Loading...
PC Min - 08/22/2017CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. AUGUST 22, 2017 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY The Planning Commission meeting of August 22, 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: Commissioner: Commissioners Absent: Commissioner: Staff Present: Yvonne Kendall Michael L. Rich Cynthia L. Dodd Philip C. Reynolds, Jr. Andrew Rivlin Donald C. Young JoElle Hernandez Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Assistant Planner: Acting City Attorney: Recording Secretary: APPROVAL OF MINUTES Paul Kermoyan Daniel Fama Victoria Hernandez Barbara Choi Corinne Shinn Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Reynolds, seconded by Commissioner Young, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2017, were approved as presented (5-0-1-1; Commissioner Hernandez was absent and Commissioner Dodd abstained) Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 E~~ge 2 COMMUNICATIONS Director Paul Kermoyan listed the following items: 1. Desk Item for Study Session Item #1. 2. Desk Item for Study Session Item #2. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS None ORAL REQUESTS Jo-Ann Fairbanks, Resident on Hacienda: • Expressed her appreciation to the outgoing Commissioners saying she wanted to do so now just in case she cannot stay for the entire agenda this evening. • Thanked Chair Kendall for her work and dedication on the Commission. • Added that Commissioner Reynolds has been an amazing Commissioner that demonstrated stellar commitment to the work of the Commission • Concluded that their work has been greatly appreciated. *~* C(~NSFNT Chair Kendall read Consent Item No. 1 into the record as follows: 1. PLN2017-111 Review and approval of draft resolution reflecting the Commission's August 8, 2017, decision that 1) overturns the Director's decision to deny a Modification to a previously approved Administrative Planned Development Permit and 2) increases the maximum employees that are allowed on site at any given time at 35 Dillon Avenue from the current five to a maximum of six. The public hearing on this item was held by the Planning Commission on August 8, 2017. No further action other than finalizing the resolution. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner Director Paul Kermoyan: • Explained that Consent items don't require the opening of a public hearing. • Reminded that the Commission decided its action on 35 Dillon Avenue at its last meeting. • Added that following the last meeting, staff incorporated findings and conditions to the draft resolution. • Said that the Commission can either elect to pull the item off Consent and reopen its public hearing or can simply take a vote on the adoption of the resolution. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 3 Commissioner Dodd advised that she would recuse from this Consent item since she was not at the last meeting. Chair Kendall asked if there was any member of the Commission wishing to pull this matter off Consent for further discussion. There were none. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Young, seconded by Commissioner Rivlin, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4406 that overturned the Director's decision to deny a Modification to a previously-approved Planned Development Permit and 2) increases the maximum employees that are allowed on site at any given time at 35 Dillon Avenue from the current five to a maximum of six by the following voice vote: (4-1-1-1; Commissioner Reynolds voted no; Commissioner Hernandez was absent; and Commissioner Dodd abstained) *** PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Kendall read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record as follows: 2. PLN2017-204 Public Hearing to consider the application of Gregg Sunday for a Modification (PLN2017-204) to aterm-limited Conditional Use Permit and Parking Modification Permit (PLN2012-154) to extend the approval period for an existing small fitness studio (NorCal Functional Fitness) on property located at 529 Forman Drive, Suites D & E. 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 calendar days. Project Planner: Victoria Hernandez, Assistant Planner Ms. Victoria Hernandez, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Kendall asked if there were questions of staff. Commissioner Rivlin asked if there have been noise complaints for this use. Planner Victoria Hernandez replied no. Commissioner Rich asked if there were any complaints about this business at all. Planner Victoria Hernandez replied none. Chair Kendall asked staff the difference between music and amplified music. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 4 Planner Victoria Hernandez said that staff's recommendation is for non-amplified music that cannot be heard at nearby residences (of normal hearing). Chair Kendall opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Gregg Sunday, Applicant: • Reported that operationally they need to keep their music low as they are giving instructions to their clients during the training. • Assured that their use will not be heard over the other uses already occurring on site. Pete Bovenberg, Adjacent Property Owner: • Asked that this request not be approved due to existing shortcomings. • Reported that the Use Permit is not currently being followed. There are too many employees and too many customers for the size of facility. • Added that as a result the other businesses in the area suffer. • Claimed that three are approximately 29 cars associated with NorCal Fitness. Fifteen of those parked on site while about 14 are parked along the street. That excess is creating adverse effects. • Stated his belief that they (NorCal Fitness) need to reduce in size in order to meet on-site available parking. • Questioned whether the required disabled parking is provided. • Claimed that they are not meeting ADA requirements. • Requested that a qualified Traffic Engineer evaluate that issue. Commissioner Rich asked Mr. Bovenberg whether his concern is simply parking issues. Are there any other issues? Pete Bovenberg said his issue is just to be fair to all the businesses equally. They overflow onto the street every day. Admitted that he was not sure what the solution is. Commissioner Rich asked Mr. Bovenberg how he knows what cars on site and/or on the street are associated with NorCal Fitness. Pete Bovenberg replied all other businesses on site were already closed. Gregg Sunday, Applicant: • Said that it might be possible that more cars were parked on site for short periods of time as each class session transitions to the next one. • Added that some cars parked along the street could be associated with NorCal but not all of them. Some of them are cars of nearby residents. • Assured that NorCal is not causing parking problems in the area. • Reminded that the other businesses on site use eight spaces. They don't complain about us. Campbell F~~arirtiir~~ ~`~ar~~~~i~vi~r 1~11in~a~~~ f~ar~. ~'=~u~~as~ 22, ?"o ~ 7 f~oge 5 Chair Kendall closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Commissioner Rich: • Reminded that a Parking Modification is being requested. • Admitted that he is concerned with this use being short by four parking spaces. As such, he is not in favor of that. • Pointed out that the uses has operated with doors left open and amplified music for the last five years and no noise complaints have been received. • Said that he is willing to grant the PMP with a caveat to reconsider if problems/complaints are received. Chair Kendall said that is a standard condition with Use Permits. Commissioner Dodd said that typically three complaints is the trigger to bring a use back to the PC for review. Planner Victoria Hernandez advised that as drafted, any complaint would trigger a review. Commissioner Dodd asked staff about the claims made by Mr. Bovenberg that there is insufficient disabled parking on this property. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Stated that this is a shared site. • Added that this tenant is seeking a parking management plan. While their use per Ordinance standards is 19 spaces, they are conditioned to only have up to a maximum of 12 persons on site at any given time. • Said that the fact that they have 15 spaces assigned and need 19 spaces but are conditioned to a maximum occupancy of 12, it is to the discretion of the Commission to deliberate and determine if it is supportable. • Added that he is not sure who to attribute as responsible for overflow parking on the street. • Said that when this site was reviewed five years ago for use by NorCal Fitness, the issue of ADA parking would have been caught by the Building Division in plan review. Victoria Hernandez agreed that Building would have caught unmet ADA requirements and would have conditioned for that. Commissioner Young: • Reminded that Commission of another recent request for a business experiencing parking problems. There was nothing different from this. • Advised that he noted an ADA space on this subject site at the back of the building. • Added that he has looked at the draft findings and find them to be spot on. Their operational hours run to 9 p.m. and have transitions between class sessions. • Admitted that having 15 people as the maximum might be a problem. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 6 • Suggested that they remain with the current maximum of 12 rather than to increase the maximum to 15 as requested. Commissioner Rivlin: • Pointed out that the parking ratio for ADA parking is one per 25 stalls/spaces. This site has 27 stalls. • Admitted that the garage door being left open during sessions doesn't bother him. Complaints would bring the use back to the Commission for reconsideration. • Added that he is still considering the parking. Commissioner Reynolds: • Agreed with Commissioner Rich. The site is under parked right now but still okay. He is okay with the roll up door being left open for air. • Stated that the Building Division is on top of ADA requirements. • Reminded that this business has been operating well with no complaints. Said that as a result, he is willing to up their maximum occupancy to 15 persons. • Added that they have corrected immediately when problems have been raised by the City. • Said he gives them credit for that cooperation and will support this project as proposed. Commissioner Dodd: • Agreed with the other Commissioners. • Said she appreciates how this business has operated. • Added that she likes the conditions about the music and can support the roll up door being left open for air. • Admitted that she is not comfortable modifying parking and suggest sticking with a maximum occupancy of 12. Director Paul Kermoyan referenced Condition 7-f, which requires no amplified sound when the roll up doors and left open. Commissioner Dodd said she was okay with music. Director Paul Kermoyan clarified that when the roll-up doors are closed they can have amplified music but when the roll-up doors are open there is no amplified music. Commissioner Rich reminded that they have been doing this already with no associated complaints. Commissioner Dodd said she was okay with the way it is written. Commissioner Rich said that doors must be closed as written. Commissioner Dodd said they need music but they also need to have the door open at times since there is no air conditioning. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 7 Chair Kendall: • Stated that it is difficult to exercise without background music. • Said that she is okay with the doors open and music played as long as at a level that cannot be heard by nearby residents. • Advised that parking is not a problem going with 15 parking spaces to correspond with a maximum 15 occupancy. • Agreed that no workouts should occur outside the building. • Suggested painted text is placed on the ground in front of the doors to indicate "no outside exercise allowed here" on the tarmac. • Expressed support for parking modification to 15 spaces. Director Paul Kermoyan pointed out that this center has 15 stalls dedicated for this use where they technically require 19 spaces. That was staff's basis to recommend a maximum occupancy up to 15. He said that overlap between sessions could be where there could be a problem. Commissioner Young suggested adding conditions to prevent that perhaps by requiring ahalf-hour between classes. Commissioner Dodd questioned how that could be monitored. Commissioner Rich said that is not fair to this business and would be too cumbersome. Commissioner Young stated he is in favor of the staff recommendation as submitted. Chair Kendall asked if there was any support for her suggested signage painted on the tarmac in front of the doors. There was none. Commissioner Rivlin said that this wasn't really necessary. Commissioner Rich said he was okay with a maximum occupancy of 15 and with the doors being left open. He added that three verified complaints within a year would bring the use back for further consideration. Commissioner Dodd asked if the staff recommended one-year review of this use would include the issue of parking. Planner Victoria Hernandez replied yes. This application's approval will include Modifications to both the Conditional Use Permit and to the Parking Modification Permit. Commissioner Dodd said that she would go along with the proposed one-year review. Commissioner Rivlin said he was fine with staff's recommendation. Music is allowed and verifiable complaints would. bring the use back to the Commission for further review if necessary. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 8 Director Paul Kermoyan said any complaint has now been raised to up to three within one year. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Reynolds, seconded by Commissioner Rich, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4407 approving a Modification (PLN2017-204) to a term-limited Conditional Use Permit and Parking Modification Permit (PLN2012-154) to extend the approval period for an existing small fitness studio (NorCal Functional Fitness) on property located at 529 Forman Drive, Suites D & E, as modified: • Modify the condition that allows music when roll up doors are open as long as the music is not audible to a reasonable hearing person in nearby residences; and • Three verified complaints against this use received within one year will bring this use back to the Planning Commission for possible further review and conditions; by the following roll call vote: AYES: Dodd, Kendall, Reynolds, Rich, Rivlin and Young NOES: None ABSENT: Hernandez ABSTAIN: None Chair Kendall advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** 3. PLN2017-130 Public Hearing to consider the application of Holly Hartman for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2017-130) for the construction of a new single-story single-family residence using portions of an existing home, and a new detached garage on property located at 1019 Audrey 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 calendar days. Project Planner: Victoria Hernandez, Assistant Planner Ms. Victoria Hernandez, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Kendall asked if there were questions of staff. There were none Commissioner Rich provided the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: • SARC reviewed this item at its meeting of August 8, 2017, and was supportive with no changes. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 9 Chair Kendall opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Rick Hartman, Project Architect: • Said he was available for any questions. • Stated that there was aranch-style home there and there will be ranch-style architecture there now. The clients wanted asingle-story residence. Chair Kendall closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Chair Kendall stated that they have a lovely home. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Young, seconded by Commissioner Rivlin, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4408 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2017-130) for the construction of a new single-story single-family residence using portions of an existing home, and a new detached garage on property located at 1019 Audrey Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Dodd, Kendall, Reynolds, Rich, Rivlin and Young NOES: None ABSENT: Hernandez 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. 4 into the record as follows: 4. PLN2017-210 Public Hearing to consider the appeal (PLN2017-210) of Alex Keyser of the Community Development Director's interpretation of the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance (CMC Ch. 21.23) as applied to a proposed conversion of an existing accessory structure to an accessory dwelling unit, on property located at 1363 Capri Drive. 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 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 if there was access to this structure from the street. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 F~~e 10 Planner Daniel Fama replied that there is a fence. Access must consist of a driveway. Commissioner Rich said that seems to indicate that one cannot access the building at the back for parking of a vehicle. Planner Daniel Fama said that there is a gate in the fence. This property does also have an attached garage and the applicant has a permit in place for an addition. Commissioner Rich asked why their conversion request of this structure was denied. Planner Daniel Fama responded that it was determined not to be a "garage" as understood in the Ordinance. Commissioner Rivlin asked if the structure could be converted were it not located within a required setback. Planner Daniel Fama replied yes. Commissioner Rivlin restated that if the structure was further off the property line everything else is acceptable. Planner Daniel Fama said that the structure is well within the setbacks of 20 and 25 feet. He added that there is also a utility easement in place. Commissioner Reynolds asked whether after having a gate installed and placing two cars into this structure, could this owner reapply and have it deemed as a garage. Planner Daniel Fama said the requirement is that the structure had been considered an existing garage as of January 1, 2017. This structure did not qualify as of that date. Establishing a firm date was done to avoid this kind of situation. Chair Kendall opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4. Alex (and Lana) Keyser, Appellants and owners of 1363 Capri Drive: • Thanked the Commission for considering their appeal. • Reported that they have lived in their home for five years. • Added that they want what is best for Campbell and its residents. • Explained that the reason for wanting an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) is to serve as a home for his wife's mother, who can't afford to rent in this expensive area despite working 50 plus hours per week. • Said that the two issues in the Director's interpretation is 1) the definition of a garage and 2) parking. • Advised that there are two garage doors on their structure with a third bay in that structure that is without its own garage door to allow direct vehicular access. • Stated that the structure was permitted as a detached garage and has not changed since constructed some 60 years ago. The structure has no interior dividing walls. Campf~ell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22. 201 ~ Page 11 It is still being used for storage. They have a 12-foot wide gate to allow access to the garage via a gravel driveway. It is a huge space. • Advised that in March 2017, they approached the Planning Department and given the criteria for what represents a remodel versus new construction. There were four points and three or more equates to new construction. • Said that they are proposing absolutely minimum scope. There is no need to remove the metal roof even though they don't necessarily want to keep it. They will keep 100 percent of the current foundation. They would frame in the garage doors and install new exterior doors. They would frame out rooms within the structure. • Reported that their verbal estimate came in at $165,000. • Pointed out that the City may one day alter its current definition of a garage but this is the Code they must work with right now. • Discussed the easement issue, saying that it hasn't been used in the last seven years and probably won't in the future. • Said that Public Works has approved their application. • Suggested that the "right thing to do" would be to allow them to do this conversion. This structure will look nicer than the current condition of the building. Commissioner Young asked where they currently are parking. Alex Keyser said they have athree-car garage planned for their home. Planner Daniel Fama: • Said that under the new Ordinance, a new house is defined. It is intended to help determine when an existing house becomes a "new" house. • Stated that it is "not to determine when a garage becomes a house." • Advised that the existing easement can be vacated. It requires a formal action taken by the utility holding the easement. • Added that the City cannot issue a permit until said easement is vacated. Director Paul Kermoyan • Whether a garage holds a washing machine or workshop is not the issue. The issue we look at with new homes is required covered parking. • Added that this structure's use has been discontinued for many years. • Admitted that it was difficult to make this decision but we have to draw a line to what extent a building can be rebuilt before it is a new structure. • Pointed out that this property could accommodate a secondary living unit just not in this particular location. Chair Kendall closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4. Commissioner Rich asked staff what the threshold is for cost of construction before a remodel is determined to be a new structure. It seems these owners had one bid at $200,000 and another at $185,000. Director Paul Kermoyan said this is the first staff has heard about multiple bids. Thus far no plans have been submitted. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 12 Planner Daniel Fama said complete plans have not yet been submitted. Staff advised the appellants to wait until the Planning Commission has reviewed, interpreted and decided upon this appeal. Chair Kendall asked Director Kermoyan if he had any additional comments. Director Paul Kermoyan said that a garage is intended to accommodate vehicles. Codes require driveway access from the street to the garage. This structure doesn't meet those requirements. Commissioner Reynolds: • Said that this is a challenging one. The Commission is defining what a garage is tonight. • Opined that "wherever you can park a care is a garage." • Stated that this fits within the spirit of what our State is trying to achieve. There is a shortage of housing. We have to draw a line somewhere. • Said that he would call this a "garage." It's not a storage unit. It's empty and available to be parked in. It's a garage. Unless his mind can be changed. He's interested in hearing others' opinions. Commissioner Young: • Stated that people use their homes in different ways. This was built as a garage. They are not proposing to extend its existing footprint in this conversion. The issue of converting versus altering/remodeling. • Said that the Commission's determination on this will apply to other requests that come in similar to this one. • Referenced Findings 9 and 10. • Explained that the definition is intended to be narrow on purpose. The question is, "What is a conversion?" • Opined that the definition of garage as written is accurate. Commissioner Rich: • Said that this has the spirit of a garage. One must look past a concrete definition. • Admitted that he has struggled with this as well. • Added that whether or not the structure is loaded with stuff has no bearing on this. • Questioned the driveway and how one accesses this structure. • Suggested that the fact that you can place a car in it means calling it a garage. Perhaps that will change in the future. • Pointed out that there is no paved driveway serving this structure. That doesn't meet the definition of garage. Commissioner Dodd: • Referenced Finding 9. • Discussed the amount of work needing to be done to convert this structure into a dwelling unit. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 13 • Admitted that she can see that it was a garage but has not been used as one for a long time now. • Reminded that this property is large enough to accommodate a new accessory dwelling unit on site but this existing structure is not appropriate for conversion into an ADU. . Chair Kendall: • Stated her agreement with Commissioner Dodd that this structure was once a garage but is not currently a garage. • Also agreed that there is room on this property for an ADU but this structure is not in the right place or option to put it. Commissioner Young reminded that the definition will apply to all properties in the City moving forward. We need a definition that is fair and clear. Commissioner Reynolds questioned why if this structure was a garage at one time, why is it not now considered a garage. What's different? Where's the change? Chair Kendall reminded that this structure was constructed over 60 years ago and built as a garage. However, now there is an attached garage to the home serving this property. Director Paul Kermoyan gave as an analogy a residence on E. Campbell Avenue that was turned into a business. It has a bathroom but it is no longer a residence. It's now a commercial building and use. Commissioner Reynolds asked if the example on E. Campbell included a zoning change. Director Paul Kermoyan said the zoning changed from residential to commercial uses. Chair Kendall: • Reminded that this structure has not recently been used as a garage. • Said that if the Commission doesn't follow the definition it will become more confusing when reviewing the next such application. • Said that this definition is not depriving an ADU on this property. This structure is just not the best use for an ADU. Commissioner Reynolds said that the Commission is simply guessing that it's not currently being used as a garage. Commissioner Rivlin: • Said that the appellant showed a photo of the structure in question. • Added that photo doesn't show that it's not a garage. The fact that the third bay is lacking a garage door doesn't disturb him at all. • Reiterated that there is no evidence that it wasn't/isn't a garage. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 14 Chair Kendall said that there is already an existing attached garage serving this property. Planner Daniel Fama replied yes. Chair Kendall asked if the attached garage was constructed before or after the structure we're discussing was constructed. Planner Daniel Fama replied that the attached garage was probably constructed after the detached structure. Chair Kendall said that the attached garage being added after this detached structure was built helped her decide that this detached structure was not being used as a garage. Commissioner Rich: • Stated that he disagreed with that position. • Added that building a new garage doesn't "void" out an existing garage on site. • Asked Commissioner Young whether his concerns are with the "safety" of the proposed ADU conversion from this structure. What does that mean? Is less construction needed in order to support this conversion? Commissioner Young replied that the structural requirements for a garage versus a home are different and less. Commissioner Rich asked, "It requires a higher threshold?" He added that he doesn't see how that impacts the differences between the old and newer garage. Commissioner Young said that there are different circumstances every time. Avery succinct and/or narrow definition is important. Commissioner Rich referenced Finding 9 that establishes a lower cost solution for ADU via a garage conversion. Planner Daniel Fama said that the intent of the State legislation was to allow these conversions as being cheaper than new construction. In this case, they would effectively be rebuilding this detached structure into an ADU. Director Paul Kermoyan said that the decision made on the interpretation will dictate how we move forward. Commissioner Rich said that the setback is the issue. There would be no issue if the structure was set back by 25 feet from the property line. Planner Daniel Fama replied yes. Commissioner Reynolds: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 15 • Said it's time to define a garage. In his opinion they include garage doors, are accessible via a driveway (that can be pavers, gravel, pavement, etc. or anything but dirt) that demonstrates proof of access for use as a garage. It includes ability to park. Chair Kendall: • Reference page 130 of the packet that gives a definition of a conversion. • Said that the definition of garage involves being used for the storage of vehicles. • Added that a third of this building was not used for parking vehicles. Commissioner Reynolds suggested that it may have been a farm structure in the past. It could have been rebuilt from a former farm building. This was still an agricultural area. That possibility still exists. Chair Kendall agreed. Commissioner Rich: • Pointed out that this existing structure met the definition of garage when constructed 60 years ago. Now it does not. Both could be right in that it doesn't meet today's definition. Chair Kendall said that the third area to the right causes little concern about this being a garage. Commissioner Dodd: • Said that what she is hearing here is that this appellant is trying to take a structure building long ago and fitting it to today's standards for a garage. We're talking about nowadays garages. This doesn't fit. It's a square peg being fitted into a round hole. Chair Kendall admitted that is what she feels. Commissioner Rich said the definition didn't take into consideration 1960's-era pseudo-farm structures. Commissioner Young asked if the Commissioners felt that any of the findings are incorrect. He added that he went through them carefully. Commissioner Rich admitted that he is still struggling. The issue is the "lower cost solution" of a conversion versus a totally new construction. Commissioner Young: • Said that converting means using an existing structure mainly in its entirety. • This structure is from the 1950's. • Opined that it will not be a low-cost solution to convert this structure into an ADU. • Suggested that the intent is abare-minimum conversion. • Stated that Finding 9 does focus on what is happening here. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 16 Commissioner Reynolds suggested bringing attention back to the original permit that described athree-car garage. The use of this structure has not changed. It has not been proven that it has changed. He is hesitant to redefine the use of that structure without some evidence. Commissioner Rich reminded that the definition itself has changed. Commissioner Young said that the "burden of proof" is borne by the appellant to demonstrate that this has been a garage. Commissioner Reynolds reminded that the appellant moved in just five years ago. What was the use five years ago? They don't know any earlier than that. Chair Kendall said that entire space of the structure is to be left available for the parking of cars. Commissioner Rivlin suggested taking a straw poll vote to see where the Commission is at this point in time. Commissioner Young again asked if there are any issues with any of the provided findings. The Commission quickly, informally and briefly discussed several of the findings. Commissioner Young reminded that this definition is for all garages moving forward. It's not just this structure. He said he sees no finding that this does not meet. Barbara Choi, Acting City Attorney: • Clarified that these are findings that the Commission can adopt or not adopt. • Added that the Commission does not have the "burden of proof". These are but proposed findings until adopted by the Commission. Chair Kendall asked which Commissioners can uphold the findings as proposed. Commissioners Young, Kendall and Dodd raised their hands. Commissioner Rich: • Said that if the Commission agrees that this was a garage, he needs help with Finding 9. • Added that if this structure is a garage, how does this appellant achieve an ADU at a lower cost in this specific situation. Commissioner Rivlin said that it is a staff decision. Commissioner Young said that if a brand new ADU is constructed it would result in a higher cost to the appellant. Cam~~~ii ~l~~~i~c, C~L~~~rr~i~~ic~r~ [~int~t~s f®r August 22, 2017 Page 17 Director Paul Kermoyan said yes. He said the question is at what point is it a garage or something different? Chair Kendall questioned whether this is the kind of structure that the State Senate saw converted or is it more of an outbuilding than garage. Commissioner Young said that it is important to have as narrow description/definition as we have here. Commissioner Rivlin reminded that there are no plans to review at this time to see if the proposed rebuild is extensive. This issue could be caught later in the process. Chair Kendall said that could potentially put the appellant into a lot of cost. Commissioner Rivlin said that was not the idea but could be a possibility. Commissioner Dodd said that cost overruns are typical. We need something more cut and dry. Chair Kendall asked if anyone has changed their position since the last straw poll. Commissioner Rich was on the fence. Commissioner Reynolds? Commissioner Reynolds said that in his opinion this qualifies and meets the State Legislature's intent for conversions of garages into ADU's. He would vote to overturn that Director's denial. Commissioner Young: • Cautioned that the definition of "garage" has to work for many different situations. He added that he can see where Commissioner Reynolds is coming from. • Added that it opens up the need for interpretation by staff. • Pointed out that per the staff report and the Director's discussion, the decision was made in an extremely logical fashion. • Reminded that the low-cost bids are still more than $200,000. • Reiterated the importance of the definition of garage. Chair Kendall reminded that the appellants had advised they secured a $167,000 lower bid that they will take. Commissioner Young cautioned that was still close to the threshold. He reiterated that he has no disagreements with the draft findings. Commissioner Rivlin reiterated that the "burden of proof" is on the appellant. They must be able to prove that they conversion cost would be less than $180,000. If the costs go beyond that maximum amount, the conversion approval could be overturned. If they still below, it would be upheld as it is now. Chair Kendall asked Commissioner Rivlin whether, as an architect, this structure looks like a building that should become a house. -~... 4 e ~..<<~,rc~~S.pG'''i i~''Ic~i1'iEr~C.:r ~,t`~t~;jt?~ll~;~!{~f~l ~+1~lll't.l1;.=' ~4~9" f-~,f~l'..~L1,~+ .? ;~ ~,i I r' ~~~~ Commissioner Rivlin cautioned that he is a Landscape Architect rather than an Architect that designs buildings but he does feel like it could become a house were it not situation within a required setback. He asked staff to confirm the setback problem. Planner Daniel Fama: • Replied yes. • Added that for one or two-garage conversions there would not have the same setback issue as this detached larger structure. There is a different setback standard for a garage than for astand-alone ADU. • Using the interpretation, there is a minimum necessary to make it habitable from a garage into an ADU. Mainly interior work. Conversion is intended for an existing useable garage structure being made into an ADU. Commissioner Rivlin said that we can't tell what they're going to do. Planner Daniel Fama: • Agreed with Commissioner Rivlin and added that that a final determination is not yet possible as there is not enough information. • Stated that if the Commission agrees with the Director's interpretation, staff will look to see if this could uphold that test. • Clarify that there are two parts to this discussion and consideration. One is whether or not this existing structure is a garage. Does the Commission agree or not with the Director's interpretation. • Said that the second issue is that the existing structure is located two-feet into a public utility easement. While it is not currently in use and seems likely that easement could be abandoned, the City cannot issue a permit until it is so abandoned by the utility. Commissioner Rich asked if the denial could be overturned and the ultimate decision on the actual conversion be determined later. Planner Daniel Fama said that the Commission needs to reach its definition of a garage. Is this a garage? Does it meet the interpretation? Does this work? Barbara Choi, Acting City Attorney: • Cautioned that the draft resolution is actually comprehensive and not designed to be a two-part decision. • Added that the "burden of proof" is a legal term not applicable to the Commission. Its job is to weigh the evidence to decide how the Commission wants to interpret the terminology. Commissioner Young said he agrees with Acting City Attorney Barbara Choi and reiterated Finding 9. Commissioner Rich reminded that the threshold amount fora "lower-cost" conversion is $185,000 versus new construction. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 19 Commissioner Young asked where the Commission now stands. Commissioner Rich said that it seems the Commission is currently evenly split (3-3). Director Paul Kermoyan advised that a split decision is no decision. The appellant then has the choice to either appeal the Commission's non-decision to Council or wait for a full Commission to convene and vote with an uneven number (7 members) a final decision can be achieved. Barbara Choi, Acting City Attorney: • Referenced Chapter 21.62.050, which references the meaning of a deadlocked vote. With a tie vote, the Director's decision is recognized as final unless appealed to Council. Planner Daniel Fama added that the Commission could continue consideration to a future meeting when the two new appointees are available. Chair Kendall called for a motion. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Young, seconded by Commissioner Dodd, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4409 denying an appeal and upholding the Community Development Director's Community Development Director's interpretation of the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance (CMC Ch. 21.23) as applied to a proposed conversion of an existing accessory structure to an accessory dwelling unit, on property located at 1363 Capri Drive, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Dodd, Kendall and Young NOES: Reynolds, Rivlin and Rich ABSENT: Hernandez ABSTAIN: None Chair Kendall said that the Director's Interpretation is final unless appeal in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Director Paul Kermoyan said that another option is for the Commission to modify its motion for a new vote to see if a majority can be achieved. Alternatively, this item could be continued to a future meeting where there are all seven Commissioners in attendance. Third option, the appellant can appeal the Director's Interpretation to the City Council. Commissioner Young asked the other Commissioners whether their main issue is making ADU's easier to achieve or the definition of the garage. Commissioner Rich asked, "Is this not a garage?" Commissioner Dodd: C~m~bell l~ic~nning Commission Minutes fior Aug`.ast 22, 2017 ~r~ge 20 • Stated that absolutely it was not a garage at the time the ADU Legislation was passed. • Recounted that her son lives in a converted garage. It took little to convert that garage into an ADU. • Compared this structure with its corrugated roof, lack of interior walls and building's outside siding. It would take a great deal of work to convert that structure into a habitable space. • Concluded that she wants to see an incredibly narrow definition. Director Paul Kermoyan: • Stated that Acting City Attorney Barbara Choi had clarified that the draft findings reflect staff's thought process. • Asked whether the removal of Finding 9 would that change anyone's mind? One or more of the draft findings can be removed if the Commission wishes to do so. Acting City Attorney Barbara Choi said that the Commission is creating its interpretation not a definition. The definitions are already in the Code. Commissioner Young said that everyone is pretty set in their opinion on this. He asked Commissioner Rich if he still feels the same. Commissioner Rich said that removal of Finding 9 does change things for him. Commissioner Young asked the others if anyone else would have an issue removing Finding 9. Would that change anyone else's position on the vote. Commissioner Reynolds replied no. Commissioner Rivlin questioned whether removal of Finding 9 makes any real difference. Commissioner Rich said it relates to conversion versus new construction. Commissioner Young added that it also puts in a maximum dollar amount for the cost of conversion to remain a conversion versus new construction. Chair Kendall said that if not approved is there a way for these owners to have a much larger structure. Commissioner Reynolds cautioned that talking about cost is irrelevant and unknown. What if the appellant/owners did their own construction? Commissioner Young said that's the reason Commissioner Rich wanted it out. He asked Commissioner Rich if this edit changes his vote. Commissioner Rich said he still ponders the question, "Why is this not a garage?" Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 21 Chair Kendall said that a third of the space in not garage-like in nature. She added that she doesn't think that old building will be easily converted into an ADU. Commissioner Young said that it seems to be non-conforming based on current use. It has not been a garage in a long time. It doesn't conform to today's standards. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Young, seconded by Commissioner Dodd, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4409 denying an appeal and upholding the Community Development Director's Community Development Director's interpretation of the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance (CMC Ch. 21.23) as applied to a proposed conversion of an existing accessory structure to an accessory dwelling unit, with the removal of Finding 9, on property located at 1363 Capri Drive, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Dodd, Kendall, Rich and Young NOES: Reynolds and Rivlin ABSENT: Hernandez ABSTAIN: None Chair Kendall advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Director Paul Kermoyan had no additions to his written Director's Report: MISCELLANEOUS 5. Farewell comments from outgoing Chair Kendall and Commissioner Reynolds whose four year terms conclude with this evening's meeting. Presentation of Proclamations to each one and the 2017 Chair Plaque to Chair Kendall. Director Paul Kermoyan presented proclamations to Chair Kendall and Commissioner Reynolds. Commissioner Reynolds: • Said that serving on the Planning Commission has been an honor. • Thanked the City Council for the privilege to serve. • Thanked his colleagues on the Planning Commission for their commitment to the City of Campbell. • Thanked the staff, who put forth a lot of work into staff reports prepared for the Commission's consideration in advance of each meeting. • Admitted that he came onto the Commission eight years ago with an anti-growth attitude. Working as a member of the Planning Commission has been a labor of love. His love of this community and for his neighbors. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 22 • Said he hopes to have helped to leave something better for future generations including his own kids and grandkids. • Stated his advice to future Commissioners. Do your homework. Study hard. Ask lots of questions. There is a tremendous learning curve. It's important to learn to become an independent decision maker. • Thanked everyone for this wonderful opportunity. Director Paul Kermoyan presented the 2017 Chair Plaque to Chair Kendall. Chair Kendall: • Stated her agreement with Commissioner Reynold's eloquent comments. • Said that she too is glad to have this opportunity to have contributed to her City that she loves. • Admitted that service on this Commission has its challenges. It's not always easy to make decisions. • Stated that she was able to work with great people here on the PC. She is grateful for having been appointed by Council. • Thanked staff for always going above and beyond providing background information that helps this Commission to make the decisions it is called up to make. • Thanked everyone for her gavel plaque and joked that her husband doesn't know this gavel is coming into their house so watch out. 6. Selection of Chair and Vice Chair for balance of 2017. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rivlin, seconded by Commissioner Dodd, Commissioner Donald Young was selected to serve as the Vice Chair of the Planning Commission for the balance of the year. (6-0-1; Commissioner Hernandez was absent) Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Dodd, seconded by Commissioner Reynolds, Commissioner Michael Rich was selected to serve as the Chair of the Planning Commission for the balance of the year. (6-0-1; Commissioner Hernandez was absent) ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. immediately to a Study Session and subsequently to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of September 12, 2017. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 22, 2017 Page 23 SUBMITTED BY: orinne Shinn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: ~ '~ ";!~+ ° ,~'e'', :, ~ /~,, ,~,,.- Yvonne Kend II, Chair ATTEST: ` .- _ 1~ ,y-~ ~~; i ~~, Paul Kermoyan, Secretary