2024.2.13 PC Min
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
Tuesday, Month February 13, 2024 I 7:30pm
City Hall Council Chamber
CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Planning Commission meeting of February 13, 2024, was called to order at 7:30 pm
by Chair Zisser, and the following proceedings were had to wit.
ROLL CALL
Staff Present:
Rob Eastwood, Director
Bill Seligmann, City Attorney
Stephen Rose, Senior Planner
Daniel Fama, Senior Planner
Ken Ramirez, Administrative Analyst
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Approval of Minutes of January 23, 2024 (Roll Call Vote)
➢ Meeting Minutes, 01/23/2024 (Regular Meeting)
➢ Commissioners present at 01/23/24 Planning Commission meeting approved
meeting minutes.
Planning Commissioners Present:
Alan Zisser, Chair
Matt Kamkar, Vice Chair
Adam Buchbinder
Davis Fields
Michael Krey
Maggie Ostrowski
Planning Commissioners Absent:
Cori Majewski
Campbell Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2024 Page 2 of 9
COMMUNICATIONS
Director Eastwood reported :
• With respect to Item 4, General Plan Land Use Densities, the City has received a memo
from Planning Commissioner Kamkar that was distributed to Planning Commission
members.
AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS
None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for individuals wishing to address the Planning
Commission on matters of community concern that are not listed on the agenda. In the interest
of time, the Chair may limit speakers to five minutes. Please be aware that State law prohibits the
Commission from acting on non-agendized items, however, the Chair may refer matters to staff
for follow-up.
Opened and Closed Public Comment, no public comments were received.
PUBLIC HEARING
Note: Members of the public may be allotted up to two (2) minutes to comment on any public
hearing item. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of five
(5) minutes for opening statements and up to a total of three (3) minutes maximum for closing
statements. Items requested/recommended for continuance are subject to Planning
Commission’s consent at the meeting.
Chair Zisser asked for any disclosures from members of the Commission.
Commissioner Buchbinder disclosed with respect to Item 2, 48 Civic Center Drive, that he had
walked by and viewed the site several times.
Vice Chair Kamkar disclosed with respect to Item 2, 48 Civic Center Drive, that had had visited the
site twice, on the second visit specifically to review issues with the intersection.
2. PLN-2023-59 – 48 Civic Center Drive
Public Hearing to consider the request of Evan Jaques on behalf of Out of the Barrel, Inc.
to allow construction of an approximately 3,100 square foot two-level commercial
building with a rooftop deck including a prefab kitchen module, a ground-level patio
bounded by a 6-foot fence, and the associated realignment of the Civic Center Drive curb-
line (to accommodate refuse pickup and deliveries); and establishment of a “taproom”
inclusive of onsite beer and wine beverage service with incidental offsite sales, ancillary
food service, and live entertainment, with an 11:00 PM daily public closing time. The
applications under consideration include a Conditional Use Permit with Site and
Campbell Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2024 Page 3 of 9
Architectural Review for construction of the proposed building for a “Liquor
Establishment” (beer and wine sales), with “Late Night Activities” (staff closing/clean-up
after 11:00 PM and before 6:00 AM), and a “Dancing and/or Live Entertainment
Establishment” (musicians providing background music); and a Tree Removal Permit for
removal of “protected” tree(s), on property located at 48 Civic Center Drive. File No.: PLN-
2023-59. Staff is recommending that this item be deemed Categorically Exempt under
CEQA. Planning Commission action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk
within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner.
Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution (reference Attachment A), approving a
Conditional Use Permit with Site and Architectural Review, and a Tree Removal Permit.
Chair Zisser opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2.
Daniel Fama, Senior Planner, provided the staff report.
Chair Zisser asked for Commission questions for staff.
Chair Zisser, Vice Chair Kamkar, and Commissioners Fields, Buchbinder, Ostrowski, and Krey had
questions.
Planner Fama, Public Works Environmental Program Specialist Newby, Traffic Engineer Jue, and
Senior Civil Engineer Storz responded.
Chair Zisser opened Public Comment.
Even Jaques, Property Owner, made a presentation.
Chair Zisser asked for Commission questions for the property owner.
Chair Zisser, Vice Chair Kamkar, and Commissioner Buchbinder had questions.
Property Owner Jaques, Planner Fama, Senior Civil Engineer Storz, and Public Works
Environmental Program Specialist Newby responded.
Chair Zisser asked for members of the public wishing to speak. There were no public comments.
Chair Zisser closed Public Comment.
Chair Zisser had questions. Public Works Environmental Program Specialist Newby and Planner
Fama responded.
Chair Zisser asked for Commission discussion.
Commissioner Buchbinder stated that this was an excellent project that doesn’t allow late night
music, and didn’t believe they had to make the downtown absolutely silent because people live
nearby.
Campbell Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2024 Page 4 of 9
Commissioner Krey said neighbors’ concerns are legitimate, but the noise mitigation measures
put into place work. He added the concerns regarding trash containers and trucks on Civic Center
Drive are valid, but there is enough room there.
Commissioner Fields supported the project, and he liked the upgraded plans in terms of safety
and moving the street. He said the coffee concept sounds great, because there are not a lot of
morning coffee places in downtown.
Commissioner Ostrowski also supported the project and thought it would be a nice addition to
Campbell. She said the design is gorgeous and matches the library.
Vice Chair Kamkar also supported the project, gave kudos to Public Works and traffic engineers in
making this tight site work, and was impressed by how receptive the applicant was to
suggestions.
Chair Zisser echoed his fellow commissioners’ comments and said he had reconciled himself to
any noise issues. He said the intersection configuration would be a great addition, and adjusting
the curb for deliveries and trash pickup made sense.
Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Krey, seconded by Commissioner Fields, the
Planning Commission motioned to grant approval of a Conditional Use Permit
with Site and Architectural Review and Tree Removal Permit to allow
construction of an approximately 3,100 square foot two-level commercial
building with a rooftop deck including a prefab kitchen module, a ground-level
patio bounded by a 6-foot fence, and the associated realignment of the Civic
Center Drive curb line (to accommodate refuse pickup and deliveries); and
establishment of a “taproom” inclusive of onsite beer and wine beverage service
with incidental offsite sales, ancillary food service, and live entertainment, with
an 11:00 PM daily public closing time on property located at 48 Civic Center
Drive. File No.: PLN-2023-59, by the following roll call:
AYES: Fields, Ostrowski, Krey, Buchbinder, Kamkar, Zisser
NOES: None
ABSENT: Majewski
ABSTAIN: None
Chair Zisser closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2.
3. PLN-2023-175 – Permissibility of Land Uses and Regulation of Businesses
Public hearing to consider amendments to Title 21 (Zoning), Title 5 (Business Licenses
and Regulations), and Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Campbell Municipal Code
related to the permissibility of land uses and regulation of the businesses. File No.:
PLN-2023-175. Staff is recommending that this project be found Categorically Exempt
under CEQA. Tentative City Council Date: March 19, 2024. Project Planner: Stephen
Rose, Senior Planner.
Campbell Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2024 Page 5 of 9
Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt
an Ordinance amending Title 21 (Zoning), Title 5 (Business Licenses and Regulations),
and Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Campbell Municipal Code.
Chair Zisser opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3.
Stephen Rose, Associate Planner, provided the staff report.
Chair Zisser asked for Commission questions for staff.
Chair Zisser, Commissioners Buchbinder, Krey, had questions. Planner Rose and Director
Eastwood responded.
Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Fields the Planning Commission motioned to
adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance
amending Title 21 (Zoning), Title 5 (Business Licenses and Regulations), and Title
10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Campbell Municipal Code. File No.: PLN-2023-175.
Chair Zisser requested the motion be amended to strike the last sentence from the definition of
“arcades.”
The maker of the motion accepted the amendment to the motion.
Commissioner Ostrowski seconded the motion.
By the following roll call:
AYES: Fields, Ostrowski, Krey, Buchbinder, Kamkar, Zisser
NOES: None
ABSENT: Majewski
ABSTAIN: None
STUDY SESSION
4. PLN-2024-19 – General Plan Land Use Densities
Study session to discuss land use changes implemented as part of the 2040 General
Plan.
Project Planner: Stephen Rose, Senior Planner.
Chair Zisser opened the Study Session for Agenda Item No. 4.
Director Eastwood provided a brief introduction, noting the item was added to the agenda at the
request of the Planning Commission.
Planner Rose presented the staff report and noted the purpose of the item was to discuss land
use changes made as part of the 2040 General Plan; “gaps” in density ranges; and changes to the
City’s method of calculating lot area.
Campbell Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2024 Page 6 of 9
Commissioners were informed that the City Council had decided to change the method of
calculating gloss lot area; that density is “baked in” and not easy to change; gaps existed in the
prior General Plan; real-world impacts are minor and easily overcome by State laws; and staff did
not advise proposing a change.
Vice Chair Kamkar disclosed that his own property was affected by these changes to the 2040
General Plan.
City Attorney Seligmann informed Vice Chair Kamkar that that could present a conflict issue, that
he is not allowed to consider or discuss something in which he has a conflict as a member of the
Commission. He considered whether the exception for a significant segment of the community
applied and said it seemed that more than a third of the residential property in the City would be
similarly affected as Vice Chair Kamkar’s property.
Planner Rose confirmed that residential land use designations in the City, excluding commercial,
industrial, and mixed-use were indeed more than one-third.
After consideration City Attorney Seligmann informed the Commission that he believed Vice
Chair Kamkar would not have a conflict issue because the exception for a significant segment
would apply.
Vice Chair Kamkar provided an analysis of 12 examples of different categories of lots and the
effects of the land use changes. He said the real-world impacts of these changes are not
minor, because the Gap Between Density Ranges table presented by staff considers deep lots,
but many lots in Campbell are not deep. He added that the problem with having gaps is it
ignores the missing middle development mentality. He added that some of the interior lots are
effected the same as corner lots.
Commissioner Ostrowski summarized that therefore the fact that density increased as a result of
the new land use, that relative ratio helps versus the loss of the relative ratio, so the increase in
the density doesn’t help or compensate.
Vice Chair Kamkar stated that under this calculation 1.65 homes could be built, and instead of
rounding it up to two homes Campbell’s policies round down. He asked why they don’t round up,
especially as but the State wants them to add density?
Director Eastwood acknowledged that the change to the City's method of calculating density did
decrease the allowable density for some properties. He clarified the changes made by the City
differed from other types of downzoning prohibited by SB 330, referring to a case in Culver City,
as the City's changes were part of a more comprehensive update process.
Campbell Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2024 Page 7 of 9
Planner Rose clarified that a downzoned individual lot would not be an SB 330 violation as the
General Plan and Housing Element Update expanded and increased the aggregate density City-
wide, which more than offset the changes being discussed. He confirmed that there are definitive
winners and losers with the new mathematical model, and very small lots and corner lots are
more impacted than interior lots and deeper lots generally. He said the adjustment from the 3.5
dwellings per acre to the new 4.5 resulted in a net increase in density City-wide, and HCD and SB
330 are okay with that because it results in more density. He said there would be more winners
City-wide than losers, with the losers being corner lots and lots that have a lower percentage of
right-of-way to their existing net lot area under the old methodology.
Commissioner Buchbinder inquired by what proportion was the zone capacity increased?
Planner Rose responded that it was intended to be as close to a wash as possible to land at solid
values like a 4.5 versus a 4.43. He explained the process by which the numbers were rounded up,
which was explained in the study session report.
Director Eastwood said the City Council voted to go with the new method of calculating gross lot
area and the issue was well deliberated.
Vice Chair Kamcar said why not increase the density of the City like the State wants them to do?
Director Eastwood said the City tripled its densities under the Housing Element to 75 units per
acre, 200% above Campbell’s RHNA allocation. He noted the discussion has to do with low to
medium category, and he had not heard of any developers or stakeholders saying they have no
ability to develop to in Campbell because it has a gap. With respect to Vice Chair Kamkar’s
reasoning of trying to make RHNA numbers he said whether the City gains one unit here or there
is not the issue in trying to reach RHNA and the HCD would not come after the City for that small
amount. He said it is not valid to suggest the concern should be that this is going to hurt the City’s
RHNA numbers, because getting to RHNA involves a bigger issue of having more major
developments.
Vice Chair Kamkar responded that this is not only an issue for smaller properties, but also for
shallower properties.
Commissioner Ostrowski said the issue is with shallow and corner lots and asked what they could
do to make those lots whole, because these lots are at a significant disadvantage, and she did not
think it a good idea to disadvantage homeowners and the middle class while developing benefit
to developers in order to get to the RHNA numbers. She added that if one used to be able to
build two units and now can only build one unit, it is a significant financial impact.
Commissioner Buchbinder informed the Commission that this is a City Council past action, but the
Commission could forward a recommendation to the City Council to reconsider this issue,
petition the Council at its priority setting meeting at the end of the month, or make proposals to
the City Council via a subcommittee. He confirmed to Commissioner Krey that this is a discussion
the City Council has already had, and there was clear knowledge in the presentation to Council
that a narrow frontage would be a winner and a lot of frontage would be a loser. Council
Campbell Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2024 Page 8 of 9
deliberated that and gave direction to move forward.
Planner Rose clarified that a number of communities use the method of calculation that Campbell
uses presently because they believe corner lots are unfairly advantaged going the other way. The
City’s old methodology was unfair in that a lot on a corner got disproportionate density over a lot
of the equivalent area without those street connections, and a big part of the reason the City
switched to the current methodology was because it was almost untenable for the City to analyze
its projections on how many housing units could occur. He noted that some of the examples
given by Vice Chair Kamkar as losers are not necessarily even resolvable by a change in density
without proposing a dramatic change. He said although there are winners and losers, overall
there would be more unit production as a result of this change theoretically. He added that on
the individual housing opportunity sites it would have been very difficult to go through that
analysis without having made this change.
Vice Chair Kamkar volunteered to be part of a subcommittee that would go parcel-by-parcel and
see how many of them are affected, because he believed there are many more of these parcels
than are being presented.
Chair Zisser was not convinced there was an issue in terms of harming very many property
owners in the real world. He was also not willing to second guess the City Planning Department,
the City Council, and the Planning Commission who reviewed the new General Plan and the new
changes over several years. He was not in favor of moving forward with any kind of effort to
pursue this issue.
Chair Zisser opened an informal vote as to whether or not the Commission would agree to have a
subcommittee on the issue of gross lot area and gapping.
Commissioner Ostrowski volunteered to be on the subcommittee.
Commissioner Krey thought it okay to go forward with the subcommittee.
Commissioner Fields was also fine going forward with the subcommittee.
Vice Chair Kamkar and Commissioner Ostrowski confirmed that little staff time would be
involved in the proposed subcommittee’s work, and that much of the data they would need
is publicly available.
Chair Zisser summarized that there was majority consensus in favor of forming a subcommittee,
and if they could do their work with little or no staff involvement, he would support it.
Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Kamkar, seconded by Commissioner Ostrowski,
the Planning Commission motioned to create a subcommittee to investigate the
issues of gap in densities, and eliminating possible developable units through the
2024 General Plan, by the following roll call:
Campbell Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2024 Page 9 of 9
AYES: Fields, Ostrowski, Krey, Buchbinder, Kamkar
NOES: Zisser
ABSENT: Majewski
ABSTAIN: None
Chair Zisser appointed Vice Chair Kamkar and Commissioner Ostrowski to the subcommittee.
Chair Zisser closed the Study Session for Agenda Item No. 4.
REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
Director Eastwood reported that:
• The next Planning Commission meeting of February 27, 2024 would likely be
cancelled due to lack to agenda items.
• The City is still recruiting for a plan check examiner.
ADJOURNMENT
Adjourned meeting at 10:39 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting on Tuesday,
March 12, 2024, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California and
via telecommunication.
PREPARED BY: _______________________________
Ken Ramirez, Administrative Analyst
APPROVED: ______________________________
Alan Zisser, Chair
ATTEST: ________________________________
Rob Eastwood, Secretary
Alan Zisser (Mar 14, 2024 21:34 PDT)
2-13-24 PC meeting minutes
Final Audit Report 2024-03-15
Created:2024-03-13
By:Ken Ramirez (kenr@campbellca.gov)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAATpn2qRbwz0bH2JRqMca2aO_aaoApimzN
"2-13-24 PC meeting minutes" History
Document created by Ken Ramirez (kenr@campbellca.gov)
2024-03-13 - 4:25:10 PM GMT
Document emailed to Ken Ramirez (kenr@campbellca.gov) for signature
2024-03-13 - 4:25:15 PM GMT
Email viewed by Ken Ramirez (kenr@campbellca.gov)
2024-03-14 - 8:16:16 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Ken Ramirez (kenr@campbellca.gov)
Signature Date: 2024-03-14 - 8:16:24 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Rob Eastwood (robe@campbellca.gov) for signature
2024-03-14 - 8:16:26 PM GMT
Email viewed by Rob Eastwood (robe@campbellca.gov)
2024-03-14 - 8:20:06 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Rob Eastwood (robe@campbellca.gov)
Signature Date: 2024-03-14 - 8:20:21 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Alan Zisser (alanzisser@gmail.com) for signature
2024-03-14 - 8:20:22 PM GMT
Email viewed by Alan Zisser (alanzisser@gmail.com)
2024-03-15 - 4:32:51 AM GMT
Document e-signed by Alan Zisser (alanzisser@gmail.com)
Signature Date: 2024-03-15 - 4:34:18 AM GMT - Time Source: server
Agreement completed.
2024-03-15 - 4:34:18 AM GMT