Builder, was for a two-story retail and office building. This project did not proceed to construction. · Informed that Sand Hill Development entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with the City in November 2003 for two critical properties within the City, this one and another at Creekside Way. · Stated that Council held a Study Session for this current proposal in March 2004. They were supportive and stressed the importance of details with the architectural style. · Reported that the applicant is applying for a Zoning Classification Change from C-3 (Central Business District) to C-PD (CondominiumIPlanned Development). Additional applications include a Planned Development Permit and Tentative Subdivision Map to allow the construction of a three story building. The first floor would consist of retail space, there would be a retail mezzanine above that and two floors of residential condominiums above. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 3 · Stated that this project is consistent with the proposed C-PD Zoning, consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Central Commercial and consistent with the Redevelopment Agency goals for the Downtown area. · Recommended adoption of four resolutions for this proposal. The first resolution would recommend that Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The second resolution would recommend that Council approve a Zoning Classification Change. The third resolution would recommend Council approval of a Planned Development Permit. The fourth resolution would recommend Council approve a Tentative Subdivision Map. · Reported that SARC reviewed this project. Chair Doorley asked staff which Commissioners participated in the SARC review of this proj ect. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied Commissioners Roseberry and Alderete. Commissioner Roseberry presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee Permit report as follows: · SARC reviewed this proposal at its meeting of August 24, 2004. · Reported that SARC was generally supportive of the project but had issues with the monolithic nature of the design. · Added that SARC tried to articulate that concern to the architect that it found some portions of the proposal to be lacking but did not give specific direction for changes. Chair Doorley asked if changes were made since the SARC meeting. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied no, the plan before the Commission this evening is the same plan as was reviewed by SARC. Commissioner Hernandez asked staff for the distance between the building and curb as shown on Drawing 2. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley advised that there are two deeper sections along E. Campbell Avenue, at the east and west ends of the building, which are 18 to 19 feet deep. At the center of the project, the distance is 12 to 13 feet. Along Second Street, the distance ranges between 18 feet down to 8 feet. The distance is wider at the ends of the building to accommodate outdoor seating for restaurant uses. Commissioner Hernandez pointed out that at the Council Study Session, it was discussed that there would likely be restaurant tenants at the corner and west end of this building. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied yes. Commissioner Hernandez asked if there would be room for a 9 to lO foot wide outdoor seating area that left sufficient room for pedestrian access. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied that the typical sidewalk width is 8 feet. There is an addition 10 feet available to accommodate the outdoor seating areas. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 4 Commissioner Hernandez reported that he has a problem with the possibility of restaurant tenants in areas where the sidewalk width is only 13 feet. Associate Planner Tim 1. Haley agreed that this would limit the possibility for outdoor seating there. Commissioner Hernandez asked staff to provide the building heights. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied that the height is 41 feet at the roofline. The tower elements exceed the 45-foot limitation to screen equipment and elevator shafts. The west tower is 49 feet and the other tower is 52 feet. Additionally, there would be a parapet along the flat portion of the roof. Commissioner Hernandez asked for an explanation of parapet. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley reported that it is a type of false western front. Commissioner Hernandez asked if this is like a façade. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied yes. A parapet may extend the 45 foot height limitation. Commissioner Hernandez asked if this exception is to cover mechanical equipment. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied correct. How much the height of a parapet may extended depends upon the size of the building. It is tied both to the size of building and to the amount of equipment to be screened. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley added that only two portions of the building exceed the 45 foot height in order to screen mechanical equipment. Commissioner Rocha asked staff the building height for the Campbell Brewing Company building. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied he did not obtain that detail but can provide the height of the Stacks building. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley offered to check the files for that detail. Chair Doorley reported that this issue came up at the Council Study Session. Commissioner Francois asked for the Stacks building height. Associate Planner Tim 1. Haley replied 36 feet. Commissioner Hernandez asked if the Initial Study took into consideration the expansion in square footage from 30,000 square feet to 50,000 square feet. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 5 Associate Planner Tim J. Haley reported that additional traffic analysis was performed. It was found that this updated project is reasonable with no significant impacts. He added that evaluating traffic for mixed uses does not include the residential component. Commissioner Hernandez asked if this is a discretionary action. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied that it is a policy in the General PIan. Director Sharon Fierro said that the code establishes the maximum height. It is a policy of the General Plan to rely on maximum height and SARC review in lieu of FAR. Commissioner Hernandez clarified that this is a policy rather than a discretionary action. Director Sharon Fierro replied yes. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 1. Mr. Jeff Warmoth, Project Applicant: · Thanked the Commission for hearing their proj ect. · Stated that they are excited about the design. · Expressed his thanks to staff, saying that they have not always seen eye to eye with staff but worked hard to meet the City's standards. · Said he was available for questions and that his architect, Rob Steinberg, is also present. · Explained that they got to the proposed height because the current minimum wall height standard for residential uses is nine feet. They have two floors of residential with nine foot ceiling heights. Additionally, they want to create a different retail experience by having 20 foot ceiling heights, which is 17 feet clear. That retail product is not currently available in the Downtown. Brokers advised that it is necessary to have that height to attract national retailers. · Assured that they want this to be a successful retail building for the Downtown. · Stated that Rob Steinberg would address the issue of the proposed roof times, which are a cutting edge material. · Said he was available for any questions. Commissioner Francois asked Mr. Jeff Warmoth how ceiling height attracts retailers. Mr. Jeff Warmoth replied that there are trends in merchandising. Vaulted ceilings with light fixtures coming down, open trusses and exposed HV AC systems are the look that retailers and restaurant uses want to see. Commissioner Hernandez asked Mr. Jeff Warmoth if he expects to be able to get this building rented quickly. Mr. Jeff Warmoth advised that they are very close to letters of intent. A restaurant use is currently under negotiations. They have a building designed that will offer great flexibility in tenant spaces. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 6 Chair Doorley said that the building has a somewhat homogenous look to it. Mr. Jeff Warmoth said that they have worked hard on this building and intended no disrespect for SARC in not changing the design following the SARC meeting. He said that it is more a reflection on where they had been and how much they liked the building they were presenting. Mr. Rob Steinberg, Project Architect: · Stated that he is pleased to be here and happy to present this design. · Said he would like to address two elements from the staff report. · Assured that this building would be a tremendous addition to the Downtown, a type of building not currently available here that would add to the retail base with very interesting residential. · Added that a mixed-use development adds vitality to the Downtown. · Pointed out the issue of articulation at the top of the stucco, as mentioned in the staff report. He said that they were not opposed to the embellishments proposed but that the pre-cast terra cotta on the sample provided is hard to do today and is costly. He added that they are agreeable to working with staff to achieve that goal. · Spoke to the issue of the zinc (metal) roofing at the corners. These would be exclamation points at the ends of the building. This is an organic material that changes with the character of light. The building takes on a different character at different times of day. This material works well and has been used many times. They are planning to use it on a high end residential project currently under construction at Stanford University although it has not yet been installed. He added that he wants to reserve judgment until that project is done. · Stated that they did not intend to ignore SARC or staff comments. · Said that the project façade includes articulation that consists of a solid corner, smaller recessed niche, small retail spaces consisting of three pieces with similar dimensions but with different details and with ample sidewalk space for tables. Commissioner Hernandez asked what the different setbacks were for the buildings. Mr. Rob Steinberg replied approximately three to five feet. They want to offset the spaces for individuality but not by big setbacks where debris or people can hide at night. Materials include glass, stone, decorative tile work, differing awnings, a series of columns and floor to ceiling glass. One piece of the façade is being repeated. They have tried to mix up height, depth and variety. Chair Doorley said that the color seems to be similar and monochromatic and looks like one building instead of six. Mr. Rob Steinberg replied that this is a good observation. They have tried to balance between making everything all the same versus everything being too different. Sometimes too much effort is made to make things look different so that it looks too stiff. They have tried to get a balance architecturally through form, plan and vertical expression to get variety. Chair Doorley suggested that greater color variation at the street level but not at the upper level might help. He asked if this suggestion would through their plan off. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 7 Mr. Rob Steinberg: · Replied no. · Added that they want to work with the City and provide a building that is a strong contributor to the Downtown. · Stated that they envision a pedestrian area with a lot of variety and different materials. · Said that if the Planning Commission feels differently, they respect that and they can look to varying color. · Cautioned that in his professional opinion too many changes in colors and materials might make the project look more like a quilt blanket and lose some of the architectural strength. Commissioner Francois asked Mr. Rob Steinberg if he could consider some sort of roof articulation in the middle of the building that currently appears very flat. He suggested some sort of architectural treatment to give it more flair. Mr. Rob Steinberg said that his instinct was to have this area even more calm that it is and put the focus on the corners. A big event at the middle of the block signals a big entrance. Added that he would love to see tables on the corner and feels it is okay if the middle relaxes a bit. Commissioner Hernandez said that having a pedestrian scale is a predominate part of this project. Expressed concern on the impression for pedestrians when walking by and looking up at a 50 foot high building. Mr. Rob Steinberg expressed his confidence in the pedestrian scale and pointed out that the building as it is depicted on the elevation would never be visible in the same scale from the same distance due to existing buildings surrounding the area that would prevent as clear a view. He assured that there would be a sense of individuality and an eclectic nature to the building. Commissioner Hernandez asked Mr. Rob Steinberg if he had done any surveys of Campbell regarding the types of architecture that exist in the community. Mr. Rob Steinberg replied yes. He added that they worked closely with staff, walked the streets and looked at height lines. He promised that this building would provide a very graceful transition to the parking garage, will fit in and look like it belongs here. Commissioner Rocha reported that he recently visited Santana Row, where the buildings are four stories high, and that one has to make the effort to look up at that height from the retail level. Mr. Kirk Heinrichs, Redevelopment Manager: · Stated that RDA gave Mr. Jeff Warmoth very clear direction that the retail component of this project has to work. · Reminded that this is a small Downtown and it is unlikely that the opportunity to redevelop one block will happen again. · Stressed the importance of a successful project that looks good and offers a retail catalyst for the Downtown. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 8 · Expressed confidence that this project could work and fit in with this location in the Downtown. Ms. Susan Blake, 84 N. Third Street, Campbell: · Advised that she is the Vice-Chair of the City's Historic Preservation Board. · Stated that this is a critical project and that the location, size and design must be compatible with the west end of the Downtown. This site serves as a gateway building and provides a first impression. · Expressed concerns with the size and architectural style of this proposed building, saying that it is massive and too tall. · Pointed out that the building faces a narrow street and would dwarf other buildings in the area. · Said that the project does not reflect the unique Downtown and pointed out that the new VTA Light Rail station is more compatible with the Downtown that this project is. · Said that the design does not offer enough setbacks to allow café style seating. · Stressed the importance that the project reflect the uniqueness of Campbell and serve as something that the City can be proud of. Mr. Joseph Gemignani, 3520 Union Avenue, San Jose: · Expressed his agreement with the comments made by Susan Blake. · Stated that this is a very important property in Downtown Campbell III a prominent location. · Stated agreement that this project is too massive. · Said that he is not impressed with the zinc roofing materials and questions its appropriateness for the City of Campbell. · Stated that he thinks that clay tile would be more appropriate as it is used well in Downtown buildings. · Acknowledged that this developer has tried to make their project more traditional but warned that the roofs with be noticeable. · Suggested that the corners of the building face a 45 degree angle so that the entrance faces the corner rather than the street frontage. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Commissioner Hernandez pointed out that the staff report suggests that further architectural details be approved at staff level and questioned why these issues not be returned to the Commission. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied that the two issues include terminating the vertical elements and roofing materials. Agreed that these issues could be handled by staff, SARC or the Planning Commission. Associate Planner Tim 1. Haley added that SARC wanted additional brick to be incorporated along the Second Street frontage to compliment the adjacent parking structure. Senior Planner GeoffI. Bradley added that the introduction of brick begins at the 3.5 foot level and increases as it nears the garage and residential area. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 9 Commissioner Francois asked why the project has strayed from the original concept that was approved. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley advised that the project approved was an office/retail project that was two-stories high. The crash of the office market effectively made that project unfeasible to build. Commissioner Francois said that he would like to see an architectural treatment over the middle portion as it currently seems generic and needs more character. Other than that, the project looks good. Chair Doorley asked if there are time constraints with this project. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley said that there are no issues remaining that cannot be resolved at staff or SARC level. Director Sharon Fierro added that the types of changes sought are material changes that are insignificant rather than architectural changes. However, this project could be brought back. Expressing timing constraints is an issue for the developer and/or Redevelopment Agency. Mr. Kirk Heinrichs said that as far as he was concerned this project could have been built four years ago. He added that there is nothing in the DDA that precludes the City from bringing this project back to the Planning Commission for additional review. However, a developer is generally on a time clock. Mr. Jeff Warmoth: · Reported that they took a gamble and spent money on structural and mechanical drawings for this proposal so they could submit to building in about four weeks time but they understood the risk when they took that step. · Advised that it is hard to convince tenants to sign a lease until ground has been broken. It is a chicken and egg situation. · Stated that he would prefer an approval that allows them to come back with elevation detail changes. · Assured that they could design a roof to support clay tile. · Explained that they had tried to do something different and that the zinc roofing proposed was not less expensive than using clay tile roofing would be. · Stated that with PC approval, they could go forward for building permits. · Said that they have tried to integrate their project with the City's attractive parking structure. · Agreed that they could start the articulation earlier in the building. Chair Doorley: · Stated that he is not upset by the size of this building as he feels the Downtown can and should be able to accommodate it. · Said his concern is that this building reflects a more modern look than would seem to fit. · Added that he is not concerned with the idea of the corners being central focal points but that he would to see more traditional building forms incorporated. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 10 · Suggested that the project come back with more of the building forms that the Commission saw previously with the originally approved project. Commissioner Roseberry: · Said that this is a very important project in Campbell. · Stated that economic realities must be faced and that a lot of thought and hard work has gone into this proposal. · Said that the character of the City does not require all buildings to look alike and that the design professional for this project has expressed himself very well. · Said that he does not want to promote this project out of economic necessity but because it is the right thing to do. · Said that this project is well thought out, classic and that he is supportive of it. Commissioner Hernandez: · Said that he is excited about this project and feels that it is important to have something built there. · Expressed concern that this project, encompassing a whole city block, is very large. · Stressed the importance of making sure this project is done right and said that he is not sure that the proj ect is there yet. · Stated that this is not really just a three story building. It is more than double the height of the two story building next door and gives more of an appearance of a four story building. · Said that the roof elements above the maximum allowed creates exclamation points and that this project dwarfs the structures around it. · Stated that he is not sure that this project relates harmoniously with the Downtown. It seems like this big building is being dropped in here. · Agreed that use of color plays in here and the building can be broken up with color. · Said that he is struggling with this significant project and is not sure this is the right interpretation. Chair Doorley said that he is okay with the size of the building but that it appears others are not. He asked for feedback on this specific issue from the others on the Commission. Commissioner Francois: · Stated that this is a better project than the dirt that is there now. · Reported that he fell in love with the original concept. · Said that this project seems pretty generic and does not wow him. · Agreed that the height does not bother him. · Asked staff for the height of the Campbell Brewing Company building. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied 37 feet. Commissioner Francois pointed out that it is about the same as this proposal. Commissioner Roseberry: · Said that this is a small Downtown and this will be the biggest and tallest building. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 11 · Said that land values are at a premium and that two story buildings are becoming the norm, even for residential, due to high land costs. · Stated that the size of this building is okay. Commissioner Rocha: · Said that he does not have as many issues with scale and size as Commissioner Hernandez. · Stated that the two tower elements reflect on the building's focus. · Said that he understands the proposed ceiling heights. · Seconded Commissioner Francois suggestion to have some sort of architectural element at the middle of the building. · Seconded the recommendation that clay tiles be used in lieu of the proposed zinc. · Asked about the parking allocation on this site. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley advised that the on-site spaces would be allocated to the residential units. Retail parking would be accommodated by street parking and the City's parking structure. Reminded that the garage was sized to accommodate this site as well as the total build out of the Downtown. Commissioner Rocha said that he would like to see more work done on this proposal. Commissioner Hernandez asked how the parking would be managed. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley reported that there are actually only 17 on-site spaces now since the trash enclosure to serve the site has grown in size. The parking would be similar to Stacks parking, covered at grade. It would be exclusive to the residents and would be enforced through the posting of signs. Director Sharon Fierro added that the applicant would pay an in-lieu fee for the loss of that one space. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied correct. Chair Doorley suggested a continuance with guidance for the applicant to bring changes back to the Commission. Commissioner Rocha said that the size of the building is the first issue to be addressed. Commissioner Hernandez said that the size is not as much of an issue as some architectural and materials elements. Chair Doorley suggested that architectural forms from the original office building design be incorporated into this project. Commissioner Francois: · Said that it would not be fair to Mr. Steinberg to replicate Mr. Bruno Marcelic's project. · Stated that this project would still be here long after this Commission is gone. · Stressed the importance to get it right. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 12 · Supported a continuance and concurred with the comments regarding the desirability of elements from the previously approved project for this site. Commissioner Roseberry said that the changes necessary are more cosmetic than substantive. This project will work. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission continued consideration of the development project at 175-201 E. Campbell Avenue to the Planning Commission meeting of October 26, 2004. (5-0-1-1; Commissioner Alderete was absent and Commissioner Gibbons abstained) *** Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.2 into the record. 2. PLN2004-91 Ayalew, M. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Merat Ayalew for a Modification (PLN2004-91) to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of a commercial day care center within an existing commercial building on property owned by Mr. Daniel Garza and Ms. Helva Bendik located at 2265 S. Winchester Boulevard in a P-D (Planned Development) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner. Chair Doorley advised that this item is proposed for continuance. Commissioner Gibbons returned to the meeting to rejoin the Commissioners following the completion of Agenda Item No.1. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley advised that staff is now recommending a continuance to a date uncertain. He informed the Commission that the applicant is having problems with the property owner regarding the lease. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 2. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission continued to a date uncertain consideration of a Modification (PLN2004-91) to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of a commercial day care center within an existing commercial building on property owned by Mr. Daniel Garza and Ms. Helva Bendik located at 2265 S. Winchester Boulevard. (7-0) *** Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 13 Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.3 into the record. 3. PLN2004-103 Stockton, B. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Bob Stockton, on behalf of DSL Service Company, for a Modification (PLN2004-1 03) to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the remodel of an existing commercial building (Downey Savings) owned by DSL Service Company located at 1480 W. Campbell Avenue in a C-I-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. 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 approval of a Modification to a Site and Architectural Review Permit for property located at San Tomas Aquino Road and West Campbell Avenue to remodel the exterior and redo the parking area as well as install a substantial landscaping area and installation of the streetscape standards. · Explained that there is no expansion of square footage for the building. · Said that the proposal is consistent with the Zoning and development standards. · Stated that one less parking space would be provided on site but that staff has no problem with that elimination based upon parking demand for the bank use. · Recommended adoption of a Resolution approving this request. Commissioner Gibbons presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee Permit report as follows: · SARC reviewed this project on September 14th and was supportive. Chair Doorley asked if this site would still be used as a bank. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied yes and said that the site is not set up for retail uses. Commissioner Rocha pointed out that Downey Savings owns this site and will likely have it for a long time. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 3. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 3. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 3586 approving a Modification (PLN2004-103) to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the remodel of an existing commercial building (Downey Savings) owned by DSL Service Company located at 1480 W. Campbell Avenue found this project to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 14 NOES: None ABSENT: Alderete ABSTAIN: None Chair Doorley advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days. *** Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.4 into the record. 4. PLN2004-1 06/1 07 Martinez, J. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Jose Martinez for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2004-106 & 107) to allow the construction of two new two-story single-family residences on property owned by Mr. Tony Baig located at 1461 & 1511 Burrows Road in an R-1-1O (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Melinda Denis, Planner I Ms. Melinda Denis, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicant is seeking Site and Architectural Review Permits for the construction of two new two-story single-family residences on two vacant lots located at Estrellita and Pollard. · Described the surrounding uses as residential and the density as Low Density Residential. The zoning is R-1-10,000 and the site is within the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan jurisdiction. The new two-story homes would include attached three-car garages and a front courtyards, porches and yards. · Stated that these homes are compatible with the neighborhood in scale and mass and the design meets the requirements of the STANP. · Recommended the adoption of Resolutions approving two Site and Architectural Review Permits. Commissioner Gibbons presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee Permit report as follows: · SARC reviewed this project on September 14th and was supportive with the use of decorative pavement, concrete roof tiles for Unit #2, and obscured glass for the garage windows for both units. Chair Doorley asked if these changes have been incorporated into the plans. Planner Melinda Denis advised that the applicant has not modified the plans but these requirements are contained within the Conditions of Approval. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 4. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 15 Ms. Meg Stein, Representative, San Tomas Neighborhood Association, 1203 Hazel Avenue, Campbell: · Said that she had the opportunity to look at the plans. · Explained that she has received some communications about this project and how it fits into the area. · Stated that a letter received outlined five issues of concern. One concern is the perceived blind corner at Estrellita and the visibility for making right turns from Estrellita onto Burrows. The second concern is the question of whether this elevation fits within the San Tomas Area, which is typically Craftsman style architecture and predominately single- story. · Suggested that this home may fit the rules but may not fit the character of the neighborhood. · Said that another issue is the side yard for one of the homes which would run along Estrellita and the impression that a long line of fencing would give an unfriendly appearance as one enters onto Estrellita from Burrows. · Pointed out that Estrellita does not call for curbs, gutters or sidewalks while Burrows does. · Reiterated that the key concerns raised were the blind intersection and the incompatibility of the architectural style. · Offered that the houses themselves are very nice. Chair Doorley asked staff to address the side yard setback issue as it pertains to fencing. Planner Melinda Denis: · Replied that the side yard fence would be set in by five feet from the property line as depicted in Sheet 8-2. The fence begins about 2/3 of the way down Estrellita and no fencing would be placed at the corner. A 3.5 foot high gate would serve for security at the driveway. · Agreed that no sidewalks are required along Estrellita and the Public Works condition for these improvements would apply on to Burrows and not Estrellita. · Pointed out that a 50-foot setback would be provided between the building and the corner. On that side, only a single-story element would be placed with the two-story element being situated on the interior portion of that lot. Commissioner Gibbons said that the dark line on plan sheets A-3 and A-5 are not clear that the area near the pool is back by five feet. Planner Melinda Denis advised that this would be corrected. Commissioner Gibbons questioned the heights and setbacks of fencing as depicted on the plans. Planner Melinda Denis said that fencing 42-inches or lower can be located anywhere on the property. Commissioner Gibbons cautioned that the clearance for the sliding gate for the driveway would have to be checked. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 16 Planner Melinda Denis assured that the required 30 foot clear triangular clearance would be provided at the corner. Ms. Susanne Waher, 1381 Estrellita Way, Campbell: · Expressed her delight at being here before the Commission. · Stated that she is concerned with lots ofthings. · Said that she is glad that the issue of sidewalks along Estrellita has been addressed. · Said that the length of fence along Estrellita is of concern. · Advised that the biggest concern is the line of sight visibility. · Explained that the street shape is like a peninsula. One must look across this property to view traffic coming from Pollard down Burrows prior to making a turn onto Burrows from Estrellita. · Advised that right turns are not a problem but that left turns are a challenge. · Said that inclusion of trees and security gate on this portion of the property causes concern as these items might impact visibility. · Added that a security gate is not in character with this neighborhood where picket fences are the standard. · Stated that these homes are huge and towering for this neighborhood. · Said these homes do not fit in at all, particularly the Hacienda style home. These homes do not look rural and the two-story high portico makes that home look even more imposing. · Suggested that a different style would be better suited. Mr. Jose Martinez, Project Architect: · Said he sympathizes with the neighbor comments. · Stated that the forces behind the design were the visibility factor and the assurance that there be no obstruction of the corner for traffic visibility. · Assured that trees can be relocated and are included on the plan only for illustration purposes. · Reminded that the fence along Estrellita does not begin until about half way down the block. No fence would be placed in the corner. · Added that the two story element for the corner house has been moved to the back of the property and sits way back. The garage is 25 feet away from the front property line and the rest is about 50 feet or more away. The second story is about 50 to 60 feet from the front property line and about 75 feet away from Estrellita. · Informed that he took the opportunity to survey the local architecture in the San Tomas Area and found that this Mediterranean style is there and well received in the neighborhood. · Agreed that small scale homes abut this property and stated that they have sloped everything away from the neighbors. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 4. Chair Doorley: · Advised staff that he is surprised to see this style supported for this area by staff · Reminded that the Commission had denied such architecture for the San Tomas area before for something that fits better. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 17 · Asked staff to address these stylistic concerns. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley advised that staff had a similar reaction at first to the Spanish style architecture but found that a house just kitty corner from this site also has a red tile roof. Chair Doorley challenged that this does not mean that this style fits and should be duplicated. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley advised that no specific architectural style is called out for within the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. The STANP calls for architectural variety. Commissioner Hernandez said that there is lots of roof visible here and questioned how it could be broken up. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley said that staff had the applicant reduce the wall plane and step down the roof, which makes a large home look smaller if well designed and executed. Commissioner Hernandez asked about whether the portico feature were reduced or not there. Planner Melinda Denis advised that staff worked on lots of variations and revisions to achieve this current proposal. The portico was brought down in height. Reminded that the landscaping plan provided is only conceptual and a final landscape plan would be processed at the time of building permit issuance. There will be no trees located at the corner. Issues of landscaping and fencing placement can be conditioned. Commissioner Roseberry asked if there is a stop sign at the corner of Estrellita onto Burrows. Ms. Susanne Waher replied yes. Commissioner Roseberry: · Stated his agreement with Ms. Waher's statement that this area at Estrellita and Burrows is a peninsula with lots of exposure of the perimeter. · Said that these are big houses on big lots. The land is expensive. · Pointed out that this is one of the more eclectic neighborhoods around with many formal homes and remodeled homes. This is a gateway area. · Said that having the driveway on Estrellita is a good thing. · Said that these may not be perfect homes but the applicant has done a good job of putting these on this property. Commissioner Francois said that the only issue is safety and the applicant has addressed the safety issue. Said that he had no problems with the compatibility of these homes in this already eclectic area. The proposals are dialed in with the STANP. Commissioner Gibbons: · Stated that SARC missed a few issues. · Said that SARC looked favorably on the efforts taken to keep these homes low and that the height of the main living rooms did not strike them as disproportionate. · Added that these buildings came together. They are similar but look substantially different. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 18 · Said that issues of fencing, gates and fountains could be looked at by staff. · Said that having trees with good height (36-inch box) in the corner might be a good thing. · Suggested that the gate in the driveway must leave enough room for a car to be pulled in totally off road. · Said that these are large but lovely and nicely detailed homes. · Advised that she is overall supportive with refinements to the conditions. Chair Doorley: · Said that the proposal for Spanish-style architecture in the San Tomas Area sits badly with him after so much time was spent developing the STANP. · Said he had no problems with the size of these homes. · Cautioned that architectural styles should not be allowed simply because other examples of that style exist in the area. Some of those styles resulted in the development of the STANP to prevent their recurrence. · Advised that he would not support this application. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hernandez, seconded by Commissioner Francois, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 3587 approving Site and Architectural Review Permits (PLN2004-106 & 107) to allow the construction of two new two-story single-family residences on property owned by Mr. Tony Baig located at 1461 & 1511 Burrows Road and found this project to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA, with the conditions that the Community Development Director review the fencing for Lot 2, driveway sight lines and landscaping on Estrellita and that SARC comments 1, 2 and 3 are incorporated, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Alderete ABSTAIN: None Chair Doorley advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days. *** Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.5 into the record. 5. PLN2004-92 Nguyen, T. Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Tiffany N. Nguyen, on behalf of Le Spa, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2004-92) to allow the establishment of a health spa including massage therapy within an existing commercial building on property owned by Mr. Jeff Wyatt located at 14 N. Central Avenue in the C-3-S (Central Business District) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, Planner I Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 19 Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a health spa with esthetician services included on property located on the east side of N. Central Avenue between E. Campbell and Civic Center Drive. · Informed that no off-street parking is provided for this location. · Said that this proposal does not result in an expansion of use so the provision of additional parking is not required. · Explained that the parking standard is one space for every 345 square feet. · Added that no exterior modifications are proposed. · Informed that the Campbell Police Department reviewed this request and had no comments relevant to the land use. · Recommended approval of this request. · SARC reviewed this project on Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 5. Ms. Tiffany Nguyen, Applicant and Business Owner, 14 N. Central Avenue, Campbell: · Introduced herself and stated she was available for questions. Commissioner Rocha asked Ms. Tiffany Nguyen about the nail care station and expressed concern about the potential of expanding that part of the use. Ms. Tiffany Nguyen: · Said that she would have just one station. · Added that space is very tight and it is her intention to operate as a day spa. · Explained that she is an esthetician who mostly does skin care and retail sales, which represents about 75 percent of her income. · Assured that this would not become a nail salon. Nail services are provided simply to be able to provide a full range of spa services to remain on par with other regional day spas in places such as Los Gatos and Saratoga. Commissioner Rocha thanked Ms. Tiffany Nguyen for alleviating his concern. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 5. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rocha, seconded by Commissioner Francois, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 3588 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2004-92) to allow the establishment of a health spa including massage therapy within an existing commercial building on property owned by Mr. Jeff Wyatt located at 14 N. Central Avenue and found this project to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Alderete ABSTAIN: None Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 20 Chair Doorley advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days. *** Commissioner Gibbons advised that she would also have to recuse herself from Agenda Item No.6 for the same reason as before, an employment relationship. She left the dais and Council Chambers. Chair Doorley read Agenda Item No.6 into the record. 6. PLN2004-69 Morley, E. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Eric Morley, on behalf of Morley Bros. LLC, for a Pre-Zoning Classification Change (PLN2004-69) from R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development) for unincorporated properties located at 16201 & 16239 Mozart.Avenue that are currently pre-zoned R- 1-6 (Single Family Residential). Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Tentative City Council meeting date: October 19, 2004. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, Planner I Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the proposal before the Commission is a Pre-Zoning Classification Change from R-I-6 to P-D for unincorporated properties located in a south County pocket that is within the City of Campbell's sphere of influence. The four parcels total 3.92 acres. The Land Use is Low Density Residential and no change is proposed. The P-D zoning designation is consistent with the General Plan and would not affect the maximum density allowed. · Recommended adoption of a resolution recommending this Pre-Zoning Classification Change. Chair Doorley sought clarification that this change does not establish the number of lots for this property. The Commission is not approving a map. Planner Stephanie Willsey replied correct. Mr. Scott Ward, Applicant, Classic Communities: · Said that it was a pleasure to be here to enable this project to move forward. · Stated that the staff recommendation is consistent with the City's General Plan, the County's General Plan and with LAFCO requirements. It will allow the City to create the flexibility to address site constraints with this property to allow high quality development. · Encouraged the Commission to approve staffs recommendation. · Said he was available for questions. Chair Doorley asked if more units would be permitted under this zoning than otherwise would be allowed. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2004 Page 21 Mr. Scott Ward said that 23 units would be allowed under the R-1-6 zoning. This zoning would allow marginally more at 24 units. Added that Council received this proposal favorably. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley advised that among the 23 units will be a couple of flag lots. Chair Doorley opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 6. Chair Doorley closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 6. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hernandez, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 3589 recommending approval of a Pre-Zoning Classification Change (PLN2004-69) from R-I-6 (Single Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development) for unincorporated properties located at 16201 & 16239 Mozart Avenue and found this project to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Doorley, Francois, Hernandez, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Alderete, ABSTAIN: Gibbons Chair Doorley advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days. *** 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 next agenda consists of three items. · Reminded the Commission of the Study Session on September 30th and promised that refreshments would be provided. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. to a Study Session to be held on Thursday, September 30, 2004, and subsequently to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting ofOelober 12,2004. ~ ' SUBMITTED BY: ~~ Corinne A. Shinn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: ~. '//Í ATTEST: