Loading...
PC Min 02/28/1995CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY FEBRUARY 28, 1995 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of February 28, 1995, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy, and the following proceedings were had, to wit: Commissioners Present: Chairwoman: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Jane Meyer-Kennedy Mel Lindstrom I. Alne Alana S. Higgins Susan A. Kearns Dennis Lowe Jay Perrine Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Community Development Director: Steve Piasecki Senior Planner: Darryl M. Jones Planner I: Gloria Sciara City Attorney: William Seligmann Reporting Secretary: Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission minutes of February 14, 1995, were approved (5-0-0-2; Commissioners Perrine and Higgins abstained). Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Pa~e 2 COMMUNICATIONS The following items were distributed as communications: 1. Letter regarding Agenda Item No. 1. 2. Letter regarding Agenda Item No. 3. 3. Revised Findings and Conditions of Approval for Agenda Item No. 1. 4. Revised Conditions of Approval for Agenda Item No. 3. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS Community Development Director Steve Piasecki proposed that the Commission hear Agenda Item No. 4 out of order and immediately following Agenda Item No. 1. The applicant is the same for both items. ORAL REOUESTS There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARING Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record. 1. S 94-09 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Kevin Ring, on behalf of Trinity Development Company, for a Site and Architectural approval to allow the expansion of an existing retail building (Breuners) located at 525 E. Hamilton Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Ms. Gloria Sciara, Planner I, presented the staff report noting the following: The project includes the addition of 18,000 square feet; a reconfigured floor plan, the addition of two box retailers in addition to the existing Breuners furniture store; on-site landscaping and pedestrian walkways; and 143 additional parking spaces. · Architectural modifications include the establishment of three retail entrances (two at Hamilton Avenue and one at the rear of the lot facing the residential area accessed from Almarida). · Staff has concerns regarding the articulation of the building facade which faces Almarida, finding the large space (400 square feet long) unappealing. Staff is recommending additional landscaping and trellis elements to soften the look of this large blank wall. · The proposed project represents an intensification of the current use with additional parking required. · Applicant is asking that the parking ratios be changed from 1:200 to 1:400 Based upon the traffic report prepared for this site, the proposed ratio is sufficient for the proposed use. The proposed site would include 498 total parking spaces which represents a slight deficit (approximately 17 spaces) which staff finds is sufficient. Planninl~ CommissiOn Minutes of February 28, 1995 Pa~e 3 The project is consistent with both the Zoning and General Plan designation for the site which is Commercial. The traffic study which was prepared indicates the expectation that there would be an additional 429 new peak hour trips as a result of this proposed project. Therefore off-site requirements are a part of the Conditions of Approval for this project to mitigate the traffic impacts caused by this project. The improvements include: the widening of Salmar to allow two northbound right-turn lanes; signal modifications at the signal at Almarida & Hamilton; and the restriction of right turns from the northerly driveway of the site onto Almarida. Condition No. 10 requires that an easement be granted and recorded. Condition No. 11 requires a deed restriction or parcel consolidation. The site is owned by two separate owners. The deed restriction would allow reciprocal parking if one site is sold. The maintenance of the streetscape along Hamilton Avenue is the responsibility of the applicant. Condition No. 19 addresses public property maintenance. A portion of property will be deeded to this project site and a covenant will be recorded for the maintenance of landscaping on this property. Condition No. 23 requires the modification of an existing traffic signal by the City of Campbell at a cost to the applicant of $2,800. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared with mitigation measures requiring the widening of Salmar, signal changes and restricted right-hand turns from the northerly driveway onto Almarida. Commissioner Alne inquired whether the changes on Salmar, Almarida and Hamilton are expected to mitigate the increase of traffic brought about by this project. Will the changes increase or decrease the impacts or will they bring about little significant change? Ms. Gloria Sciara replied that the mitigating measures would make the traffic situation better. Commissioner Lowe requested a report by the City's Traffic Engineer. Commissioner Perrine also had a question regarding the dedicated land. Mr. Ron Marquez, Traffic Engineer, responded that he had nothing to add to the information already imparted by Ms. Sciara. Most traffic issues caused by this project will be addressed through the Conditions of Approval and the mitigation measures taken by the applicant to address traffic impacts. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page4 Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy asked for clarification as to where the driveways were located on the site plan. Mr. Ron Marquez pointed out the locations for the three existing and two proposed driveways on the exhibits provided. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy inquired about traffic flow from the site. Mr. Ron Marquez advised that early discussions had considered the option to allow right turns into the site and left turns out of the site. At this time, the rear driveway is the only driveway with restricted right turns out of the site, directing traffic towards Hamilton Avenue. Commissioner Lowe inquired whether the project mitigation measures might improve the LOS from E. Mr. Ron Marquez replied that it was expected that the mitigation measures would raise the LOS from E to LOS D. Commissioner Lowe asked how that improvement in LOS was anticipated to OCCUr. Mr. Ron Marquez answered that the second turn lane at Salmar would clear the roadway twice as fast as a single lane. Commissioner Lowe inquired what was planned to improve the traffic flow on Hamilton Avenue. Mr. Ron Marquez answered that: · Two lanes doubles the number of cars clearing an intersection during a light. This serves more people. · Any time saved will be switched to Hamilton Avenue. Commissioner Perrine expressed concern regarding Condition of Approval No. 13. Mr. Ron Marquez explained that the original concept was to discourage movement to the north toward the residential area. Commissioner Perrine asked when the traffic issues/details would be resolved. Mr. Ron Marquez responded that an encroachment permit process is reviewed and approved through the Public Words Department staff. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 5 Commissioner Alne sought clarification that the restricted right turn at the exit from the rear driveway was in place solely to prevent traffic from going toward the Almarida residential area. Asked whether lane markings could be added that advised traffic leaving the front driveway, via a right turn, that they are restricted to only entering another site driveway and are prohibited from going into the residential neighborhood. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy asked what effect this project would have on Hamilton Avenue and whether a percentage of increased traffic had been identified. Mr. Ron Marquez replied that it was expected that the project would cause no real problems on Almarida; some increased traffic on Salmar and an imperceptible change to traffic on Hamilton. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy inquired whether the apartments on Almarida had security gates. Mr. Darryl Jones, Senior Planner, responded that the apartment complex directly across the street from the project site did have security gates. Commissioner Lindstrom Committee report as follows: · presented the Site and Architectural Review SARC met twice with the applicant. While currently, the loading dock is fronting on Almarida, the applicant has agreed to move the loading dock to a rear interior area of the site (fronting Highway 17). Applicant has included extended pedestrian walkways on the site and added trees throughout the site. Traffic issues were noted and Conditions of Approval created to address these traffic issues. SARC believes these issues are well and properly addressed through the proposed Conditions of Approval. SARC found that the applicant has done an excellent job in reworking the original plans to improve the architectural appearance. S^RC recommends approval. Commissioner Alne asked if SARC believes that the modifications made are proportionate to the impact the project has on the area. Commissioner Mel Lindstrom replied that they were. Mr. Kevin Ring, Applicant, Trinity Development Company. · Advised that he is representing JBC Realty. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 6 Thanked staff and commended their responsiveness. Stated that he had worked closed with staff and SARC over the last two weeks. Announced that he had concerns about the report and read the following: 1. Traffic issues: From page 6 of the original staff report: "Staff understands the applicant's concern and finds that further review with the Traffic Engineer is advisable to facilitate traffic movements to the northerly portion of the property and to prevent the project traffic from impacting the residential property to the north." Asked that a resolution to the traffic issues be reached tonight if possible. Not to make a final decision leaves an open end for things to be changed. Seems that they have done everything asked to mitigate traffic issues. Project is designed so that exits/entrances and any turning restrictions are clearly marked. Commissioner Lindstrom asked if the applicant had seen the revised Conditions of Approval. Mr. Steve Piasecki clarified that Condition of Approval No. 24 allows additional review by the Traffic Engineer particularly regarding the northerly driveway. Mr. Kevin Ring opined that solid plans have been developed together with SARC and staff and he is interested in proceeding into the production of construction documents. Commissioner Alne asked staff what information was needed to make a determination on final traffic mitigation. Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that the detailed construction drawings were needed and that only small issues remained unresolved. Commissioner Alne asked Mr. Ring whether that level of uncertainty was unacceptable. Mr. Kevin Ring replied that it was not unacceptable at that level. Commissioner Lindstrom sought clarification that under Condition No. 24, issues could be resolved at staff level. Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that he was correct. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 7 Commissioner Perrine brought up a suggestion that he had faxed a concept drawing to Gloria to depict a curve in the roadway to restrict traffic which he felt would be inexpensive for the applicant to install. Mr. Kevin Ring sought clarification as to Condition No. 24 saying that he was under the impression that only the northerly driveway was effected but that the language seems to imply that all driveways are under review due to this Condition. Mr. Steve Piasecki explained that there were still unresolved issues regarding signage for the southerly driveway. Commissioner Alne asked whether there were two or three driveways. Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that there were two driveways. Mr. Kevin Ring stated that he was unclear what was expected of them next. Mr. Steve Piasecki responded that Phase I would require them to submit detailed drawings that included signs, curbing and right of ways as well as construction documents for the parkway and streetscapes. Mr. Kevin Ring asked who would be signing off on these items. Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that the City Engineer with consultation with the Traffic Engineer. Mr. Kevin Ring brought up Condition of Approval No 3 and stated that this issue had not been previously raised by staff and asked for instruction. Commissioner Lindstrom offered his opinion that gARC felt that the building design had been approved and that Condition No. 3-A seems to infer incompleteness. Mr. Steve Piasecki stated a concern regarding the tall blank walls. Staff finds it necessary for the applicant to work with staff further to add trellises, scoring of stucco or additional landscaping to break up this large expanse of wall. Commissioner Lowe asked why this matter was not finalized prior to this evening's meeting. Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that these differences have been known for a long period of time and he wants to reserve the right to suggest further modifications. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 8 Commissioner Lowe opined that this should have been taken care of earlier. Mr. Steve Piasecki agreed but advised that staff did not want to delay the process so the application continued to be processed without staff's requests being satisfied in full. Details are often worked out late in the process. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy clarified that staff was not seeking a change in design but rather a softening of the large blank wall. Mr. Steve Piasecki agreed stating that the proposed changes were limited to scoring or paint colors. Commissioner Alne clarified that SARC has approved a design, staff still has changes it wants implemented and the applicant is asking for direction. He expressed his sympathy for the applicant who has a right to know whose opinion he is expected to subscribe to. Mr. Kevin Ring added that he did not like to leave things open ended when he had come to the Planning Commission meeting believing all issues were settled. The way things are currently stated in the Conditions delays are possible. Advised that while adding trellis work had been discussed, the suggestion had been eliminated with the full knowledge of the City's Architectural Advisor. Commissioner Alne advised that the Commission had two options. Either to approve SARC's recommendation or to continue the matter until a definite design could be approved. Commissioner Lowe made the recommendation that Condition of Approval No. 3 be stricken from the revised Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Lindstrom advised that SARC had "nitpicked" the project pretty well. Changes were made twice by the applicant. Felt that the presented project was acceptable to both SARC and staff through detailed meetings with lots of give and take. Asked the Commission to support SARC's recommendation. Commissioner Alne asked if staff participated at these meetings. Was SARC aware that staff was not fully satisfied. Mr. Steve Piasecki answered that the Commission can strike any Condition of Approval but that staff was obligated to broach ideas. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy stated her belief that a consensus was in place to eliminate Condition No. 3. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 9 Mr. Kevin Ring asked if all the comments made this evening were a part of the record. He also stated that he would speak with his architect to evaluate the concerns and recommendations of staff. Ms. Rosanne Serrati, Mitchell Court. Has lived in the area for 25 1/2 years and has concerns regarding traffic and access issues. Outlined existing problems despite the traffic circle (which is not being used properly) and speed bumps. Stated that with the addition of Frys and Home Depot, much additional traffic has been experienced in the area. Additional car trips are a concern. Does not want to see Almarida become another Salmar. Expressed concerns about the through traffic that exits Home Depot's parking lot and changes in the signal at Almarida and Hamilton. Mr. Ron Marquez explained that the previous use of arrow indications at the signal limited departures from the Home Depot to either left or right turns but turned out to be confusing and dangerous. Therefore they were removed and crossing straight through onto Almarida was allowed. He hopes to bring back the more restrictive turns only but in a more safe fashion. He is monitoring traffic in the area and stated his appreciation for any safety concerns being raised by local residents. MS. Nanette Vidales, 775 Almarida Drive. Expressed concerns regarding the traffic circle. As the mother of young children, she is concerned about the level of traffic already experienced on their street. Drivers cross the stop sign at Pamlar all the time. Suggested the possibility of dead ending Almarida since it is being used as such a thoroughfare. Stated concern that inadequate parking facilities might cause patrons of the site to park on their residential street. Asked the Commissioners to take the local residents' concerns into account when making their decision. Mr. Ken Rerales, Almarida Drive. Expressed concerns about the possibility of overflow patrons parking on the residential street. Questioned if parking was adequate for the site. Recommended the addition of stop signs on Almarida and on David. Mr. Steve Piascecki advised that the only portion of this project with less than normal parking ratio is the Breuners store. Furniture stores typically generate less traffic. The deficiency is only 17 spaces. Mr. Ken Rerales asked if it would be possible to restrict parking on Almarida. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 10 Mr. Tom Conte, 801 Almarida. · Discussed impacts of Frys and Home Depot traffic in the area. · Asked what they would get out of this project as far as safety issues. · Asked if site could be accessed from area between building and highway for access from Hamilton Avenue and the front portion of the site. · Stated that addition stop signs are necessary in the area. Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that a building addition was being placed in that space as well as the loading dock. Mr. Allan Borkin, 812 Almarida. · Concerned about level of traffic and parking. · Advised that when Breuners was more successful, traffic would end up on his street when patrons were drawn by big sales. · Suggested stop signs at David & Almarida. · Asked about sidewalk across Woonerf and landscaping in woonerf. Ms. Rosanne Serrati asked if left turns would still be permissible from Hamilton onto Almarida. Mr. Ron Marquez said they would. MO~O~ On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom, the Planning Commission unanimously moved to dose the Public Hearing. (7-0) Commissioner Alne added that stop signs can be added as required. Parking ratios are difficult to predict. When McBain experienced Tower Records traffic on the street, permit parking was enacted. Applicant should have due notice as to what is required of him and it is unfair not to do so. Commissioner Perrine opined that this area is become a "billion dollar" intersection with the large businesses. The issue here is mainly traffic and he is confident that with the assurances of the Traffic Engineer, traffic issues will continue to be monitored. MO~O~ On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2953 approving a Site and Architectural application to allow the expansion of an existing retail building (Breuners) on property located at 525 E. Hamilton Avenue with the revised Conditions of Approval (eliminating Condition 3) and approval of a Negative Declaration, by the following roll-call vote: Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Pa~;e 11 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy, Perrine None None None Mr. Steve Piasecki announced that there was a 10-day appeal period. If appealed this matter would be forwarded to City Council. The Planning Commission's decision is final, unless appealed. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 4 (out of order) into the record. 4. SA 95-O6 Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Kevin Ring, on behalf of Trinity Development Company, for approval of a Sign Application to allow the refacing and remodel of an existing freestanding sign and additional wall signs at a retail center (Breuners site) located at 525 E. Hamilton Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Ms. Gloria Sciara, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: · Applicant is requesting three wall signs, two directional monument signs and one freestanding monument sign. · Staff is supportive of the three wall signs and two directional signs. · Staff seeks the reduction of the Office Depot sign located on the building wall at the rear of the site. · Staff seeks a reduction in the monument size due to the prominent visibility of the site and asks the Planning Commission to give direction to the applicant to reduce the size of the monument sign. Commissioner Lindstrom asked where the signs would be placed on the site. Ms. Gloria $ciara replied that the directional signs would be placed at the driveways and the wall signs at the three respective business entrances. The monument sign would remain at its current location. Commissioner Lindstrom asked why the details of this application were not finalized. Ms. Sciara explained that the application came in late and staff was attempting to facilitate the applicant. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Pase 12 Commissioner Lindstrom presented Committee report as follows: · SARC recommends approval of the Site and Architectural Review the directional and wall signs with a reduction in the size of the Office Depot sign. SARC finds that the monument sign proposed is larger than the monument signs found at similarly sized businesses in the area. SARC feels that the applicant can work with a similar size sign such as Frys and Home Depot. Recommend that the monument sign be denied as presented but give staff the opportunity to work with the applicant to reduce the size of the sign. Commissioner Alne inquired if the directional signs were complying with the Sign Ordinance. He found them to be large. Ms. Gloria Sciara answered that the Sign Ordinance limits directional signs to 6 square feet with no advertising. The proposed directional signs are 11 square feet. Because of the remote location of Office Depot on the site the larger signs were found to be acceptable. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom, the Planning Commission unanimously approved Sign Application (SA 95-06) for the 525 E. Hamilton Avenue (Breuners site) as stated in the staff recommendation on the report (reduction of Office Depot wall sign and reduction of monument sign). (7-0) Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record. 2. UP 94-06 Hearing to consider the City-initiated action to revoke Use Permit No. 94-06 for property located at 126 N. Harrison Avenue (Nostalgia Motors) in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District due to a lack of compliance with the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Darryl Jones, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: · The City is seeking the revocation of a Use Permit approved in September 1993. · Applicant had originally been approved for use of one-third of the building and took over the remainder of the building when the space became available. · Conditions of Approval required for the Use Permit approved in 1994 painting, addition of windows, landscaping, ventilation and stairways. · Applicant was provided with a Notice to Comply with the Conditions of Approval but did not. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 13 Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 MO~O~ On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Kearns, the Planning Commission unanimously moved to close the Public Hearing. (7-0) MO~O~ On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2954 revoking UP 94-06 (Nostalgia Motors) located at 126 N. Harrison Avenue in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District, by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy, Perrine None None None Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record. 3. UP 95-02 Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Virginia Hendricks, on behalf of Western College of Therapeutic Massage, for approval of a Use Permit to allow a 750 square foot instructional school of therapeutic massage in an existing commercial center located at 2235 S. Winchester Boulevard in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Ms. Gloria Sciara, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: Applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit to allow the move of her business, Western College of Therapeutic Massage, to 2235 S. Winchester Boulevard (near Catalpa). · The school classroom area will consist of 750 square feet. · Staff has distributed revised Conditions of Approval due to submission of additional details of the operational description. Revised Conditions allow larger class size and expansion of programs to include Advanced Study Programs and Certification. · Proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning for the site and sufficient parking is available to serve the use. · Staff is supportive of the application and recommends approval. Commissioner Alne asked if the Conditions reflected the hours of operation. Ms. Gloria Sciara replied that they were included. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Pa~e 14 Ms. Virginia Hendricks, Owner/Applicant. · Announced that she had been in business for eleven years in Campbell with no complaints made against her school. · Has requested an increase in class size to 16 students to conform with State standards. Additionally wanted the option to add advance level classes to the curriculum. · Sought clarification regarding the provision of therapy to outside clientele. Advised that her current clientele is strictly women and includes her sister (a non-paying client) who is wheelchair bound. Asked to be allowed to provide therapy to her sister at her school. Commissioner Lindstrom recommended that language be added to Condition F "consistent with requirements of the State." Commissioner Alne asked where Ms. Hendricks referrals came from. Ms. Hendricks replied that mainly friends and family and only women. Most of her clients have physical problems. Commissioner ^lne asked staff if the Use Permit is transferrable. City Attorney William Seligmann clarified that the Use Permit was for the location and was therefore transferrable. Commissioner Alne pointed out to the applicant that the City could not be assured that anyone following her use of the site may not have the same high standards of operation. Ms. Hendricks asked if her sister is considered a client since she does not pay for therapy. Commissioner Alne answered that he deferred that response to the City Attorney. Commissioner Lowe asked whether students practiced only on each other. Ms. Hendricks replied that they practiced on each other, on friends and family members and on former students. A variety of body types is required in order to obtain a well-rounded training experience as a therapist. Commissioner Lowe asked if 100 hours of instruction were completed within two weeks. Ms. Hendricks replied that was the case. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 15 Ms. Darleen Nappe, a former student of Ms. Hendricks. · Attended the Western College of Therapeutic Massage seven years ago at the age of 57. Went to work after her husband retired and now has her own business in therapeutic massage. Clients include dancers from the San Jose/Cleveland Ballet. · Virginia Hendricks was her instructor at that time although she did not yet own the business. Instruction was done carefully and students are put at ease. MO~O~ On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission unanimously moved to close the Public Hearing. (7-0) MO~O~ On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Perrine, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2955 approving a Use Permit to allow the establishment of Western College of Therapeutic Massage, to operate under the Conditions of Approval which are to be reworded to allow up to 16 students and additional advance programs of instruction, on property located at 2235 S. Winchester Boulevard in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District, by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy, Perrine None None None REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, was accepted with the following highlights: · March 27, 1995, is tentatively set for a joint meeting with the City Council. Meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m. Commissioners asked to notify Corinne if they are unable to make that meeting time. · Asked Commissioners to consider major issues and directions for the Commission in 1995/96 and bring those ideas to the next Commission for discussion. · Reminded the Commissioners about the League of California Cities Planners Institute scheduled for March 22 through March 24 in Monterey. Commissioner Lindstrom announced his unavailability for the March 2, 1995, SARC meeting. Commissioner Alne agreed to attend in his place. Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1995 Page 16 ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10 p.m., to the next Planning Commission meeting of March 28, 1995, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 North First Street, Campbell, Californi~L ~, SUBMITTED BY: (._f ~"~.,N_t.~ Corinne A. Shinn, Recording SecretalTy APPROVED BY: ~-I~ennc:l~ly, C~airwoman ~ ' ATTEST: ~a~(~ Steve Pia e~, (~mmunity Development Director