PC Min 01/28/1997CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
7:30 P.M.
JANUARY 28, 1997
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY
The Planning Commission meeting of January 28, 1997, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in
the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chairwoman Keams,
and the following proceedings were had, to wit:
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present:
Chair:
Vice Chair:
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
Susan A. Kearns
Dennis Lowe
I. Alne
Elizabeth Gibbons
Brad Jones
Mel Lindstrom
Commissioners Absent:
Commissioner:
Jane Meyer-Kennedy
Staff Present:
Community
Development Director:
Senior Planner:
Planner I:
Planner I:
City Attorney:
Reporting Secretary:
Steve Piasecki
Darryl M. Jones
Barbara Ryan
Aki Irani
William Seligrnann
Corinne A. Shinn
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: On motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Alne, the
Planning Commission minutes of January 14, 1997, were approved (6-0-
1, Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy was absent).
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
Mayor Barbara Conant addressed the Commission, thanking the members and staff for their
service. The time and effort pays off. The recommendations received by Council from the
Planning Commission are very helpful. She advised that her theme for her term as mayor is
"Celebrate Community" as she introduced Bernie Strojny, the new City Manager.
City Manager Bernie Strojny stated that he is impressed with the work of the Planning
Commission and looks forward to working with the Commission in the future.
Planning Commission Minutes of January 28, 1997 Page 2
COMMUNICATIONS:
There were four communication items as follows:
1. Revised Conditions of Approval for Agenda Item No. 1.
2. Three letters in opposition to Agenda Item No. 2.
AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS
There were no modifications or postponements.
ORAL REQUESTS
There were no oral requests.
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairwoman Kearns read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record.
S 96-16/UP 96-18
Pacific States
Capital Corp.
Public Hearing to consider the application of Pacific States
Capital Corporation for a Site and Architectural Approval (S
96-16) and Conditional Use Permit (LIP 96-18) to allow the
construction of a 95,000 square foot, three-story mini-storage
facility with a 1,000 square foot on-site manager's living unit
on property located at 50-110 Curtner Avenue in an M-1-S
(Light Industrial) Zoning District. A Negative Declaration will
be prepared for this Project. Planning Commission decision
final, unless appealed within 10 days to the City Clerk.
Ms. Aki Irani, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows:
· This is a two-part application:
A. A Site Approval to allow the construction of a 95,000 square foot, three-story mini-
storage facility with 750 self-storage units; and
B. A Conditional Use Permit to allow for a 1,000 square foot, on-site manager's living
unit for use in conjunction with this mini-storage facility.
· The site (three parcels which will be merged) currently has a warehouse, storage yard and
office building, all of which will be demolished.
· The mini-storage facility will be operated by Storage USA.
· Operational hours will be from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., seven days a week in the office; with 7
a.m. to 9 p.m. access to the units, seven days a week; and 24-hour access to the units by
appointment only.
· The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations.
· Site is surrounded by single-family residential to the east, a restaurant and Highway 17 to
the west, an animal hospital to the north and a motel to the south.
· There is a 41 foot setback from the proposed new building to the residence behind it.
· The site will include 16% landscaping. Thirty-six inch box evergreens will be planted to
help screen this site from the residential properties.
Planning Commission Minutes of January 28, 1997 Page 3
· The structure will be a three-story structure of grey stucco that will appear to be a two-
story building. The third story is located beneath the roof elevation.
· Fourteen parking spaces are required and 16 are provided.
· Street improvements are required which will include new traffic striping and sidewalks.
· Staff is supportive of this application and recommends approval with the revised
Conditions of Apprvoal.
· A representative from Pacific States Capital Corporation, Mr. John Hansen, is available for
questions.
Commissioner Gibbons asked if there would be parking permitted around the base of the
building to access the units which open to the outside.
Ms. Aki Irani replied that short term parking would occur at these units. However, a 20-foot
fire access will remain clear.
Commissioner Gibbons further inquired whether outdoor storage was proposed, such as for
trailers.
Ms. Aki Irani replied that no outdoor storage would be permitted per the Conditions of
Approval.
Commissioner Gibbons asked what heights are permitted in this zoning district.
Ms. Aki Irani replied that the height permitted is 75 feet.
Commissioner Alne asked for an added statement that the site manager will be responsible to
handle residents' complaints of excessive noise created after hours.
Ms. Aki Irani suggested that the applicant address this request. Staff can add a Condition of
Approval to cover this requirement.
Commissioner Lowe presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report:
· The applicant has been extremely cooperative and made changes requested by SARC at its
first meeting regarding this project.
· A second SARC meeting was held to review the changes which included creating the
appearance of a two-story structure although there are three stories and lightening the
colors of the building.
· The City's Architectural Advisor believes the applicant has fully cooperated in the design
revisions made by SARC.
Commissioner Gibbons asked if the building height had been lowered.
Planning Commission Minutes of Januar7 28, 1997 Page 4
Commissioner Lowe responded that the roof line was altered to give the appearance of a two-
story rather than three-story structure.
Commissioner Gibbons stated that the building is huge.
Commissioner Lindstrom asked what size building is allowed in the M-1 Zoning District.
Ms. Aki Irani replied that a maximum of six stories or 75 feet is allow in the Light Industrial
Zoning District (M-l-S).
Commissioner Alne asked for the height of this proposed structure.
Ms. Aki Irani replied that the building is 37 feet high.
Commissioner Lowe added that it is set back 40 feet from the residential properties adjacent.
Chairwoman Keams opened Public Heating No. 1.
Mr. John Hansen, Pacific States Capital Corporation, Applicant:
· Stated that he was supportive of the added Condition of Approval to have his on-site
manager available to handle any noise complaints as a result of unnecessary noise after
hours.
· Advised that the project architect is available for any questions.
Dr. Andrew Kessler, 130 Curtner Avenue:
· Questioned the setback from this proposed building to their adjacent animal hospital.
· Also wondered about the extension of the turn lane and how far it would be expanded.
Ms. Aki Irani replied that the extended left mm lane would be 150 feet from the property line.
Dr. Andrew Kessler asked about the disruption of utility services, such as electrical, when the
undergrounding of utilities occurs on the project site.
Mr. Darryl M. Jones, Senior Planner, advised that PG&E continues service to adjacent
property owners even while installing underground power to a site. Short interruptions are
possible but are usually scheduled in advance.
Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, advised that Dr. Kessler speak with
City Engineer Michelle Quinney regarding this concern.
Dr. Andrew Kessler opined that this proposed building is overwhelming to the area.
Planning Commission Minutes of Januar~ 28, 1997 Pa~e 5
Commissioner Lindstrom advised Dr. Kessler that he has had experience working on a site
adjacent to another site having underground utilities installed. The utility companies work
very well with the surrounding area.
Dr. Tom Bailey, 130 Curtner Avenue:
· Stated that any loss of power is a concern as it would prevent them from treating
emergencies.
Commissioner Alne asked if the animal hospital had any emergency standby equipment. Since
it is inevitable that power losses occur, what do they do now?
Dr. Tom Bailey replied that they have to wait for power to return.
Chairwoman Keams closed Public Hearing No. 1.
Commissioner Gibbons stated that she concurred that the applicant has taken great effort to
work with the City in the design of this project. The project is huge but appears to have
reasonable setbacks. Advised that she will bow to the efforts of SARC and support this
project.
Commissioner Lowe stated that he too supported this project and depended quiet a bit on the
expertise offered by the City's Architectural Advisor.
Commissioner Alne stated that this project is only one-half of the height allowed under the
Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has taken steps to minimize the impact by making the
structure appear to be two stories rather than three. The City cannot ask more of the
applicants. They have tried to be a compatible neighbor and an asset to the City.
Motion:
Upon motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Alne, the
Planning Commission adopted a Negative Declaration, Resolution No. 3071
approving a Site and Architectural Approval to construct a 95,000 square
foot, three-story mini-storage facility and Resolution No. 3072 approving a
Conditional Use Permit to allow a 1,000 square foot on-site manager's
living unit on property located at 50-110 Curtner Avenue with added
language to the Condition of Approval No. 19 which will require the on-site
manager to be available to surrounding residents to handle any noise
complaints generated by after hours use of the facilities, by the following
roll call vote:
AYES: Alne, Gibbons, Jones, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe,
NOES: None
ABSENT: Meyer-Kennedy
ABSTAIN: None
Plannin~ Commission Minutes of January 28, 1997 Pal~e 6
Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed within 10 days to the City Clerk.
Chairwoman Keams read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record.
2. PM 96-02
Appeal of Planning Director approval of a Parcel Map (PM 96-
02) to create three residential lots on property located at 360
Bedal Lane in an R-l-8 (Single Family Residential) Zoning
District. This project is Categorically Exempt.
Ms. Barbara Ryan, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows:
· Applicant received approval of a Parcel Map to split a ~ acre lot into three residential lots
by the Community Development Director.
· This matter is before the Planning Commission because the neighboring property owner
appealed the approval.
· This Parcel Map splits the lot into three rectangular lots which will front onto a cul de sac.
· The Public Works Department requested the filing of a plan line which would require the
neighboring property to complete construction of the cul de sac in the event that they
subdivide their lot.
· A majority of the cul de sac will be built by this applicant.
· The neighboring property owner opposes the requirement for a plan line on his property
and asks that the applicant be required to fit the entire cul de sac on his own lot and not
involve his family's property in this cul de sac.
· Both the Parcel Map approved by the Director and the original cul de sac submitted by the
applicant meet all of the City's requirements, including the requirements of the San Tomas
Area Neighborhood Plan.
· Staff recommends that the Commission deny this appeal.
Commissioner Lowe asked for the square footage of the three lots.
Ms. Barbara Ryan stated that they are 8,860, 8,788 and 8,000 square feet.
Commissioner Lowe asked what sized lots are predominate in the area.
Ms. Barbara Ryan replied that they range from 7,000 to 10,000 square feet. She added that
other lots are less wide but deeper than the project site. She added that the neighboring
property owner says that they want to keep their property whole.
Commissioner Alne asked why the plan line was needed.
Ms. Barbara Ryan stated that the plan line would depict where the road would have to be
expanded if the neighboring parcel is every subdivided.
Planning Commission Minutes of Januar7 28, 1997 Page 7
Commissioner Alne declared that the neighboring property owner has stated outright that they
do not plan to subdivide their property ever. If they choose not to subdivide their lot, that is
their right. Therefore, there will never be a reason to complete these street improvements.
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that both cul-de-sac scenarios can be approved. If this appeal is
upheld, the applicant can develop the site using his original cul-de-sac design. The benefit of
the approved Parcel Map design with the plan line for future completion of the cul-de-sac is
that the streets are aligned. The adjoining property owner can keep their lot whole as long as
they want. Fire access is met with the portion of the cul-de-sac that the applicant will be
required to install.
Commissioner Alne questioned the wisdom of having a partially constructed cul-de-sac.
Commissioner Lowe questioned the wisdom in having one property, whose owner wants to
subdivide his lot, having an impact on his neighboring property owner.
Commissioner Lindstrom raised the question that if by requiring the plan line, is the City not
taking someone's property?
Commissioner Alne asked what setbacks would be for the adjacent property owner should they
want to put an addition on their existing home.
City Attorney William Seligrnann advised that the property line remains the same.
Chairwoman Kearns asked if the adjacent property owner decides to improve their lot whether
this plan line would impact their ability to do so. Would any improvement trigger the need
for competing these street improvements?
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that if the adjacent property owner decided to add more than 50%
to their home, they would be required to dedicate to the cul-de-sac and install the street
improvements at the cost of the property owner. The requirement for street improvements is
necessary for the cohesiveness of neighborhoods. He added that the builder has offered to
cover the entire cost of installing the cul-de-sac.
Commissioner Jones asked for clarification that the second Parcel Map layout could go
forward.
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised him that was correct.
Commissioner Alne stated that the City would end up with a strange sort of cul-de-sac if the
adjacent property owner never subdivides and the cul-de-sac is never completed.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes of January 28, 1997 Pa~e 8
City Attorney William Seligmann informed the Commission that in order for the City to
reduce the number of lots allowed under the City's zoning regulations, they must make the
finding that the development of the site at the allowable density would harm the area.
Commissioner Alne stated that this applicant has no right to burden the neighboring property
owners.
Commissioner Jones sought clarification that with a plan line, if the neighboring property
owner demolishes their home and/or builds an additional home, the requirements for the plan
line kick in.
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that that was correct.
Commissioner Alne stated that this is unfair. The neighboring property owners do not want a
cul de sac or the plan line imposed on their property.
Chairwoman Keams opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2.
Mr. Vinnie Patron, 337 Bedal Lane:
· Mentioned the problems caused to his property due to the large commercial building and
gas station located adjacent to his property.
· Stated that the land on which this proposed line would be imposed is some of the most
desirable and valuable land on their lot.
· Trees which his family has cultivated for more than 20 years would have to be taken down
to install this cul-de-sac.
· Stated that his family is determined to fight this plan line, no matter how painful or costly.
This is an abuse of eminent domain.
City Attorney William Seligrnann advised that eminent domain is not applicable. There is no
taking or public use of land until or unless development takes place on this piece of property.
Commissioner Lowe asked if the developer were willing to pay for the land needed to finish
the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Shin Park, Owner, 360 Bedal Lane:
· Advised that he bought this lot in May, 1996.
· Stated that he had submitted a different Parcel Map layout which he was happy to use.
However, he was told that this proposed lot split is illogical.
· He was willing to wait to create three lots with a larger cul-de-sac which is better for the
community.
· This proposal would have no impact on the neighboring property owner unless they too
develop their lot.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes of JanuarF 28, 1997 Pa~e 9
Commissioner Lowe asked if Mr. Park were willing to compensate for the land needed to
complete the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Shin Park stated that he is willing to pay but they are not willing to sell.
Commissioner Alne asked if staff would recommend approval of this project without the plan
line?
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that Public Works would have severe reservations. They believe
that future owners of 337 Bedal should be forewarned of the requirement to complete the cul-
de-sac should this property be subdivided in the future.
Commissioner Alne stated that until the cul-de-sac is completed, this would be a marginal cul-
de-sac.
City Attorney William Seligmann added that the Public Works Department feels that if the
neighboring property is developed, appropriate design concepts would require completion of
the cul-de-sac. A plan line puts future owners on notice.
Commissioner Gibbons asked if any street parking is available on the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that parking is permitted on the west side of the cul-de-sac but not
on the east.
Commissioner Lindstrom asked whether the developer could post a bond to cover the costs of
the cul-de-sac improvements in the future?
Mr. Shin Park advised that he is willing to pay for the improvements at this time but not in the
future. Stated that dedicating part of a parcel to public improvement when developing a
property is normal. He himself had dedicated 5,000 square feet to the City for the cul-de-sac
on his project site.
City Attorney William Seligmann advised that a Condition of Approval to cover future street
improvements could be required. An agreement would be entered into at the direction of the
City Engineer.
Commissioner Gibbons stated that a question can be raised whether the intent of the plan line
supercedes the rights of private property owners. Stated that she is inclined to support the
rights of the property owner.
Commissioner Lowe stated that the neighboring property owner could actually benefit. Said
that he would like to see the differences worked out.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes of January 28, 1997 Pa~e 10
City Attorney William Seligmann stated that it might be better for the Commission to continue
this item to avoid having the applicant demand that the City execute eminent domaine.
Commissioner Alne asked if the neighboring property can be subdivided without using a flag
lot.
Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that the frontage was not large enough to accommodate the required
frontage for two lots.
Ms. Cherie Woodward, Advisor for the Patron Family, 337 Bedal Lane:
· Stated that the City appears to have made lots of promises to Mr. Park.
· Advised that Mr. Park purchased his lot with full knowledge.
· Bedal is a small street located off of a major street. Access off and onto Bedal is at times
difficult and dangerous.
· Declared that Mr. Park had never before offered compensation to the Patrons for the land
needed to complete the cul-de-sac.
· Stated that Mr. Park has not taken any steps to secure a building on site which is currently
open and available to vagrants.
· Opined that Mr. Park's lot would best be developed with two homes rather than three.
Commissioner Lowe asked if the Patrons would consider accepting compensation for the land
needed to complete the cul-de-sac.
Ms. Cherie Woodward replied that the interaction with Mr. Park and the City has not been
amicable.
Commissioner Lowe stated that he was willing to continue this item for two weeks to allow
Mr. Park to continue negotiations with the Patrons.
Ms. Cherie Woodward stated that she would have to discuss this with the Patrons. However,
they are open to better subdivision plans.
Mr. Vinnie Patron stated that they are not interested in dedicating any land. They want to
retain the perfect rectangular shape of their land. The City does not have the fight to force this
dedication. They will not sell to the developer for use in the cul-de-sac. Asked the
Commission to stop this. It has gone too far. This is an ill-planned design.
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that the lots on Bedal are legal, non-conforming due to reduced
frontage widths.
Mr. Dan Sherber, Contractor for Mr. Park:
· Advised that Mr. Park has been patiently waiting to develop his site in order to work with
the City on a Parcel Map that is in the best interests of the City.
Planning Commission Minutes of January 28, 1997 Pa~e 11
Chairwoman Kearns closed the Public Heating for Agenda Item No. 2.
Motion:
Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Lowe,
the Planning Commission moved to uphold the appeal of Parcel Map 93-02
with modified findings as recommended by the City Attorney.
Commissioner Lowe stated that the Patrons have raised a lot of concerns. He believes the
family is making a mistake in not letting the developer install the cul-de-sac improvements at
his cost. Mr. Park is simply trying to comply with the City's requirements.
Mr. Steve Piasecki added that he needed to respond to the opinion expressed by the Patrons
that Mr. Park has been surly in his dealings. Mr. Park has reached out to the Patrons. Mr.
Patron is simply fed up with the process. There was never any intention of being surly.
Commissioner Jones added that he too felt that it would be better for the neighborhood and the
City to install the full cul-de-sac. However, he will support the appeal.
Commissioner Alne stated that there is no apparent justification and advised that he too will
support denial of the Parcel Map. The other parcel map layout is not in the best interest of the
City but the applicant is able to do it.
Commissioner Lindstrom stated that he finds it difficult to obligate one property owner's
property when a neighboring property is benefitting. Stated that he will support the appeal.
City Attorney Seligmann read off two findings to uphold the appeal:
· The proposed subdivision results in the alignment of a cul-de-sac that would unnecessarily
infringe on the adjoining property to the east.
· The proposed subdivision does not result in a desirable lot pattern or design
Motion:
Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Lowe,
the Planning Commission moved to uphold the appeal of Parcel Map 93-
02, adopting Resolution No. 3073 with modified findings as recommended
by the City Attorney, the following roll call vote:
AYES: Alne, Gibbons, Jones, Kearns, Lindstrom
NOES: Lowe
ABSENT: Meyer-Kennedy
ABSTAIN: None
Chairwoman Keams read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record.
Planning Commission Minutes of January 28, 1997 Page 12
3. Sign Ordinance
Discussion regarding staff level approvals of sign applications
that comply with the provisions of the Sign Ordinance.
Mr. Darryl M. Jones, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows:
· Advised that under the provisions of the City's Sign Ordinance, the Community
Development Director has the authority to approve signs that comply with the Sign
Ordinance.
· If changes are desired by the Planning Commission, staff can initiate revisions to the Sign
Ordinance.
Commissioner Lowe stated that there appeared to be no definition of monument signs in the
Ordiance.
Mr. Darryl M. Jones advised that Section H defines freestanding signs which are the same as a
monument sign.
Commissioner Alne expressed concern that the Rasputin Music signs meets the requirements
of the Sign Ordinance. That needs to change. Said that he was sorry this sign was approved.
Suggested that staff schedule a study session in the near future.
Commissioner Gibbons suggested having two staff sign offs on each sign rather than just one.
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that staff will still need specific criteria by which to review signs.
One example might be to have any caricatures forwarded to the Commission for review.
City Attorney William Seligmann stated that specific criteria is required. The criteria must be
objective and not subjective. This leaves little room for subjective taste. He added that
content is protected under the First Amendment and cannot be edited unless obscene.
Commissioner Lowe asked who describes obscenity?
City Attorney William Seligmann advised that obscenity is defined under State Law and by the
Supreme Court.
Commissioner Lowe stated his concern that such a sign be approved as Rasputin when the
Commission is so careful in its signage decisions.
Mr. Steve Piasecki reiterated that the Commission can establish a guideline by which all signs
incorporating a caricature be reviewed by the Commission.
Commissioner Alne stated that more guidance is need for applicants and the Commission.
Planning Commission Minutes of January 28, 1997 Pal~e 13
Commissioner Lowe asked if the City's Sign Ordinance is more or less restrictive than the
Sign Ordinances from other local cities.
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that Campbell's Sign Ordinance is fairly restrictive. Most
Ordinances are "hands off' in terms of content under the First Amendment. A case can be
made for review for architectural compatibility.
Commissioner Jones suggested that a Study Session on the Sign Ordinance is a good idea.
Perhaps a more restrictive Sign Ordinance is needed, however, he said he would not like to see
the Commission boxed into a comer. It might not be a bad idea to have more sign applications
come before the Planning Commission.
Mr. Steve Piasecki suggested scheduling the Study Session for the next meeting, February 25,
1997, to consider two particular topics, exceptions and staff approvals.
Commissioner Gibbons suggested having some sort of Consent Calendar of sign applications
much as the City Council has where things can be approved in a group if no questions arise.
REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
The written report of Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, was accepted as
presented with the following additions:
Advised that Council adopted the Surplus School Site Plan. The City can purchase up to
30% of surplus school property at 25% of the cost. If the Coventry School site becomes
available, the City is eligible to purchase 1.57 acres at 25% of market rate. If the City
purchase the entire 5.2 acres, the cost is approximately $3 million. It costs approximately
$250,000 to develop each acre of park land.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. to the next Planning Commission
meeting of February 25, 1997, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 North First Street,
Campbell, California. The meeting ofFebmary/~1997, has been ~~..,x~9
SUBMITTED BY:
o'C'6'~nnn~ A.'~Sh?, R~- ~ta~
APPROVED BY:
SUsan A. Keams, Chair
ATTEST: Steve Pi~a i,~t~