Loading...
PC Min 04/11/1995CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY APRIL 11, 1995 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of April 11, 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: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chairwoman: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Jane Meyer-Kennedy Mel Lindstrom I. Alne Alana S. Higgins Susan A. Kearns Dennis Lowe Commissioners Absent: Commissioner: Jay Perrine Staff Present: Associate Planner: Planner II: Building Official City Attorney: Reporting Secretary: Tim J. Haley Curtis Banks Frank Cauthorn William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner Kearns, the Planning Commission minutes of March 28, 1995, were approved (6-0-1; Commissioner Perrine was absent). COMMUNICATIONS There were no communication items. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no modifications or postponements. Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 2 ORAL REOUESTS: There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARING Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record. 1. TA 95-01 Public Hearing to consider the City-initiated application for approval of a Text Amendment (TA 95-01) to amend Campbell Municipal Code Section 21.59.080 - "Projections Allowed Into Yards." Mr. Curtis Banks, Planner II, presented the staff report noting the following: The proposed amendment to the Campbell Municipal Code will clarify Section 21.59.080 as it pertains to projections allowed into yards. · Currently the ordinance allows cornices, eaves, etc. to extend into yards by 24- inches on the side yard and by 30 inches on the front yard. · Proposed amendment would add bay windows to the architectural features that would be allowed to project into the required yard areas by 24 inches into the side yard and 30 inches into the front yard. · Staff believes that not including bay windows in the allowable projections list causes design constraints and recommends approval of this amendment. Commissioner Alne asked why the bay windows had been prohibited into the setback space. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that he was uncertain what reasoning was used as the ordinance had been in place for some time now. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission moved to close the Public Hearing (6-0-1; Commissioner Perrine was absent). MOTIO~ On motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Kearns, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2959, recommending approval of TA 95-01 (CMC Section 21.59.080 - "Projections Allowed Into Yards", by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy None Perrine None This recommendation will be forwarded to City Council on May 2, 1995. Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 3 Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record. 2. S 95-03 Public Hearing to consider the application of New Cities Development Group for a Site and Architectural Approval to allow the construction of 36 single-family residences on property located at 1510 W. Hacienda Avenue in an R-l-9 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Susan Kearns excused herself from this item as she resides within 300 feet of the project site. Mr. Curtis Banks, Planner II, · presented the staff report as follows: Project site is the former San Tomas School site. Nine acres of the site will be used to build 36 single-family homes. Four acres of the site will be developed into a public park. Applicant's proposal includes three models with two variations of each model. In total, there will be six varieties of front elevations. Included are one one-story and two two-story models. Applicant is proposing utilizing different treatments for the front to expand on the architectural variety of the project. Both the City's Zoning Ordinance standards and the standards set forth in the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan are being met. Landscape plan calls for 181 trees. For a project of this size, 171 trees would be required. Applicant is providing 10 more trees than required. For lots 1 through 13, 14, 15 and 36, an easement exists with the Santa Clara Valley Water District. SCVWD must have access to the area in each of these lots. A condition of the tentative map requires that a fencing plan be approved by the Planning Commission. A removable fence panel is being considered which would allow access as needed by SCVWD. A number of residents in the San Tomas area were invited to meet with the developer to discuss any issues regarding this project. One issue that was raised was the height of the single-story model. In response to those concerns, the developer reduced the height of the single-story model from 27.5 feet to 23 feet. A second concern was raised regarding the size of the overhangs provided by the roofs. Based upon an environmental assessment, taking CEQA standards into consideration, staff has determined that there are no negative impacts. Staff recommends that the Commission grant a Negative Declaration and adopt a Resolution approving this project. Commissioner Lindstrom asked for clarification regarding the easement. Commissioner Alne asked whether homeowners would be prevented from planting in the easement area. Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 4 Mr. Curtis Banks responded that the owners are prevented from obstructing this area. No buildings and no large trees that would prevent SCVWD from accessing the easement area. Mr. Tim Haley, Associate Planner, added that the SCVWD has restrictions regarding what planting materials would be allowed in the easement area. Commissioner Lindstrom presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · SARC was supportive of the project as submitted. Found that the applicant had done an excellent job in designing the houses. Mr. Tom Merschel, New Cities Development (Applicant), addressed the Commission as follows: · This project represents New Cities' first development within the City of Campbell. · Announced his availability to answer any questions. · Advised that New Cities has been working closely with staff from the on-set of this project and, in addition, met with residents of the area. · New Cities is in agreement regarding the Conditions of Approval and requests that the Planning Commission approve the project. · The homes will be an attractive addition to the neighborhood and to the City of Campbell. Mr. Doug Iwanaga, 1366 York Avenue, addressed the Commission as follows: · Stated that he found this to be a nice development. · Objected to Lot 11 having a two-story structure as it will block his view of Mt. Hamilton. A recently built project has blocked his view of the Saratoga foothills from the front of his home. · Mentioned that other neighbors in the area are interested in developing an easement agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Mr. Curtis Banks advised that the difference may be that while SCVWD has an easement which must provide SCVWD with use and access to the easement areas, they do not own the land, the homeowners do. The SCVWD must own the land outright that is directly behind the houses seeking a similar easement agreement with SCVWD. Ms. JoAnn Fairbanks, 1565 Hacienda Avenue, addressed the Commission as follows: · Mentioned that she was in attendance with her son, Joshua, aged 25. When Joshua was 10, in 1980, she worked to help develop a development policy for the San Tomas Area. Personally feels that this project does not meet the 1980 Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 5 policies. Requests that this application be denied. Feels that an opportunity exists to re-look at what should be done with the site. Expressed regret that the use of the property is a lost opportunity. Commissioner Alne asked Ms. Fairbanks to be more specific regarding what she finds is in violation of the policy since the policy was revised in 1993. Ms. Fairbanks replied that there were six standards in the 1980 San Tomas plan. In her estimation, the proposed project does not reflect a low-density development. Commissioner Alne advised Ms. Fairbanks that the lots were all 9,000 square foot lots. Ms. Fairbanks stated that the project does not feel or look like the intent of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. Commissioner Alne again asked for specific violations. Ms. Fairbanks replied that there were no violations. However, the City is not obliged to allow the maximum density allowed under the Zoning. Mr. Rich Taborick, 1441 Walnut, addressed the Commission as follows: · Mentioned that he had participated in the meeting with the developer. · An issue had been brought up regarding the fence line and the fact that the fence line is not necessarily on the property line. Commissioner Lindstrom clarified that since the jog (offset) in the fence is in place, the entire property is located within the fencing area. Mr. Tom Merschel advised that there were 9,000 square foot legal lots with 9,000 square feet of usable space. Commissioner Alne asked why all this discussion was taking place regarding the fencing and lot lines. Mr. Tom Merschel replied that it was being considered in order to comply with the plans and the tentative map requirements. Commissioner Alne inquired whether the lots were clearly outlined on the map and whether the lots met all setback requirements. Mr. Tom Merschel replied yes. Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 6 Commissioner Lindstrom asked whether the homeowner would have use of 9,000 square feet on their individual lot. Mr. Tom Merschel said that they would due to the inclusion of a jog in the fence. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy informed the Commission that the matters currently under discussion (easements and fencing) were not part of the Site and Architectural approval but rather a part of the final map process which is considered by the City Council. Mr. Tom Merschel concurred. Mr. Curtis Banks added that the only fencing issue to be considered by the Planning Commission is the access required by the Santa Clara Valley Water District. The remainder goes before City Council. Commissioner Alne asked whether it is permissible for a seller to impose an easement or is an easement established after the sale. City Attorney William Seligmann responded that the easement can happen during escrow. It is difficult to accomplish under one common ownership. Commissioner Alne reiterated that easements and fencing issues are not subject to review by Council. He asked why review these matters if unnecessary. City Attorney William Seligmann replied that it serves as a recordation of easement if it appears on the Final Map. Mr. Tom Merschel proposed that the issue of easements go before City Council. He clarified that the easements would be disclosed during a sale as it shows up on the preliminary title. Commissioner Higgins added that all these easement issues are disclosed to the buyer. The buyer will have use of a net 9,000 square foot lot. There is no problem or issue here. Mr. Doug Iwanaga asked if the jog in the fence line was needed to meet setback requirements. If so, he wanted to oppose the easements. Commissioner Lowe added that if the house that Mr. Iwanaga disapproves of is moved, it will instead block the view of one of his neighbors. Mr. Doug Iwanaga retorted that his neighbors should be at this meeting to look out for their interests. Planning; Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 7 Mr. Curtis Banks clarified that the fence placement has nothing to do with meeting the required setbacks. Commissioner Alne advised Mr. Iwanaga that whether his neighbors are present or not, the Planning Commission has the obligation to look out for the interests of all people in the area. If there is no law against obstructing views, than nothing can be done to prevent the installation of the two-story structure on Lot 11. Mr. Doug Iwanaga suggested that the developer lower the roof line of the house. Mr. Joshua Fairbanks, 1565 Hacienda Avenue, addressed the Commission as follows: * Wants to see the preservation of trees and maintain the rural area. · Asked spedfically regarding the fate of trees on Lots 35 and 36. Mr. Curtis Banks advised Mr. Fairbanks that the approved Subdivision Map allows the removal of trees. Mr. Joshua Fairbanks asked how many trees would be removed and how many retained. Mr. Curtis Banks responded that 30 trees would be removed and 17 retained. Tree retention was addressed with the Subdivision Map approval last year. Altogether there will be 160 new trees. Mr. Joshua Fairbanks stated his belief that there is a policy to retain trees and requests denial of this application. He feels that density levels should be built at lower than allowable levels. Ms. Suzanne Waher, 1481 Estrellita Way, addressed the Commission as follows: · Asked what the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) would be for this project. Mr. Curtis Banks replied .45. MS. Suzanne Waher, 1481 Estrellita Way, continued: Stated that she was happy to have single-story structures included as part of this project but felt that the two-story structures could be lower. Finds the massing of the project overwhelming and heavy. Stated her belief that the eaves were not big enough. The eaves are currently 18 inches. Ms. Waher suggested that they be increased to 24 inches. Feels that larger eaves help the houses to look informal. Pleased to note that there will be seven exterior paint colors used but would like to see more variations on the exterior elevations. Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 8 Spedfically asked that a wide variety of trees be included. At the residents' meeting with the developer she inquired whether the proposed sound wall along Lot 1 (Pollard Road) could be built in stone rather than stucco. Has the developer considered this request. Commissioner Lowe reminded that the developer has reduced the height of the single-story structures from 27.6 feet to 23.3 feet. Commissioner Alne inquired whether the developer found the request for a diversity of trees acceptable. Mr. Tom Merschel replied that they had no objection. A landscape architectural firm is being used to develop the landscape plan. Mr. Curtis Banks mentioned that the landscape plan offers eight different tree varieties and ten different shrubs. Commissioner Alne stated that the probable cost to increase the size of the overhang was probably small. Would this create a problem to increase the overhang. Mr. Tom Merschel replied that the shorter overhang was deliberate to create an intentional look. It allows more light into the homes. These homes are designed to meet the design demands of home buyers. Today's homes are tight because of improvements in glass and insulation. Mr. · · · · Gary Sharon, 804 Sunnyarbor Avenue, addressed the Commission as follows: Glad to see single-story structures inclUded in this project. Sunnyoaks development was built completely of two-story houses. Concerned that access to Walters will greatly increase traffic. Encouraged Commission to reject this project. Asked if there was not an impact since heritage trees were being removed. Mr. Curtis Banks responded that the City's Traffic Engineer studied the impact of Walters Avenue when the Subdivision Map was considered. The determination was made that the roadways could handle the demand. The City has no ordinance to prohibit removal of trees. Applicant has mitigated the removal of any trees by adding 164 new trees. Mr. Gary Sharon questioned whether the studies performed were good studies. Was staff doing its job in preparing the environmental studies or simply marking off boxes on a form. Commissioner Alne responded that he participates voluntarily as a Planning Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 9 Commission, attending two Commission meetings per month. He does this because he cares about the City. Reminded that the Subdivision Map for this proiect was approved in February 1994. Mr. Curtis Banks clarified that the environmental study prepared is concerned with the impact of building houses on this site. Checklist looks at the impact of actually constructing the 36 homes. Commissioner Alne advised Mr. Sharon that the Commission calls on experts, such as the Traffic Engineer, to make assessments by which the Commission can make an informed decision. Mr. Gary Sharon continued by stated his belief that the review matrix by which assessments are made might need to be reconsidered. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy again reminded the Commission that the Tentative Map was decided last year. The Commission needs to consider the Site and Architectural approval. Mr. Gary Sharon stated that he felt issues were still unresolved. Commissioner Alne advised that decision making is a difficult process. If all information is available, a clerk could make the decision. The Planning Commission relies on information provided by staff. The Commission then weighs that information objectively. Mr. Gary Sharon asked the Commission to listen to the folks who have made comments this evening regarding the impact of these proposed homes on their lives. Look to see what a two-story house looks like. Commission Alne responded that the Valley has changed over the years and will continue to change. Population increases as does traffic. Everything is subject to change. While this project represents change, the developer has mitigated all that could be mitigated. Mr. Rich Taborick: · Stated that he was unclear. Was this meeting to approve the Site plan and setbacks. · Stated again that the property lines are not the same as the fence line. Mr. Tim Haley responded that the fence issue was not before the Planning Commission and that the setback requirements have been met. Mr. Rich Taborick asked at what meeting would the fence issue be addressed. Planning Commission Minutes of A~ril 11, 1995 Page 10 Mr. Tim Haley replied that there would be 'no meeting necessary for the approval of the fence. Mr. Allan Ahlstrand, 1441 Juanita, addressed the Commission as follows: · Expressed his appreciation of the receptivity of the City staff, Planning Commission and City Council. · Asked for details regarding the developers meeting with local residents. Why was he unaware of this meeting. Mr. Curtis Banks responded that this meeting was not a public meeting so it was not noticed. If an item is of specific interest to residents in a certain area, interested residents are sometimes invited to participate in a meeting to discuss the matter. Mr. Allan Ahlstrand asked if his name could be added to the mailing list of interested parties available to discuss any future projects that pertain to the San Tomas Area. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that that was possible and would be taken care of. Ms. Mary Donahue, 1441 Juanita, addressed the Commission as follows: · Advised that she had picked up a copy of the project plans early in the process and walked through the areas. · Would like to second the motion to see a wide selection of tree varieties. In her opinion the wide variety of trees in the region is what makes the area different. · Asked about one particular corner site visible from the park site. Plans are for two-story model on that corner. Asked if it was possible to put smaller model there. Answered her own question by stating that it was probable that this site was of a size to accommodate the largest models. · Complimented the developer since the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan does not require the inclusion of a single-story model in a development. MO~O~ On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom seconded by Commissioner Higgins, the Planning Commission moved to close the Public Hearing (5-0-1-1; Commissioner Perrine was absent and Commissioner Kearns has abstained from this Item). Commissioner Lowe complimented the area residents for their comments calling their participation and input "democracy in action." Advised that originally, he had supported the idea of using the entire site for a park. This development is a good plan which he will support. Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 11 Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy advised that the Planning Commission gives a great deal of time to make the best possible derisions. Thanked the residents for their input. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Alne, the Planning Commission approved forwarding to City Council a recommendation to grant a Mitigated Negative Declaration and to adopt Resolution No. 2960, recommending approval of S 95-03, by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alne, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy None Perrine Kearns Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy called for a 10-minute break at 8:55 p.m. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy reconvened at 9:05 p.m. Commissioner Kearns returned to her seat and resumed her duties as a Commissioner following her abstention for Item No. 2. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record. 3. S 95-05 Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Emily Chen for a Site and Architectural approval to allow a move-on single family dwelling on property located at 1680 White Oaks Road in an R-l-6 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Tim Haley, Assodate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: Applicant is seeking a Site and Architectural approval to allow a move-on single family residence. The structure is a one-story dwelling that is similar to the other residences in the area. Tentative Parcel Map is currently being processed and will be reviewed by City Engineer and Community Development Director. Setbacks are met and the density is consistent with the General Plan. Staff recommends approval. Commissioner Lowe asked whether the homes on this project site would be considered one at a time. Mr. Tim Haley responded that usually approval can be granted by the Community Development Director. However, move-on houses require a review and approval Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 12 by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Lindstrom provided the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · SARC is supportive of this project. Review of the project was extensive and the project is compatible to the area. · Recommends approval subject to the Conditions of Approval. Chairwoman Jane Meyer-Kennedy opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. There were no parties interested in addressing this item. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom, the Planning Commission moved to close the Public Hearing (6-0-1; Commissioner Perrine was absent). MOTIO~ On motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Higgins, the Planning Commission moved to adopt Resolution No. 2961, recommending approval of S 95-05, by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy None Perrine None Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 4 into the record. e GP 95-03/ZC 95-03 ZC 95-04/S 95-02 UP 95-03A UP 95-03B Public Hearing to consider the following: 1. A General Plan Amendment (GP 95-03) on behalf of Kirkorian Development for approval of a land use change from Professional Office to Commercial (1820 W. Campbell Avenue) 2. A Zone Change (ZC 95-03) on behalf of Kirkorian Development for approval of a zone change from Professional Office to C-1-S (Neighborhood Commerdal) (1820 W. Campbell Avenue). 3. A Zone Change (ZC 95-04) on behalf of the City of Campbell for approval of a zone change from C-2-$ (General Commercial) to C-1-S (Neighborhood Commerdal) (1800 W. Campbell Avenue and 75 S. San Tomas Aquino Road). Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 13 A Site and Architectural Approval (S 95-02) on behalf of Banducci Associates Architects, Inc., to allow the construction of two retail buildings (4,460 square feet each) and the remodel of an existing 19,600 square foot commercial building in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District (1800- 1820 W. Campbell Avenue) and 75 S. San Tomas Aquino Road). A Conditional Use Permit on behalf of Kids Choice (UP 95-03A) and Kirkwood Animal Hospital (UP 95- 03B) to allow a day care center and an animal hospital in portions of the shopping center (1800- 1820 W. Campbell Avenue). Mr. Tim Haley, Assodate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: · Proposal is for the third phase in the remodel of Kirkwood Plaza Shopping Center. · Included in this phase: 1. The demolition of a two-story building at the corner of Fulton and W. Campbell Avenue 2. Construction of two new pad buildings, one at the corner of Fulton and W. Campbell Avenue and the second at the San Tomas Aquino Road frontage. 3. Remodel of existing exterior facade (Kragens and British Food Store). 4. Use Permit to allow a day care facility with an outdoor play area and an animal hospital. 5. Site approval to approve the pedestrian walkways and landscape plan. 6. Zone Change and General Plan Amendments. · Staff has initiated the Zone Change (ZC 95-04) for the property at 1800 W. Campbell Avenue and 75 S. San Tomas Aquino Road from C-2-S (General Commerdal) to C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) so that the entire shopping center will have the same zoning designation. · Staff recommends that the Commission adopt resolutions supporting the above-referenced actions. · Project is consistent with the Zoning for the site and proposed General Plan designations. Commissioner Lowe had questions regarding the impact of this zone change on surrounding properties, whether single-family homes would be zoned C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial). Mr. Tim Haley responded that the zone change would impact only the project site Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 14 and not the surrounding properties. Commissioner Alne had questions regarding the differences between the various commercial zoning designations. Mr. Tim Haley clarified that for the General Plan, designation is simply Commercial. For Zoning Districts, commercial zoning has variations such as Neighborhood Commercial and General Commercial. Commissioner Lindstrom presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: SARC is supportive of the project with the addition of a driveway at Fulton, the relocation of the pedestrian walkway, an awning addition on the south elevation, the addition of a landscape strip in the rear area of the site, a review of elevation regarding color and tower ~elements and the condition that the applicant address revised elevations for Fabridand within the next two years. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy asked if all of those concerns had been addressed. Mr. Tim Haley replied that all issues have been addressed either in the plans or within the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Dave Banducci, Architect, addressed the Commission as follows: · Advised that he is available for any questions. · All concerns have been resolved with City staff. Ms. Christine Evans, 4606 Whitwood Lane, addressed the Commission as follows: Has no objection in general. In fact, she finds this final phase a positive completion of the center. Has concerns regarding the remodeling process. Phase I generated a lot of dust. Work was done during the summer time. Whenever she wanted to open her window, dust and grime prevented her from doing so. Phase II create much less inconvenience as the work was done during the winter. Asked for timing for Phase III. Asked if a traffic study had been done regarding the driveway on Fulton. If not, requested that one be prepared. Expressed concerns regarding a day care use on this site. Mr. Tim Haley responded by advising that the City has regulations regarding construction hours. They are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. On Saturday. The Conditions of Approval include measures to reduce Plannin~ Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Pase 15 dust including water trucks and covering piles on the site to prevent generation of dust. As to the traffic impacts of the Fulton driveway, the Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposed driveway and supports its installation. Commissioner Alne explained that the driveway on Fulton is being installed because it is difficult to make a left turn onto Campbell Avenue. This driveway will allow drivers to utilize the light instead of having to cross busy traffic. He asked what her concerns were regarding the day care use. Ms. Christine Evans replied that her concerns were the drop off and pick up hours (6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.) which will bring lots of cars to the area in short periods of time. Particularly if the allowed number of kids, 144, are enrolled. Commissioner Alne replied that if 144 kids are enrolled, it will serve as proof of the need for the service of this day care fadlity. Ms. Christine Evans said that she had no problem with the zoning and Use Permits just the time of implementation. She asked that the contractors be reminded to abide by the work hours. Commissioner Alne asked her to contact staff if there are infractions. Mr. Kent Kirkorian, Developer, addressed the Commission as follows: During Phase I, they demolished 90,000 square feet and faced tough deadlines to get Nob Hill moved into the new site. Phase II was smaller and therefore caused less disruption to the area. Promised to do everything possible to minimize the impacts and/or problems caused by construction of Phase III. Mr. Lee Baxter, 1820 Whitwood Lane. Not concerned about noise or construCtion. Expressed concerns regarding people driving down Fulton as if it is a speedway. Feels that there is no police presence in the area to stop this problem. Has concerns regarding the additional driveway on Fulton. Suggested that the Commission take more time to consider this project. Expressed concerns regarding having a play area within a shopping center with so many kids. MO~O~ On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission moved to dose the Public Hearing (6-0-1; Commissioner Perrine was absent). Planning Commission Minutes of April 11, 1995 Page 16 MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Hi§§ins, seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom, the Planning Commission moved to adopt Resolution No. 2962 (GP 95-03), Resolution No. 2963 (ZC 95-03), Resolution No. 2964 (ZC 95-04), Resolution No. 2965 (S 95-02), Resolution No. 2966 (UP 95-03A) and Resolution No. 2967 (UP 95-03B) and recommended that the City Council grant a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project, by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Linds[rom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy None None Perrine The General Plan Amendment (GP 95-03), the two Zone Changes (ZC 95-03 and ZC 95-04) and request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be forwarded to City Council at its meeting of May 16, 1995. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, was accepted as presented ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:39 p.m., to the next Planning Commission meeting of April 25, 1995, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Recording Secretary j~he~~er_i~r~e~lf, fZ~ta~rw~"r~an ~',- ATTEST:~ ~ v~~ ~ _ _ Steve Pi~%~ki, C~mmunity Development Director