Loading...
PC Min 11/13/2001CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY NOVEMBER 13,2001 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of November 13, 2001, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Francois, and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Tom Francois Joseph D. Hemandez George Doorley Bob Alderete Elizabeth Gibbons Felicia Leonard Commissioners Absent: Commissioner: Brad Jones Staff Present: Community Development Director: Associate Planner: Planner II: Planner I: City Attorney: Reporting Secretary: Sharon Fierro Tim J. Haley Darcy Smith Stephanie Willsey William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission minutes of November 5, 2001, were approved. (4-0-1-2; Commissioner Jones was absent and Commissioners Doorley and Leonard abstained) COMMUNICATIONS. 1. Desk Item re Agenda Item No. 1. Planning Commission Minu~¢s of November 13, 2001 Page 2 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARING Chair Francois read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record. PLN2000-45 (ZC) PLN2000-46 (PD) PLN2001-81 (TS) PLN2001-118 (TRP) Cusella, S. Continued Public Heating to consider the application of Mr. Stephen J. Cusella for approval of a Zone Change (PLN2000-45) from R-3-S (Multiple Family Residential) to PD (Planned Development); a Planned Development Permit (PLN2000-46) to allow the construction of a four-unit townhouse development; a Tentative Subdivision (PLN2001-81) to create five lots; and a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2001-118) to remove five trees on property located at 861 Apricot Avenue in an R-3-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: Wednesday, January 2, 2002. Ms. Darcy Smith, Planner II, presented the staff report as follows: · Reminded that this application was continued from the October 30, 2001, meeting at which there were four Commissioners in attendance reaching a tie vote. The Commissioners present did not wish to forward the project on to Council without a recommendation and elected to wait until more members of the Commission were available to consider the proposal. · Informed that the applicant has developed a revised site plan that provides one additional parking space. The existing single-family residence and detached garage on this property will be demolished. · Said that this property's Land Use Designation is High Density Residential allowing up to 27 units per gross acre. The applicant's proposal represents a density of 14.8 units per gross acre. · Stated that the Zone Change sought is from R-3-S to PD. The PD (Planned Development) Zoning designation would allow for separate ownership of these townhome units. · Advised that the Tentative Subdivision would create five lots, four residential parcels and one common lot for the shared 20-foot, two-way driveway along the eastern property line to access the four homes. · Said that the building will be developed with two buildings using wood siding, composition shingles, a river rock base and large front porches for each unit. The rear yards range from five to 10 feet deep. · Added that a Tree Removal Permit is required for the removal of five trees on site, including a cedar, spruce and alder tree. An Arborist's report has been provided to substantiate removal of these trees. The applicant will be required to replace the trees with five 36-inch box trees. · Identified the parking on site, which meets the 3.5 spaces per unit, using two car garages for each unit, and six common spaces on site. The sixth exterior space has been created as a tandem space. The tandem spaces will be specifically assigned and are located north of Planning Commission MinuLcs of November 13, 2001 Page 3 Unit B. Additionally, staff is recommending that the width of the exterior parking spaces be widened from eight feet to nine feet. Recommended that the Commission adopt four resolutions in support of this application. Vice Chair Hernandez presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · SARC reviewed this project on October 9, 2001, and was supportive of the architectural design. · SARC had concerns about the shortage of one required parking space on site. City Attorney William Seligrnann announced that the Commissioners who were absent from the Public Heating on October 30th must stipulate that they have reviewed the minutes from the meeting in order to be eligible to participate in this evenings hearing and to vote on the proposal. Commissioner Doorley advised that he had both read the meeting meetings from October 30th as well as having viewed the videotape from that meeting in preparation for this evening. Commissioner Leonard informed that she too has read the meeting minutes. Chair Francois opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Steve Hanleigh, 671 Regas Drive, Campbell: · Advised that he is the owner of two adjacent properties to this subject site. Said that while he previously was supportive of this proposal, he has changed his mind upon further consideration. Said that the proposed tandem parking space will be blocked and does not represent a practical solution. · Questioned the placement of the air-conditioning unit for these four townhomes. Said that if placed in the rear yards, little area will be available as open space. · Stated that he has a problem with the mass of this project. · Said that in this area units typically range from 800 to 1,600 square feet while this proposal is for units at approximately 2,100 square feet. · Said that the project should be downsized in square footage and mass. · Pointed out that his tenants have problems parking on Apricot. · Suggested that this project layout be flipped so as to allow the possibility of a shared drive between this site and his adjacent property at such time that he is ready to redevelop his site. Mr. Bill Gould, Project Architect: · Agreed that a tandem parking space could be a problem in a larger, more anonymous complex. A project with four units is less anonymous and neighbors will know each other better and be more courteous and cooperative. · Pointed out that if the two tandem spaces are assigned to the same unit there will be no problems being locked in. · Explained that there will be no air-conditioning units installed and therefore no condenser units to place within the yard spaces. Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2001 Page 4 · Stated that today's buyers are more interested in internal square footage as opposed to outdoor yard space requiring maintenance. There is a market for this type of unit. · Said that they will utilize decorative pavers for the hardscape and the provision of generous porches provides additional outdoor space to these four units. · Pointed out that they are now meeting the City's parking requirements with this project and reminded that their use of the site is undersized per the City guidelines. Commissioner Hemandez asked Mr. Gould about the suggestion for flipping the orientation of the site as proposed by Mr. Hanleigh. Mr. Bill Gould replied that there is a natural break in the street trees for the proposed driveway access that does not occur if the project were to be flipped. However, it does not appear that flipping the project would adversely affect the site layout. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that per the previous meeting, the project is not being flipped due to a privacy intrusion on other properties. Commissioner Gibbons: · Stated that as designed, these units will not create privacy impacts because the second story elevations that overlook neighboring properties have closets running along that wall as well as frosted glass bathroom windows rather than larger windows. · Asked Mr. Gould if the alternate site plan has an impact on the rear yard spaces. Mr. Bill Gould replied that one yard is reduced from 10 feet to five feet in width while the second will remain 10 feet wide. Mr. Steve Cusella, Applicant, 871 Apricot Avenue, Campbell: · Pointed out that the footprint of this project is almost exactly the same as that of his project next door. · Said that he has discussed with his attorney the possibility of stipulating within the CC&Rs that no roommates are permitted in these units and that each unit may only be occupied by a single-family. Additionally, they can stipulate that exterior parking is limited to visitors only. Unauthorized cars can be towed off site. · Stated that he performed a parking survey on his street and found that the most impact occurs nearer to Union Avenue, along which there are numerous apartment buildings. · Agreed that the parking on Apricot is tight but that his project would not adversely impact parking on this street. · Declared that he was not interested in building apartments. Mr. Steve Hanleigh: · Said that he has been a realtor for the last 32 years and finds that a four-unit project is too small to self-police itself. · Stated that adequate parking needs to be provided on site and that he would love to see this project go forward with adequate parking. · Said that flipping the site layout could help with future development. Chair Francois closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Planning Commission MinuLes of November 13, 2001 Page 5 Commissioner Gibbons: · Said that this project has lots of wonderful things going for it including excellent design and the very good intentions of the applicant. · Added that despite that fact, she cannot support this proposal due to the mass of the buildings and the limited amount of open space with minimal on-site landscaping provided. · Stated that this project is just too much for too small an area and that she would not have held up the project only with parking concerns. Other issues also prevent her support. Commissioner Doorley: · Said that the applicant could easily build a five-unit apartment complex on site with less required parking. · Added that the applicant has responded to the concerns of the Commission raised at the last hearing. · Said that he would be supportive of this project either as is or with the flipping of the site plan if that is found to be necessary by the Commission. Commissioner Gibbons asked staff to identify the setback standards for R-3 Zoning. Ms. Darcy Smith replied five feet for rear and side yard setbacks for a single story structure. The side yard setback for a two-story structure is a minimum of five feet or half the wall height whichever is greater. The front setback is 15 feet. The allowable building coverage is the same. Commissioner Gibbons asked if this project complies with R-3 setbacks. Ms. Darcy Smith replied no. The side yard setbacks do not comply with R-3 requirements because the second story that is not recessed resulting in a setback that is less than would be required under the R-3 Zoning. Chair Francois: · Said that this is a townhome development for which livable square footage is more important than available yard space. · Pointed out that he owns a similar unit in Santa Rosa. · Said that he will support this proposal since the applicant has come up with the deficient parking space. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Doorley, seconded by Commissioner Hernandez, the Planning Commission took the following action: 1. Adopted Resolution No. 3394 recommending that Council approve a Zone Change (PLN2000-45) from R-3 to PD; 2. Adopted Resolution No. 3395 recommending that Council approve a Planned Development Permit (PLN2000-46) to allow the construction of four townhome units, with the added requirement to widen the parking stalls from eight feet to nine; 3. Adopted Resolution No. 3396 recommending that Council approve a Tentative Subdivision (PLN2001-81) to create five lots; and Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2001 Page 6 4. Adopted Resolution No. 3397 recommending that Council approve a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2001-118) to allow the removal of five trees; On property located at 861 Apricot Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Francois, Hernandez and Leonard NOES: Gibbons ABSENT: Jones ABSTAIN: None Chair Francois advised that this application will be considered by Council for final approval at its meeting of January 2, 2002. Chair Francois read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record. 2. PLN2001-116 Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Heather Shock, Shock, H. on behalf of Light Bodies, for approval of a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2001-116) to allow a holistic wellness center/massage establishment within an existing office building on property located at 1550 S. Winchester Boulevard in a C-PD (Condominium/Planned Development) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that this application is for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of a holistic wellness and massage establishment. · Informed that the applicant has worked at Innovators Beauty Salon for the last three years and is seeking an approval that will allow her to establish smaller and later grow her business to a maximum of 1,000 square feet of space at this site. · Added that one condition requires the applicant to submit a written application to the Police Department for approval to establish a massage establishment. The Police Department has indicated that they have no concerns. · Said that as there are no proposed architectural changes, SARC did not review this proposal. · Said that the existing parking for this site exceeds the requirements. · Concluded by stating that staff is recommending approval of this application. Chair Francois opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Chair Francois closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Leonard, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3398 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2001-116) to allow a holistic wellness center/massage establishment on property located at 1550 S. Winchester Boulevard, by the following roll call vote: Planning Commission MinuLes of November 13, 2001 Page 7 AYES: Alderete, Leonard NOES: None ABSENT: Jones ABSTAIN: None Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez and Chair Francois advised that this approval is effective in 10 days unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Chair Francois read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record. 3. PLN2001-117 D'Allessandro, T. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Todd D'Allessandro, on behalf of Hertz Local Edition, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2001-117) to allow a car rental establishment on property located at 2230 $. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt. Planning Commission decision final in 10 days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicants seek to establish a car rental agency on the east side of S. Bascom Avenue, south of Shady Dale and north of Dry Creek Road. The use will include an office for the car rental agency located within an existing commercial building. Added that the proposed use will occupy approximately 1,000 square feet or about 26 percent of the building area and proposes to store up to 12 rental vehicles on this site at peak evening and weekend times. During non-peak times, only five cars would be stored on site. · Identified this building as being constructed in the early 1960's with 20 parking spaces on site. However, the owner of this building also owns the adjacent building so 40 spaces are shared between the two buildings. The building is not improved to current standards, having no landscaping and a non-conforming freestanding sign as well as a five-foot high wall rather than the current requirement for a six-foot high wall separating this commercial site from adjacent residential. · Stated that staff is recommending denial because the proposed use requires a disproportionate share of available parking. Typically for 1,000 square feet, six spaces would be needed. Chair Francois provided the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · SARC agreed with staff that this proposal requires a disproportionate number of the available parking spaces for the entire building. Chair Francois opened the Public Heating for Agenda Item No. 3. Mr. Todd D'Allessandro, Applicant, Hertz Local Edition: · Stated that this location is a viable and important site for Hertz. Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2001 Page 8 Said that 90 percent of their business is insurance replacement vehicles while damaged cars are in the repair shop. There are lots of auto body shops in the area. Hertz has from five to eight drivers available to move cars from their various locations to get these vehicles to their clients as needed, usually delivering the cars to body shops. Commissioner Doorley asked Mr. D'Allessandro about shared parking. Mr. Todd D'Allessandro said that he would defer to the owner about parking but said that Hertz is sensitive to the other tenants' parking needs at all their locations. Commissioner Leonard asked Mr. D'Allessandro if Hertz could store all cars off site since there is such a high demand for parking at this Bascom location and the fact that Hertz is already using four of six allotted spaces for employees. Commissioner Hernandez proposed reducing the number of cars to eight and asked if the applicant is willing to do so. Mr. Todd D'Allessandro said that Hertz wants to locate in Campbell and is willing to examine all options. Chair Francois asked Mr. D'Allessandro what the minimum number of rental cars on site is viable for Hertz' operation. Mr. Todd D'Allessandro replied four. Commissioner Doorley asked if Hertz could operate at this location even with no rental car storage. Mr. Todd D'Allessandro replied yes and added that they can store cars at body shops. Mr. Larry Ballasaro, Project Realtor: · Said that this application is inviting a new business into Campbell. · Pointed out that this proposal is for the lease of an existing building and not a new development. There are no monumental changes proposed and this use will be less intrusive that the previous health food market. · Added that the sound wall is actually seven feet in height from the residential side due to grade differences on the two sides. · Said that they have other potential tenants that would be less desirable including massage or smoke shop businesses. · Stated his belief that the City is being overly restrictive in its review of parking and the proposed site improvement requirements are excessive. · Said that the sign on this property is over 20 years old and therefore "grandfathered." Director Sharon Fierro pointed out that contrary to what Mr. D'Allessandro has said, storage of Hertz rental cars at auto repair businesses would not be permitted. Auto related businesses already have their own parking requirements and most cannot accommodate extra parking such as this on their sites. Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2001 Page 9 Commissioner Hernandez asked Director Fierro if staff is treating this applicant any differently than any other. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied that per the Zoning Code, the Commission must review such a business on a case-by-case basis. Auto related uses require approval of a Conditional Use Permit while a solely office use, without vehicle storage, is a permitted use without need for a Use Permit. Additionally, this is an older building without typical improvements by today's standards. Commissioner Hemandez added that part of the goal for the Conditions of Approval is to bring this property more into conformance. Commissioner Gibbons pointed out that a similar application was considered along Bascom Avenue not so long ago and that this review is not unique but rather consistent with practices. Director Sharon Fierro reminded that a former photo shop converted a garage building into retail space. A number of improvements were imposed as a condition of the approval for that project. Mr. Steve McVeigh, Property Owner, 2230 S. Bascom Avenue (Project site): Said that he is a lifelong resident and property owner in Campbell. · Said that he seeks to find a good use for this property and cautioned that he does have a proposal for a smoke shop, a use that he prefers not to establish on his site. · Pointed out that there is a section at the rear of this property on which currently a cold storage unit is located. That unit is no longer required and with its removal there would be space to park up to nine cars without taking up any of the site's existing parking. · Said that while he can support the addition of some landscaping, asking for approximately $40,000 in landscaping, including at the back of the site, is cost prohibitive for a building that will generate about $30,000 in rental over a year's time. · Identified his future plans for the site as being a mixed-use retail/office use development. Commissioner Gibbons asked Mr. McVeigh if he has other proposed tenants for the remaining spaces in his building. Mr. Steve McVeigh replied a discount cigarette shop, a retail pottery business and a nail salon. Commissioner Doorley stated that the Commission does not have a preconceived notion about this proposal. Added that parking is routinely considered for each site and use. In addition to Hertz' use of this property, parking must also be available for the other tenant spaces on this site. Commissioner Hernandez asked Mr. McVeigh if he has reviewed the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Steve McVeigh replied yes. Planning Commission MinuLes of November 13, 2001 Page 10 Commissioner Hemandez asked Mr. McVeigh what conditions are palatable and what conditions are not. Mr. Steve McVeigh replied that the requirement for rear landscaping benefits no one. Said that he was willing to look at improving the sign and that he was agreeable to the requirement for front landscaping. Mr. Horacio Rodriguez, Owner, Innovator Salon: · Said that his building is located next door and that he feels it would be insane to have Hertz move onto this site. · Added that Hertz clients would not be beneficial to the other businesses located in the center. · Said that he did not believe that Hertz would limit itself to only four rental cars on site at any time. Chair Francois asked Mr. Rodriguez if there is shared parking among the owners and parcels. Mr. Horacio Rodriguez replied that each building is independently owned with its own parking. Commissioner Doorley asked staff if the proposal to park cars, where the cold storage building is currently located, is a viable parking area. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied that he did not feel that nine cars could be parked there but that four or five should be possible without much problem. Commissioner Doorley suggested limiting the rental vehicles to be parked in this rear area. Mr. Todd D'Allessandro replied that he absolutely could fit eight to nine cars stacked in this area. Added that he wants to be a good neighbor to Mr. Rodriguez. Chair Francois closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Commissioner Hemandez asked staff where the parking spaces are counted. Associate Planner Tim J. Haley replied that staff is not currently counting any parking in the cold storage building area. Chair Francois cautioned that if the other tenant spaces are occupied the parking will be tight at the back of this site. Commissioner Gibbons: · Stated that this building has 3,800 square feet with 19 spaces required. · Added that auto-related uses require a Use Permit. · Said that typically, a space with 1,000 square feet requires six parking spaces. Since there will be four full time staff for this Hertz location, that leaves just two spaces available beyond staff parking to serve customers and rental car parking needs. Planning Commission Minu~¢s of November 13, 2001 Page 11 Commissioner Hemandez: Stated that there is a clear parking issue but it appears the applicant is willing to work with the City and other tenants. · Agreed that the property owner has concerns about the viable use of his property and appears to accept most of the proposed Conditions of Approval. · Said that he is inclined to support approval of this application with a limitation to four rental cars. This equals two spaces over the fair share allotment for this tenant space. Commissioner Gibbons: · Said that the main issue is where the vehicles are parked overnight. · Said that she is okay with parking four cars in the cold storage building area and finds that cars can be stacked there between the hours of 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. · Pointed out water runoff issues for car washing that might occur. · Said that this is a high quality tenant for this building and agreed that rental cars do not have to remain on site for long. · Stated that it would be inappropriate to allow Hertz to usurp a disproportionate number of available site parking spaces. · Agreed that sharing parking helps all the businesses. · Pointed out that nice landscaping and good signs will help improve the site also. Commissioner Doorley said that he was open to allowing six spaces up front and four in the rear. Pointed out that the residents to the rear have been used to hearing delivery trucks at the back of this building over the years that it was a health food market. This large use will be quieter. Commissioner Alderete said that he is familiar with this center, having patronized a barber there for years, and finds that parking is always a problem. Added that he is concerned about safety and will support staff's recommendation for denial of this application. Commissioner Leonard said that she is leaning toward supporting approval with stacking of cars allowed at the rear of the site from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. Added that this is a great project. Commissioner Doorley asked if there is a discount factor for shared parking. Director Sharon Fierro advised that shared parking discounts are based upon an offset of peak hours that parking is needed by the users sharing the parking. There is no offset found in this situation. Commissioner Gibbons proposed requiring Hertz staffto park at the rear of the building. Chair Francois said that with the Condition limiting the site to four rental vehicles he is leaning toward supporting approval of this Use Permit. Commissioner Gibbons: · Said that the conditions must be made clear on parking limitations. · Said that the landscaping and fence issues have not been finalized. Planning Commission Minu~es of November 13, 2001 Page 12 · Stated that she is actually okay with the sound wall as it is and is flexible on the issue of rear site landscaping. · Said that she does not support overnight parking of more than six cars total and that cleaning and vacuuming of cars needs to be monitored carefully. Chair Francois pointed out that Hertz would only perform light cleaning at this location using a dust buster. Commissioner Gibbons suggested that Condition Number 8 be modified to include a provision that would give the Director the authority to reduce or eliminate outright the storage of rental vehicles on site in the event that substantiated noise complaints are received by adjacent neighbors as a result of this business' operation. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Hernandez, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3399 granting a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2001-117) to allow a car rental establishment on property located at 2230 S. Bascom Avenue, with the following modifications to the conditions: 1. That Condition 1-C be modified to limit vehicle parking to six rental vehicles and four employee vehicles on site at any given time with four of the six rental vehicles to be parked in tandem in the rear lot and no more than six cars on site overnight; 2. That Condition 1-D be modified to state that all employees are required to park in the rear parking lot; 3. That the applicant be required to submit an irrigation and landscaping plan for the front of the site (and not the side and rear); 4. That Condition 4-E be modified to authorize the Community Development Director to require the increase in height of the existing sound wall from five feet to six feet in the event that there are substantiated noise complaints from adjacent residential properties as a result of Hertz' operations, 5. That Condition 8-B be modified to provide the Community Development Director with the authority to immediately reduce and/or prohibit outright the parking of rental vehicles on site upon substantiated noise complaints from adjacent residential properties as a result of Hertz' operations as a means to solve noise complaints; and by the following roll call vote: AYES: Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez and Leonard NOES: Alderete ABSENT: Jones ABSTAIN: None Chair Francois advised that this decision is final in 10 days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Planning Commission Minu[es of November 13, 2001 Page 13 REPORT OF TI-IE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, was accepted as presented with the following additions: · Announced that Council approved the General Plan on November 6th and will give second reading to the Ordinance on November 20th. The new General Plan will become effective thirty days later on December 20th. · Advised that Council will hold a public hearing on the Housing Element on November 20th. · Informed that the November 27, 2001, Planning Commission will be cancelled and that the next Commission meeting will be held on December 11, 2001. The second December meeting will also be cancelled as it falls on Christmas Day. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjoumed at 9:26 p.m. to the next Regular Public Hearing on December 11, 2001 (the meeting of November 27, 2001, has been cancelled), in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. SUBMITTED BY: ~ Corinne A Shinn, ~ecor l'd~Secretary APPROVED BY: ATTEST: Tom Francois, Chair S~'aron Fierro, Secretary