PC Min 03/28/1995CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
7:30 P.M.
TUESDAY
MARCH 28, 1995
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The Planning Commission meeting of March 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:
Jane Meyer-Kennedy
Mel Lindstrom
I. Alne
Susan A. Kearns
Dennis Lowe
Jay Perrine
Commissioners Absent: Commissioner:
Alana S. Higgins
Staff Present:
Community
Development Director: Steve Piasecki
Senior Planner: Darryl M. Jones
Planner I: Gloria Sciara
City Attorney: William Seligmann
Reporting Secretary: Corinne A. $hinn
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by
Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission minutes of March
14, 1995, were approved with two minor corrections (6-0-1;
Commissioner Higgins was absent).
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Page 2
COMMUNICATIONS
There were no communication items.
AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS
There were no modifications or postponements.
ORAL REOUESTS
There were no oral requests.
pUBLIC HEARING
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record.
1. TS 95-03
Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Emily Chen
for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the
creation of eight single-family residential lots on property
located at 1910 and 1922 White Oaks Road in an R-l-6 (Single
Family Residential) Zoning District.
Ms. Gloria Sciara, Planner I, presented the staff report noting the following:
Applicant is seeking approval to create eight single-family lots on property
located at 1910 & 1922 White Oaks Road, creating a new, fully-improved cul
de sac.
· Removal of some trees will be necessary with a replacement ratio of two trees
for any tree removed. A tree inventory/report will be prepared for this site.
· Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that City
Council grant a Negative Declaration. Action taken by the Planning
Commission is advisory to the Council.
Commissioner Kearns asked whether there was any historical significance to the
structure on this site.
Ms. Gloria $ciara replied that the structure is not included on the Historic
Resources Inventory for the City of Campbell.
Commissioner Perrine had a question regarding the lot frontages for the eight
proposed lots.
Ms. Gloria Sciara advised that the average or medium lot-width must be 60 feet.
Commissioner Alne sought clarification -- minimum or average.
Ms. Gloria Sciara replied -- average.
Commissioner Alne asked if there was any consideration that this structure had
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Page 3
historical significance. He also asked why a historic consideration for some
structures occurs before an application is filed and some only after an application
is filed. Was there any chance that this structure would be found to have
historical significance.
Ms. Gloria Sciara replied that it was possible but not likely.
Mr. Rudy Herz, 1888 White Oaks Road.
His property is one house removed from the proposed subdivision.
· Informed the Commission that he had known the original owner of the
property, an elderly woman who lived at the site for many years.
· Suggested that the applicant and/or City of Campbell consider naming the cul
de sac in the former owner's honor -- Hatcher Court -- instead of the
proposed Peppertree Court.
· Disagreed with the assessment of the Pepper Trees. Stated that if
trimmed/pruned, they may be viable or perhaps they could be moved. Trees
are attractive.
· Since Campbell is proud to be a "Tree City," encourages the City to save these
trees rather than cutting them down. Campbell needs all the green it can get.
· This area serves as the entry to Campbell from Los Gatos.
· Stated his opinion that the house has not historic value anymore. Many
additions were made and not well done.
Ms. Emily Chen, Applicant.
· Advised the Commission that the new owners of the two parcels are present
and available for any questions.
· Expressed her appreciation to City staff for direction and support.
· Advised that she is looking to make a good project which will make the
neighborhood nicer.
· Agrees that the house has no historic value and that it was poorly built. In
addition, an agreement was made with Mrs. Hatcher when the property was
sold, which allowed her to remove anything from the property/building that
she wanted to keep. Mrs. Hatcher didn't expect that the house could be saved.
· Advised the Commission that she wants to save any trees possible.
· The proposed name of Peppertree Lane was in honor of the number of
pepper trees on the street.
If the City wants to use an island in the street to save the large pepper tree at
the entry of the proposed cul de sac, she was supportive of that idea.
Commissioner Lowe asked if Ms. Chen had any objection to changing the name of
the street.
Ms. Chen replied that there was no problem for her or the owners.
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Page 4
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy advised that the Planning Commission does not
designate street names.
Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, confirmed that the Civic
Improvement Commission was the body that approved/assigned street names.
Commissioner Alne asked why any historic significance was being considered
since the building did not make the original Historic Resource Inventory in 1980
when it was last revised.
Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that the intent was to save any artifacts and provide a
graphic (photo) record.
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy clarified that with the Historic Resource Inventory,
house listed are not automatically considered historic. The owners must apply for
historic designation and the house must meet code before the designation is
approved.
Ms. Gloria Sdara added that the State Historic Building Code must be met. The
house must be habitable and structurally sound. Inclusion on the Historic
Resource Inventory means that a property is potentially historic, that there is
some cultural or historical significance.
Commissioner Kearns asked if the pepper trees could be moved.
Ms. Emily Chen replied that arborists have told her that the trees would not
survive a move. She personally has no objection to trying to save the trees.
Commissioner Alne asked whether the City has a Tree Ordinance.
Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that the City does not have a Tree Ordinance.
Commissioner Alne asked whether they could do what they please regarding
trees.
Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that the City tries to save significant trees. If a tree is to
be protected, it becomes a part of the Site and Architectural Approval.
Ms. Emily Chen informed the Commission that she is supportive of the staff
request to plant two trees to replace any one tree removed. Trees will also be
planted along the sidewalk.
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Page 5
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by
Commissioner Kearns, the Planning Commission moved to close
the Public Hearing (6-0-1; Commissioner Higgins was absent).
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by
Commissioner Kearns, the Planning Commission approved
forwarding to City Council a recommendation to grant a Negative
Declaration and to adopt Resolution No. 2957, recommending
approval of TS 95-03 with the Conditions that a Historic
Assessment be done as well as a Tree Preservation Plan/Inventory,
by the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Alne, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy, Perrine
None
Higgins
None
This recommendation will be forwarded to City Council on April 18, 1995.
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record.
2. S 95-01
Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Sam
Maliniak, on behalf of Escobar Jewelers, for a Site and
Architectural Approval for a 6,000 square foot retail/office
building located on property at 480 Harrison Avenue in a C-1-S
(Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District.
Mr. Curtis Banks, Planner II, presented the staff report as follows:
· The site is on the southeast corner of Harrison at Hamilton, adjacent to the
Home Depot.
· Site includes three parcels with three single-family homes. The homes will
be removed and the parcels combined.
· Applicant is proposed to build a retail/office building to house Escobar
Jewelers and a small loan business.
· Both the General Plan and Zoning Designations for the site are Commercial.
· A 10-foot landscape buffer and masonry wall will buffer the residential area
from this use.
· Applicant will provide Streetscape Standards for Hamilton Avenue.
· Twenty-seven parking spaces are required and 26 are provided. Staff finds
this sufficient.
· Traffic problems exist in this area. All new developments in the area require
participation in paying a pro-rated amount of the cost for traffic
Plannin$ Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Pase 6
improvements. It is expected that the site will increase traffic on Hamilton
by 90 trips per day. Approximately 18 new trips a day will be added to
Harrison due to this project.
The environmental evaluation has determined that no significant impacts
will be caused when the mitigated measures proposed are implemented.
The City Attorney has suggested revising Finding No. 5 as follows:
· There is a reasonable relationship between the fee imposed for the
widening of the Salmar Avenue and Hamilton Avenue intersection
and the type of development proposed in that additional traffic
generated by this project will contribute toward degrading the level of
service of the intersection of Salmar Avenue and Hamilton Avenue
below acceptable City standards. There is a reasonable relationship
between the amount of the traffic fee and the cost of the public
improvement, in that the fee roughly represents the proportion of the
total cost of the intersection widening that the trips generated by the
proposed use bears to the total trips generated by uses in the area.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission grant a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and adopt a resolution with the revised finding and condition.
Applicant will conduct a traffic count to determine traffic during peak hour.
The cost of traffic mitigation is $188,000. A per trip fee will be determined
and multiplied by the traffic count generated by this project for a
proportionate share of the mitigation costs.
Commissioner Alne asked if the applicant at this time had any idea what the cost
will be for traffic mitigation.
Mr. Curtis Banks replied that this will depend on the traffic the site generates.
Since the specific uses of this site generate limited traffic, the applicant believes
that its uses is 50 to 60 percent of typical use. The cost could be anywhere from
$4,000 to $6,000 instead of $8,000 to $10,000.
Commissioner Lindstrom presented the Site
Committee report as follows:
· Move to accept and recommend approval.
and Architectural Review
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy opened the Public Hearing for Item No. 2.
Commissioner Lowe had a question regarding the placement of handicapped
parking in relation to building entrances.
Mr. Sam Maliniak, Applicant.
· The placement of the handicapped parking spaces is to accommodate two
separate business uses. The spaces are centrally located.
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Page 7
MO~O~
MO~O~
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom seconded by
Commissioner Alne, the Planning Commission moved to close the
Public Hearing (6-0-1; Commissioner Hig§ins was absent).
On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by
Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission approved
forwarding to City Council a recommendation to grant a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and to adopt Resolution No. 2958,
recommending approval of S 95-01, by the following roll-call vote:
Alne, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy, Perrine
None
Higgins
None
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record.
ClP 1995-2002 Public Hearing to consider the City of Campbell's 1995-2002
Capital Improvement Plan.
Mr. Darryl Jones, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows:
· This is a City-initiated application.
· The Planning Commission is asked to consider two aspects: the
environmental review and consistency with the City's General Plan.
· Generally, the CIP is concerned with maintenance of existing facilities.
· A hearing is required by State law.
· The City Council will review the CIP 1995-2002 in April.
· Advised that Mr. Nelson Fialho, Administrative Analyst, is present to
answer any questions.
Commissioner Kearns asked for clarification regarding the improvements on
Pollard.
Mr. Darryl Jones responded that the improvements were to be done near the San
Tomas School Site.
Commissioner Perrine admitted his pleasure at seeing $75,000 a year for the next
five years for downtown building upgrades.
Mr. Darryl Jones advised that this was a matching funds program for facade
improvements.
Planning Commission Minutes o£ March 28, 1995 Page 8
Commissioner Perrine inquired about the purchase of park land from the San
Tomas School Site.
Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that the purchase would be occurring with current
fiscal year funds.
Commissioner Alne asked about the Winchester Drive In site and whether funds
were in place for that project.
Mr. Nelson Fialho replied that funds were included to cover the cost of the sale of
the site and for engineering reports, etc.
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy asked about downtown parking.
Mr. Nelson Fialho responded that 60 spaces would be added by implementing
parallel parking on Orchard City and Civic Center in 1996/97.
Commissioner Lindstrom asked if this project has been approved yet.
Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that it had not yet gone to City Council.
Commissioner Lindstrom asked if this was a Redevelopment Agency project.
Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that it was. The Redevelopment Agency Board
proposed directly to City Council.
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy stated her belief in the desperate need for additional
parking in the downtown.
Commissioner Perrine asked about the revenue sources and how much came
from property taxes.
Mr. Nelson Fialho did not have the specific percentage.
Commissioner Lowe asked about the purchase of additional radio equipment
(page 13).
Mr. Nelson Fialho responded that the Police Department would be purchasing use
rights for an additional radio frequency. The City currently operates with just one
frequency which is usually acceptable. However, if two major situations are
occurring at the same time, this is problematic. The purchase price for an
additional frequency is $50,000.
Commissioner Lowe asked if the City was not safe without this second frequency.
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Page 9
Mr. Nelson Fialho replied that the City has a contract with the County in the
event that a second frequency is needed but that it is a cumbersome process.
Commissioner Lowe admitted that he would prefer to see this money used
elsewhere.
Commissioner Kearns asked about the parking lot improvements for the
Community Center (page 11).
Mr. Nelson Fialho responded that the lot on Winchester would be redone in the
first year and the lot on Campbell Avenue in the third year. Staff is proposing
restructuring to include landscaping and upgraded storm drain system.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Perrine seconded by Commissioner
Kearns, the Planning Commission moved to close the Public
Hearing (6-0-1; Commissioner Higgins was absent).
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by Commissioner
Kearns, the Planning Commission approved forwarding to City
Council a recommendation to grant a Negative Declaration and to
advise that the CIP 1995-2002 is consistent with the City's General
Plan, by the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Alne, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy, Perrine
None
Higgins
None
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 4 into the record.
4. Appeal
Hearing to consider the Community Development Director's
denial of a request to remove a maple tree at the First United
Methodist Church located at 1675 Winchester Boulevard.
Mr. Curtis Banks, Planner II, presented the staff report as follows:
· Staff received a request from the First United Methodist Church to remove a
maple tree from the front yard of the church because it blocked visibility of
the sign and sanctuary.
· The tree was planted in 1962 and was part of the approved landscape plan.
· The sign was installed in 1990.
Staff has recommended that the church move the sign north.
· Staff denied the request because the tree is healthy, of a significant size and
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Pase 10
would leave a large gap in the streetscape.
The Church is appealing this decision.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission uphold the denial of this
request.
Commissioner Alne asked why the request was denied.
Mr. Curtis Banks replied that it was because the tree was healthy and of a
significant size. According to a search of records, the sign was placed five years
ago when the tree was already mature and of a significant size. That was the
appropriate time to consider the removal of the tree. Staff feels that there are
other options, including the move of the sign.
Commissioner Alne asked if $6,000 was the cost to move the sign.
Mr. Curtis Banks replied that that was the figured offered by the applicant.
Commissioner Alne asked why the applicant was not warned in 1990 when the
sign was installed that the tree would cause visibility problems.
Mr. Curtis Banks replied that he did not participate in that application and was
unable to determine what discussions took place at that time.
Commissioner Alne asked why this matter was being considered since there is no
Tree Ordinance.
Mr. Curtis Banks answered that this is a non-residential use with an approved
landscape plan that had the City's review and approval.
Mr. Steve Piasecki added that only reason given for removing the tree is that it
blocks the sign. Staff is sensitive to requests to remove trees. The Commission
has the option to approve the removal.
Commissioner Alne stated that it was hard to deny the church the right to remove
this tree.
Commissioner Lindstrom asked if the tree could be trimmed.
Mr. Curtis Banks replied that it had been discussed, however, the applicant has
stated that it is the large trunk that is blocking their sign.
Commissioner Perrine questioned if the $6,000 figure was the cost of the sign
rather than the cost of moving it.
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Page 11
Mr. Curtis Banks replied that according to the letter, this was the cost of moving
the sign.
Commissioner Alne asked if the applicant was allowed to prune this tree without
City approval.
Mr. Curtis Banks said they were.
Commissioner Alne asked Mr. Banks to define excessive pruning.
Mr. Curtis Banks said if it were to damage the structure of the tree.
Commissioner Perrine proposed allowing the applicant to remove the tree but to
require a new landscape plan for review by SARC.
Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy stated that removal of this tree would leave a large
hole.
Commissioner Alne opined that the church had planted many trees and felt they
should be given credit for these trees already planted.
Mr. Robert Renfer, Applicant.
· Church was founded in 1888 and has 900 active members.
· Their request to remove this tree is based upon their efforts to outreach to the
community. Activities include a Boy Scout Troop, a pre-school program, the
Campbell Early Settlers' Program, outreach with residents of the Wesley
Manor Senior Center, AA meetings, meetings for Campbell teachers and
organizations, as well as musical concerts.
· The church feels that the tree blocks access to the sign, sanctuary and church
tower. If their predecessors had known the size of the tree, they would not
have planted it in that location.
· It is a healthy tree -- too healthy. It has to be repeatedly pruned to keep it off
the power lines. In fact, the tree currently needs pruning. It is a 30 foot tall
tree with a three foot thick trunk.
· Tree masks the sign, the chapel and the sanctuary and tower.
· Church has made many changes including a one million dollar renovation
of the sanctuary, courtyard and chapel. Since the initial site approval, the
church has added a great number of trees (pine, flowering cherry, maple,
evergreen), bushes and flowers.
· While City staff has suggested moving the sign, the church selected its
placement carefully. Its intent is to allow passers by to see the church and be
invited and welcomed to the oldest institution in the City of Campbell.
Planning Commission Minutes o£ March 28, 1995 Page 12
Commissioner Lowe asked if the tree shadowed the sanctuary or block the stained
glass.
Mr. Robert Ren£er replied that it did not.
Commissioner Lowe asked for clarification regarding the cost removing the tree.
Mr. Robert Ren£er responded that the church would rely on volunteers at a
minimal cost.
Commissioner Alne announced that he would not be supporting the staff
position. He planned to "do what good judgement dictates."
Commissioner Lindstrom asked Mr. Renfer what plans were in place for the area
in which the tree would be removed.
Mr. Robert Renfer replied that they would plant more flowers or install concrete.
Commissioner Lindstrom asked if the sign was visible from the north.
Mr. Renfer replied that it was.
Commissioner Lindstrom announced that he would support the removal of the
tree.
Commissioner Alne advised that he felt the church was capable of replacing the
tree as they saw fit in an manner equal or greater than staff or SARC could
recommend.
Commissioner Perrine asked, "why not revise the plan?"
MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner
Lindstrom, the Planning Commission rejected the staff
recommendation to deny the request to remove the tree and voted
to allow the applicant to remove the tree by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Alne, Lindstrom, Lowe and Meyer-Kennedy
NOES: Kearns and Perrine
ABSENT: Higgins
ABSTAIN: None
Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 1995 Page 13
REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
The written report of Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, was
accepted with the following highlights:
· SARC will discuss the San Tomas School Site on March 30th. Since
Commissioner Kearns has a conflict (lives within 300 feet). Commissioner
Alne has agreed to attend in her place.
· The Study Session with the City Council will be rescheduled for some time in
April.
· City is dosing escrow for the park site (former San Tomas School site) next
week. A presentation before City Council is scheduled for the first meeting
in May (May 2, 1995) where the check to the School District will be presented.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m., to the next Planning
Commission meeting of April 11, 1995, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, City
Hall, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California.
SUBMITTED BY: 'e6'rinne A'. ShinnT-~cordin-~e~'r'etary
APPROVED BY: ~'. ~.~
J~n/e" M~/~r-Ken~]a~irwoman
Steve Piasecki, ~ommunity Development Director