Loading...
PC Min 06/14/2005 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY JUNE 14, 2005 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of June 14, 2005, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Gibbons and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner Elizabeth Gibbons Bob Alderete George Doorley Mark Ebner Tom Francois Michael Rocha Bob Roseberry Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Planner I: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: Sharon Fierro Geoff I. Bradley Stephanie Willsey William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission minutes of May 10, 2005, were approved as submitted. (7-0) COMMUNICATIONS 1. Revised findings for Agenda Item No.3 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 2 ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. *** PUBLIC HEARING Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.1 into the record as follows: 1 PLN2005-55 Prince, M. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Mike Prince for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-55) to allow the construction of a first and second story addition to an existing single-family residence on a flag lot property owned by Mr. Mike Prince located at 1150 Stein way Avenue in an R-1-10 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Tim J Haley, Associate Planner Mr. GeoffI. Bradley, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of a new two-story home on a flag lot located at 1150 Steinway Avenue. . Informed that this is a substandard lot at 8,000 square feet where 11,000 is required but it is a legal lot. . Described the property as being located on the south side of Steinway, adjacent to its intersection with Peggy Avenue. It is surrounded by single family residential on all sides and is included in the San Tomas Neighborhood. The project is consistent with the requirements of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. . Said that this new two-story home is accessed by a 163 foot long driveway. The home includes architectural features that are typical to the area including simple forms and gable roofs. . Stated that the applicant has provided letters of support from his adjacent neighbors. . Reported that SARC reviewed this project at its meeting on May 24th. . Recommended that the Commission adopt a Resolution approving this request. Commissioner Alderete presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on May 24th. . Advised that SARC made the recommendation that the applicant use decorative concrete or pavers in lieu of the proposed asphalt for the driveway. The applicant agreed to this recommendation and this requirement was added to the Conditions of Approval. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 3 Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3651 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-55) to allow the construction of a first and second story addition to an existing single-family residence on a flag lot property owned by Mr. Mike Prince located at 1150 Steinway Avenue by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, Francois, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.2 into the record as follows: 2 PLN2004-172 (ZC) PLN2004-173 (TS) PLN2004-174 (PD) Haro, R. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Richard Haro, on behalf of Richard Haro Drafting and Planning, Inc., for a Zone Change (PLN2004-172) from R-M (Multiple-Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development); a Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2004-173) to create five lots and one common lot; and a Planned Development Permit (PLN2004-174) to allow the construction of five town homes on property owned by Mr. Ben Schulman located at 620 W. Hacienda Avenue in an R-M (Multiple- Family Residential) Zoning District. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: July 5, 2005. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, Planner I Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Described the subject property as being located on the south side ofW. Hacienda Avenue between Walnut and Capri. It is surrounded by a single-family residence to the south and with town homes to the north, east and west. . Stated that the Land Use designation is Low to Medium Density Residential at 6 to 13 units per gross acre. The proposed project is developed at 8.62 units per gross acre. . Advised that the Zoning is R-M (Multiple Family Residential), which allows multiple family developments. . Said that the applicant is seeking a Zone Change from R-M to PD to allow the construction of five town homes on individual lots. Fifteen foot setbacks will be provided on all property lines. No tree removals are proposed for protected trees. Screening landscaping will be planted along the adjacent property lines. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 4 . Recommended that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation for approval to Council. Commissioner Rocha presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on May 24th and was supportive with the recommendation that decorative paving or pavers be used in place of proposed asphalt for the driveway. This requirement has been included in the Conditions of Approval. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Mr. Richard Haro, Applicant, 843 S. McGlincy Lane, Campbell: . Stated that he has been in Campbell since 1982. . Declared that this is a great project thanks in great part to the work done by Stephanie Willsey and the input of the neighbors. . Said it is a pleasure to be able to do a project with such a good design. Commissioner Alderete pointed out the Condition of Approval requiring a decorative stamped and colored concrete or pavers instead of asphalt for the driveway and asked Mr. Richard Haro if he is okay with that requirement. Mr. Richard Haro said that he was supportive of that condition as it makes the project better. Since the cost is the same for both stamped concrete and pavers, they will use pavers. He said that the most important thing for this is to achieve correct impaction but that is no problem. Ms. Cecily Fung, 1220 Capri Drive, Campbell: . Expressed concern over potential construction hours and possible impacts on rest. . Said that she understands that construction can begin at 8 a.m. and that Saturday construction is also allowed. . Asked if modifications were possible to construction hours to require a later start time. Commissioner Francois pointed out that Condition of Approval #15 calls out construction hours from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays and from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction is allowed on Sundays or holidays. Ms. Cecily Fung asked if changes to that are possible. Chair Gibbons asked staff if these hours are per Ordinance requirements. City Attorney William Seligmann replied yes. Chair Gibbons told Ms. Cecily Fung that these are the allowable construction hours for any project in the City. A Condition of Approval requires the posting of a contact number for the contractor for use in dealing with construction-related complaints. If noise impact problems occur after regular office hours, the Police Department can be contacted. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14, 2005 Page 5 Planner Stephanie Willsey clarified that this requirement is reflected in Condition IS-E. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Commissioner Alderete said that with the added condition to require decorative concrete paving or pavers for the driveway, he supports this project. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Doorley, the Planning Commission took the following actions: . Adopted Resolution No. 3653 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration; . Adopted Resolution No. 3654 recommending approval of a Zone Change (PLN2004-172) from R-M (Multiple Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development); . Adopted Resolution No. 3655 recommending approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2004-173) to allow the creation of five residential lots and one common lot; and . Adopted Resolution No. 3656 recommending approval of a Planned Development Permit (PLN2004-174) to allow the construction of five town homes on property located at 620 W. Hacienda Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, Francois, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chair Gibbons advised that this project would be considered by Council at its meeting of July 5,2005, for final action. *** Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.3 into the record as follows: 3 PLN2005-23 (8) PLN2005-24 (TRP) Fulton, J. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. James Fulton, on behalf of Architectural Technologies, for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-23) to allow the construction of four new industriaVoffice buildings and associated site improvements and a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2005-24) to allow the removal of 11 protected trees on property owned by Mr. James Chalmers located at 700-750 E. McGlincy Lane in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, Planner I Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 6 Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval for the development of four one-story industrial office buildings consisting of 71,740 square feet. The application consists of a Site and Architectural Review Permit and a Tree Removal Permit for the removal of 11 protected trees. . Described the General Plan Land Use designation as Light Industrial and the zoning as M- I-S (Light Industrial). The project is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project is allowed in an M-I-S Zoning District with approval of a Site and Architectural Review Permit. . Said that the project will be accessed via five driveways. Two are loading driveways and three are parking lot access driveways. Parking includes 209 standard and 14 accessible spaces. . Informed that staff had put out a RFP and selected DKS to provide traffic impact analysis of this proposal. Based upon the traffic analysis, the determination has been made that there are no significant impacts and no mitigations recommended. . Said that the Tree Removal Permit is to remove 11 protected trees. The arborists reports states that most of these trees are in poor condition. Replacement trees would be required. . Explained that a sign proposal is not included. A sign company will be retained by the applicant to develop a Master Sign Program. A condition of approval has been drafted that requires the submittal of a Master Sign Plan to the Planning Commission for review and approval. . Stated that a dedication of land would be required for a 30 foot half-street, curb, gutter and sidewalks. Utilities are required to be placed underground and include three utility poles. The applicant is asking the Planning Commission to waive the requirement for off-site undergrounding of utilities. . Recommended approval and advised that both the applicant and the consultant from DKS are available this evening. Commissioner Alderete asked if the trees are protected due to size rather than species. Planner Stephanie Willsey replied correct. Commissioner Alderete asked if the traffic study identifies the number of increased daily trips and a percentage for the increase in daily trips. Planner Stephanie Willsey said she would defer this question to the traffic consultant. Mr. Mark Spencer, Principal, DKS Associates: . Reported that the daily trips are projected to be about 500. . Advised that there is no existing information available. . Added that the change in peak hours is not significant. Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Mark Spencer for his best guess on the projected percentage of increase in daily trips. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 7 Mr. Mark Spencer pointed to page 14 of the traffic report that states that existing peak trips now is 200 to 250 trips daily and the net projected increase is by 300 trips a day. Commissioner Alderete said that this means the daily trips number is more than doubling. Mr. Mark Spencer replied yes. However, this increase is not affecting service levels in the area. Commissioner Alderete asked for verification that it is a three-way stop at Cristich rather than a lighted intersection. Mr. Mark Spencer replied yes. Chair Gibbons said that this is a funny area and that often a bottleneck is created there. Mr. Mark Spenser said that he would not project a change from what is there now. He said that the added trips (roughly 30 trips at a.m. peak) would only be noticeable if someone was actually out there counting cars. Commissioner Francois pointed out that McGlincy and Union also provides another means of egress. He said that he doesn't see a severe impact with this project. Mr. Mark Spencer said that about 44 percent of the trips would go onto Union Avenue from this site. Commissioner Doorley expressed his surprise at the ranking of trees with four of 11 being considered poor and seven being ranked in the two to three category, which is average or above average. Planner Stephanie Willsey advised that most of these trees are clustered at the northeastern side of the site near the existing home. These trees are in the proposed building footprint area and have not been well maintained over the years. Doorley said it simply appears that one cannot say that most of these trees are In poor condition but rather they are in the footprint of the proposed building area. Planner Stephanie Willsey clarified that a tree is not considered that great when it is ranked as a three on the scale. Trees ranked as ones or twos are desired for retention while trees ranked as threes, fours or fives are not desired for retention. Commissioner Ebner pointed out that placing utilities underground is required under Code. The developer is asking not to be required to do so for the street frontage. He asked what the total linear footage for this frontage is. Planner Stephanie Willsey replied 75 feet and also includes crossing the street. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 8 Commissioner Ebner said the intent for this requirement to underground utilities is to improve the area. He said that he believes all utilities should be placed underground. Chair Gibbons said she agreed with Commissioner Ebner on this issue. She asked if staff supports the applicant's request for a waiver for part of that requirement. She asked for clarification that this is not a main distribution system. Planner Stephanie Willsey replied that staff is recommending undergrounding of utilities and said that the lines involved are power lines. Commissioner Rocha presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on May 10th and was supportive except for waiving any portion of the requirement to underground utilities. . Added that the members of SARC believe placing utilities underground will enhance this project and the streetscape. . Said that a waiver should not be granted. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Mr. Steve Hanleigh, 671 Regas Drive, Campbell: . Said that he is a friend and neighbor of Mr. Jim Chalmers. . Said he supports this project. . Pointed out that between 15 and 20 homes are impacted. . Identified himself as a real estate broker who owns a similar project with industrial condominiums. . Pointed out that once the units are individually sold, managing the owners is like herding cats. . Stated that having an association to manage the property is necessary. . Said that he has a couple of ideas to improve this project. . Said that adding two-feet of lattice at the top of the eight-foot concrete wall will help reduce line-of-site impacts. This is an inexpensive and visually pleasing addition for both sides. . Pointed out that the lighting standards proposed for the parking area is 20 feet high. . Said that these types of fixtures don't necessarily have to be L-shaped. There are other designs that have lights built into the pole itself thus allowing a reduction in overall height will still offering the required parking lot lighting. . Suggested low maintenance vines and lattice in the three-foot setback landscape area to help screen buildings from view. . Expressed concern about trash pickup times and asked for CC&R restrictions on pick up hours. . Said that a restriction on compressors should also be called out for in the CC&Rs. . Stated that while an illuminated sign might be acceptable along McGlincy Lane itself, it would not be appropriate for elsewhere on this property. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14, 2005 Page 9 . Suggested a restriction on any sort of 10ft living units being created in this industrial/office building project. Commissioner Rocha asked for verification that Mr. Steve Hanleigh is speaking only for himself and not as a neighborhood representative. Mr. Steve Hanleigh replied yes. Chair Gibbons restated Mr. Steve Hanleigh's concerns as being landscaping, lighting, garbage, signs, noise and truck delivery hours. Mr. Steve Hanleigh replied yes. Mr. Jim Fulton, Applicant: . Thanked Stephanie Willsey, GeoffBradley and SARC for their work. . Said that a good design has been developed for this site. . Said that Mr. Steve Hanleigh has made some good points. . Reported that a light shield is called for. If the lighting were lowered from 20 feet to 16 feet in height, more lights would be needed. Using lights with a 20-foot height is the best design. . Said that placing a vine in the three-foot wide landscape area facing the residences is fine. . Said that a Master Sign Program would be developed and that illuminated signs are not being considered. . Agreed that noise and garbage collection issues could be dealt with in the CC&Rs. . Said that a line-of-sight study would have to be done to support the request for an extension of the eight-foot-high wall with a two-foot lattice. . Stated that he does not agree with that recommendation. Commissioner Rocha asked about the possibility for roof-mounted compressors. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley pointed to Condition 10-C that requires that compressors be located within a building with the door closed. Chair Gibbons asked if this requirement could be added to the CC&Rs. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied yes. Chair Gibbons suggested that all ofthe Conditions of Approval be included within the CC&Rs. City Attorney William Seligmann cautioned that not all of the Conditions of Approval are appropriate for inclusion in the CC&Rs. Director Sharon Fierro said the site operation and maintenance conditions would be appropriate for inclusion in the CC&Rs while the construction conditions would not. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 10 Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley: . Advised that the intent for constructing industrial condominiums is to allow sale to individual owners. To do so, a rezoning from M-I-S (Light Industrial) to Condominium would have to be processed. Right now, what is proposed is an industrial building. . Reminded that an 80,000 square foot R&D project had previously been approved and extended for this property but never constructed. . Said that the CC&R issues would be dealt with if the project is rezoned to Condominium to allow individual ownership. Commissioner Doorley asked if industrial condominiums are not unusual. Mr. Jim Fulton said that while it is the first such project in Campbell it is a popular trend. He explained the business owners are tired of the ups and downs of leasing and want to take advantage of owner's equity. Commissioner Doorley said that individual ownership for residential units has a positive community impact but he feels the opposite is true in commercial. He gave as an example the shopping center on Winchester where the Home Church is located. There are different owners for different segments of this shopping center, each with a different maintenance standard. Mr. Jim Fulton said that the CC&Rs place restrictions to help manage the site. He assured the Commission that these owners take pride in ownership. These are not cheap units to buy and will increase in value. Commissioner Rocha: . Advised Mr. Jim Fulton that he is in Commercial Real Estate and saw a number of such projects built in the late 1980s. . Expressed his agreement in the belief that owners' associations help keep these developments consistent in appearance. . Stressed the importance of not having any type of automotive uses in this development. . Informed that these developments have a good after market value and represents a good in- fill type ofproject. Commissioner Francois asked Mr. Jim Fulton to clarify if he opposes the extension of the concrete wall with lattice. Mr. Jim Fulton replied yes. He is okay with adding vines to the landscaping area but finds the existing eight-foot wall to be pretty substantial. Chair Gibbons said that it is hard to make the fence extension a Condition of Approval when there is just one neighbor asking for it. Mr. Jim Fulton advised that the maximum building height is 24 feet and that any roof-mounted air-conditioning units would be located below that roofline and out of sight. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 11 Mr. Steve Hanleigh: . Pointed out that while the existing wall is eight feet high from ground level, the homes have significant foundations which make the actual fence height only five to six feet. . Suggested that adding the two-foot lattice to this wall would be of more benefit to the residential owners than adding the lattice and vines on the building. He would rather see this wall increased by two feet. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley clarified that any proposed auto related uses would require issuance of a Conditional Use Permit in this zoning district. Commissioner Rocha suggested that all or no auto-related uses should be included in such a project development. You cannot have auto uses with other light industrial uses. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley cautioned that such a restriction would have to be conditioned. Commissioner Francois pointed out that one scenario might be a car collector who purchases one of this industrial condominiums to house a private collection and as a place to restore such vehicles. He said that these types of uses are very clean as these owners are very particular about their collections. Commissioner Rocha agreed that this is different and he would not have a problem with such a use. Mr. Jim Fulton: . Asked that the Commission not restrict uses on site if they are allowed under the zoning. In the Code, auto uses would require a Use Permit to allow it here. . Advised that undergrounding between 150 and 200 feet would add $750,000 to the cost of the project. . Asked that they not be required to underground across the street. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Commissioner Roseberry: . Advised that some issues raised are dealt with by existing Codes. . Said that he was not sure what could be done about trash pick up times. . Stated that a good job was done on the lighting. . Said he was opposed to raising the fence height and asked what the fence height limits are. Chair Gibbons replied eight feet. Commissioner Roseberry: . Said he was in favor of placing utilities under ground and that now is the time to do it. If not done at this time, undergrounding of utilities for this property would not occur for another fifty years or more. . Stated that the City needs to stick to its guns on undergrounding utilities. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 12 . Reported he was in favor of this project. Commissioner Ebner said he agreed about placing utility lines underground. He said that this is a good project. Chair Gibbons expressed support for the comments of the other Commissioners and suggesting adding a Condition of Approval regarding garbage collection hours. Director Sharon Fierro said that collection hours are at the discretion of the garbage franchiser. She added that staff tries to locate garbage enclosures as far away residences as possible. Chair Gibbons: . Said that the design of the site circulation has been well done. . Proposed that truck deliveries and garbage pick up be conducted in such a way that no backup is required. . Suggested amending Condition 10-A to read, "Circulation for deliveries and garage shall be such that no back up is required, with circulation in one direction, and shall be done within the hours of 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. " . Expressed her caution on using too many of one species of tree in the landscaping so that if some sort of disease befalls that species of tree the entire landscaping is not lost. Therefore, she suggested that a larger variety of trees be used and perhaps more trees overall. . Said that she is not supportive of the fence extension to 10 feet since the buildings are 50 feet away from the residences. . Stated that landscaping and irrigation should be included on the southern facades to shield the building. Commissioner Francois asked staff if the restrictions on garbage pickup times can be included in the Conditions of Approval. Chair Gibbons suggested modifying hours for garbage pickup between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. in Condition 10-A. Commissioner Francois asked if this is enforceable. Director Sharon Fierro said that it gives the Community Development Director direction to try to work this out but no guarantees of success. Commissioner Rocha: . Said that undergrounding the utilities will set the standard for the street for the next 30 to 40 years. . Said that while he understands the concerns about the additional cost, at about $1.30 per square foot it will not be too detrimental. . Encouraged supporting the requirement to underground. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14, 2005 Page 13 . Said that the Owners' Association would have to ensure that no residential lofts are constructed in these industrial units. . Said that the site circulation is fine. . Reminded that track pick up times are at the mercy of the City's trash vendor. . Pointed out that the Use Permit process weeds out any potentially undesirable uses for this development. . Stated he was in favor of this project. Commissioner Alderete: . Said he too is supportive of this project with the utilities placed below ground. . Said that the slate added along the base of the building per SARC's recommendation improves the appearance. . Suggested a change to Condition 10-D that currently restricts noise generating machinery such as parking lot sweepers, leaf blowers and other mechanical equipment should be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily and applying the construction hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. on Saturdays and prohibited on Sundays. . Asked when the CC&Rs would be required and whether the Planning Commission would have input on its specifics. Director Sharon Fierro advised that the applicant is not obligated to have CC&Rs as currently proposed. This approval can stand on its own as a rental project but not as an individual ownership project. City Attorney William Seligmann said that the condominium concept would require rezoning to C-PD (Condominium/Planned Development). Chair Gibbons asked if issues raised this evening are covered without CC&Rs. Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied yes, the Conditions of Approval will enforce the Commission's actions. Chair Gibbons suggested requiring the roll-up doors be kept closed at all times rather than only between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 p.m. as indicated on Condition 1O-B. Commissioner Rocha said that this is good in theory. He added that most units would likely be operating with these roll up doors closed any way. Chair Gibbons asked if the project, as approved tonight, can be rented out for any use without Planning Commission review. Senior Planner GeoffI. Bradley said that some uses would require Use Permit approval. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that there are decibel level restrictions established in the Conditions of Approval. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 14 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission took the following action: . Adopted Resolution No. 3657 approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration; . Adoption Resolution No. 3658 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-23) to allow the construction of four new industrial/office buildings and associated site improvements with revised findings and conditions as modified; . Adopted Resolution No. 3659 approving a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2005-24) to allow the removal of 11 protected trees, on property owned by Mr. James Chalmers located at 700- 750 E. McGlincy Lane by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, Francois, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None None None NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, was accepted as presented with the following additions: . Announced that Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley has taken a job with a developer and this is his last meeting with the Commission. . Mentioned that Geoffhas been on staff with the City for the last eight years. . Said that he is a compassionate person with a heart of gold. . Reported that he has a funny bone and she will miss his sense of levity. . Said that he is a tough negotiator but is someone who is easy to deal with. . Explained that Geoff is off to a new adventure with offices located in Pleasanton and an expense account. . Advised that a celebration send off will be held for Geoff on Wednesday, June 22nd, and the Commissioners are invited to participate. Commissioner Francois: . Said that Geoff has been a tremendous asset to the City, to staff and to the Planning Commission. . Stated that Geoff always answered his questions when he would call. . Said that Geoff is talented and bright and will be an asset in his new job. . Wished Geoff Godspeed. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14, ZOOS Page 15 Commissioner Rocha: . Said he too will miss Geoffs return calls as well as seeing him when packet delivery occurs on Thursdays. . Said that Geoff will now appear "hat in hand" on the other side of the counter at Planning Departments all over. . Wished him all the best. Commissioner Ebner joked that perhaps Geoffs wage here at Campbell could be raised to $5.50 per hour and he would stay. Commissioner Alderete: . Joked that he would have to disagree about return calls as Geoffnever called him back. . Said that he learned a lot about the Brown Act thanks to Geoff. . Stated that he has gotten along well with Geoff and finds him to be both professional and knowledgeable. . Recounted how impressed he was when Geoff handled the Council hearing on the Zoning Code Update and was able to field detailed and complex questions. . Agreed that Geoff would be missed. Commissioner Roseberry: . Agreed with the other comments made. . Said that Geoff is a knowledgeable guy. . Said that he would also miss packet delivery day but that Geoff is sti11likely to show up at his door with one of his kids when his wife, Heather, wants him out of the house for a while. . Wished Geoff the best of luck. Commissioner Doorley: . Said that he learned about how to be a civil servant through his interactions with City of Campbell staff through the years, even before he went into the public sector. . Said that Geoff is a funnier guy than he would ever be. . Joked that having experienced working in both private and public sector jobs, Geoffwill be back. Chair Gibbons: . Said that Geoff has contributed a lot and trained most of those currently serving on the Planning Commission. . Stated that she is certain that she has been a challenge for Geoff on occasions with her questions. . Said that Geoff is a grand person with a very wonderful humor that contributes a lot to the projects he works on. He helps the Planning Commission to do its job well. . Told Geoffto just have great fun in his new job and that she wishes him the very best. Director Sharon Fierro advised that there is an opening on the Historic Preservation Board and interested parties should be encouraged to apply through the City Clerk's Office. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14,2005 Page 16 Commissioner Rocha advised that he attended a Planning Workshop in Mountain View on June 19th and is providing copies of a handout from that session entitle, "How to Stay out of Jail." He advised that attendance at this program was time well spent. Director Sharon Fierro: . Informed the Commission that a Historic Preservation Workshop is being held at Campbell City Hall on June 22nd including lunch and a tour ofthe Ainsley House. . Invited the Commission to also participate in Geoffs reception at 5 p.m. that same day (June 22nd). ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9: 17 p.m. Commission Meeting of June 28, 2005. SUBMITTED BY: ~~ Corinne A. Shinn, Recording Secretary to the next Regular Planning APPROVED BY: Â}~b~~ . zabe Gibbons, Chair /rJf~ ~ /Slìaron Fierro, Secretary ATTEST: