Loading...
PC Min 06/27/1995CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY JUNE 27, 1995 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of June 27, 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: Senior Planner: Associate Planner: Planner I: City Attorney: Reporting Secretary: Steve Piasecki Darryl M. Jones Tim J. Haley Gloria Sciara William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Higgins, the Planning Commission minutes of June 13, 1995, were approved with a minor correction to page 6 indicating Commissioner Kearns as absent from the vote on Resolution No. 2981 (6-0-0-1; Commissioner Kearns abstained from the vote as she was absent from the June llth meeting.) Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 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. S 95-04 UP 95-08 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Paul Karakashian, on behalf of Crockers Lockers, for a Site an Architectural Approval (S 95-04) to allow the development of a new 55,000 square foot mini-storage facility and a Conditional Use Permit (UP 95-08) to allow a 950 square foot on-site manager's living unit for property located at 187 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue in a M-I-$ (Light Industrial) Zoning District. MS. Gloria Sciara, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: The project site is an existing commercial/residential development which is bounded by Highway 17 and San Tomas Expressway. Project challenges included creating compatibility with the surrounding uses. For this infill project, mature trees existing on site were incorporated into the design of the site. These mature trees will screen the project from the north and the south. In addition trellis features are incorporated to further soften and screen the project. Included on site is a structure which is included on the Historic Resources Inventory, known as the First Campbell Grammar School. An Historic Assessment has been prepared. Staff worked with the applicant to locate someone to take and preserve the building. The applicant has fulfilled the Conditions of Approval imposed regarding attempts to save the structure. To date there are no parties interested in the structure. A parking study was conducted. There is no parking standard in effect for a mini-storage facility. It has been determined that the four proposed spaces as well as available parking in front of the roll-up doors is adequate. A Negative Declaration has been prepared. No significant impacts have been identified except for the disposition of the house. Staff recommends approval and adoption of the Negative Declaration. Commissioner Lindstrom presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · SARC is in favor of the size of this project. Finds that it fits will into the area Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Page 3 and the building is well screened by trees. Lots of thought went into the design. SARC had requested the additional use of trellis treatments. Commissioner Kearns added that SARC was concerned with the amount of use of the corporate color, a bright blue, in the painting of the building. Ms. Gloria Sciara advised the Commission that the project would include trellis treatments along the eastern elevation and along the lower elevations. Commissioner Lowe expressed concern about the "large footprint" this proposed structure left on the project site. Additionally, he inquired whether recreational vehicle and other vehicle storage would be included on site. Ms. Gloria Sciara replied that no vehicle storage would be included. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Richard Crocker, Owner, Crockers Lockers. · Advised the Commission that he was available for questions and introduced George Homsey, project architect. · Sought clarification regarding two of the Conditions of Approval. · For Finding No. 14, he asked that the words "or demolished" be added. · Advised that while the rendering shown this evening depicts five roll up doors while the project actually has seven roll up doors. Ms. Gloria Sciara advised the Commission that the seven roll up doors show up on the plans included in the staff report. Mr. Richard Crocker continued: · Asked for clarification regarding Condition of Approval No. 13. He sought assurances that the Condition would only be enacted when and/or if the Light Rail System was installed. Ms. Gloria Sciara advised that per the Public Works Department, the Dell Avenue improvements were required to assist in the creation of a pedestrian circulation system. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy reiterated that the requirement outlined in Condition of Approval No. 13 was not tied into the installation of the Light Rail. Ms. Gloria Sciara told her that assumption was correct. Commissioner Alne stated that with or without the installation of a Light Rail System, the improvements would be required. Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Page 4 Ms. Gloria Sciara said that was the case. Mr. Richard Crocker asked whether it was an arbitrary decision as to when the improvements would be installed. Commissioner Alne advised that there are perimeters as to when improvements would be required such as when 50 percent of the properties have had on-site improvements. Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, added that the reason that all of the improvements are not being required immediately is that this is the only project in the immediate area. In the future, when other activity in the area warrants it, the street improvements will be installed. Mr. Richard Crocker asked for clarification as to whether the Condition of Approval No. 5 would require him to obtain a bond. Ms. Gloria Sciara advised the Commission that no bond would be required. Public Works has the discretion to determine whether a bond is required. Commissioner Lowe questioned the driveway onto Dell Avenue. Ms. Gloria Sciara replied that the Dell Avenue driveway and entrance were for emergency access only. Commissioner Perrine asked where the blue color paint would be used on this project. Mr. George Homsey, Project Architect, replied: · The blue is used for window trim and doors as an accent color. Commissioner Perrine asked whether a band would be painted along the building walls. Ms. Gloria Sciarra replied that no band of blue would be included along the walls. The blue is simply an accent color. Commissioner Alne asked how much leasable space is included in this project. Mr. Richard Crocker replied that the project included a total of 55,000 gross square feet. Commissioner Lowe asked if air conditioning would be included in this project. Planning Commission Minutes of June 27,1995 Page 5 Mr. Richard Crocker replied that in light of the recent heat wave he might consider it although typically they do not air condition the storage facilities. Ms. Gloria Sciara advised the Commission of the following concerns: · Condition of Approval No. 3-B requires that the applicant paint the doors in a color that closely relates to the wall color rather than the proposed blue. · Advised that no signage is included in this review and approval by the Commission. Signage will be handled as a separate issue. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy asked if the applicant was being asked to change their paint colors. Ms. Gloria Sciara replied that just the doors were proposed to be changed from the blue proposed by the applicant to a matching color to the walls as proposed by staff. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy asked if the applicant agreed with this requirement. Mr. Richard Crocker replied that they would prefer to use the blue but will work with staff. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Kearns, the Planning Commission moved to close the Public Hearing (7-0). MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Alne, the Planning Commission adopted the Negative Declaration and adopted Resolution No. 2982 granting a Site and Architectural Approval (S 95-04) to allow the development of a new 55,000 square foot mini-storage facility as well as approval of a Conditional Use Permit (UP 95-08) to allow a 950 square foot on-site manager's living facility on property located at 187 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue, by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy, Perrine None None None This approval is effective in 10 days unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Page 6 Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record. 2. PD 95-02 PM 95-07 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Omid Shakeri, on behalf of Mr. Massoud Maeseomi, for approval of a Planned Development Permit (PD 95-02) and Parcel Map (PM 95-07) to allow the construction of four townhomes on property located at 33 Sunnyside Avenue in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: Applicant is seeking approval of a Planned Development Permit and Parcel Map to allow the creation of four detached single-family homes on north Sunnyside Avenue near Winchester Boulevard. Units are four bedroom with 2.5 or 3 baths. Coverage is 38% and landscaping is 43%. · Project calls for a common drive. There is no alleyway access. · Units will have two-car garages and rear units will have two tandem parking spaces. · SARC has recommended that one additional tandem parking space be added for each of the two front units. · Project density is 8.1 units per gross acre. The General Plan calls for a density of 6-13 units per gross acre. · This project is consistent with the Downtown Neighborhood Policy. · Advised the Commission that revised Conditions of Approval have been distributed which reflect minor modifications. · Staff is recommending additional treatments to enhance individuality of each unit. · Staff recommends that the Planning Commission advise the Council to: 1. Approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. Adopt a Resolution approving the Planned Development Permit (PD 95- 02); and 3. Adopt a Resolution approving the Tentative Parcel Map (PM 95-07). Commissioner Lindstrom asked for the parking ratio for residential uses. Mr. Tim J. Haley replied that the ratio was 3.5 spaces per unit. This project has 12 parking spaces on site which represents a deficit of two. Commissioner Perrine asked if the architectural changes sought by staff would be considered by SARC. Mr. Tim J. Haley advised that they would receive final approval by the Community Development Director. Commissioner Lowe asked why changes were considered necessary. Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Pal~e 7 Commissioner Lindstrom presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · SARC was supportive of this project. · Potential changes by staff in building design features were not discussed at SARC. Commissioner Alne questioned why any changes at all were needed if SARC and the Planning Commission had no concern. Mr. Tim J. Haley advised that if the Commission and/or SARC does not feel comfortable with staff reviewing minor changes, the project could go back to SARC. Staff is not proposing substantial changes. Commissioner Lindstrom Committee report as follows: · continued the Site and Architectural Review SARC was concerned with on-site parking. Feels Commission should stay with the Ordinance and require the proper number of on-site parking spaces. Recommends that the two additional on-site parking spaces (one for each of the two front units) be included in the final approval. Commissioner Alne advised that he had heard no compelling reason offered to deviate from the Parking Ordinance. Ordinance should be applied. Commissioner Lowe concurred with Commissioner Alne. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy opened the Public Hearing for Item No 2. Mr. Ben DeNapoli, Owner, 2210 Winchester Boulevard. · Project must have on-site parking. His lot is constantly filled with parking on weekends for people in the adjacent residential neighborhood. · Believes that the project should have all on-site parking. · His second concern is the alleyway. Asks for improvements to the alleyway to the rear of the project site. Commissioner Alne asked Mr. DeNapoli to point out his property which Mr. DeNapoli did. Mr. Omid Shakeri, Applicant, addressed the Commission as follows: · Thanked staff for their assistance. · Expressed his excitement for this project stating that it will be a nice project which meets both the City's and his own goals. · Issues exist regarding on-site parking and the alleyway behind the site. · They will provide the parking if required by the Commission. However, Plannin$ Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Pase 8 feels that there will be a better environment inside the development without the two spaces to give more landscape area. Parking spaces are available on the street which are closer to the two front units and which the property owners will more than likely utilize. There is no vehicular access to the alleyway with the exception of garbage collection and gates to get the garbage out to the alley. Believes that the alleyway should be improved and maintained but that a Improvement and Maintenance District should be formed with all owners joining. He is willing to participate in such a District. Piecemeal improvement will take lots of time. Actually, he questions the ownership of the alleyway. He is supportive of staff recommendations and is working closely with staff. Commissioner Alne asked if the complete alleyway adjacent to Mr. DeNapoli's business was improved. Mr. Omid Shakeri, replied that the alleyway was the way to access the parking for his site. Commissioner Alne asked if the alleyway was where garbage would be collected for the two rear units. Mr. Omid Shakeri replied that was the case. Mr. Tim J. Haley added that while the alleyway is used as a public right-of-way it is unclear as to whether it was publicly or privately owned. Mr. William Seligman, City Attorney, advised that if the City has not accepted the alleyway as a public right-of-way it is private. Commissioner Alne asked what requirements are in place if the alleyway is a private roadway. Mr. Tim Haley replied that it is maintained and improved as a private drive. The Condition of Approval requires that it be improved as a private drive. Commissioner Alne asked why. Mr. Tim Haley responded that is was needed by the site for trash pick up. Commissioner Alne asked if the improvements were deferred. Commissioner Lowe asked why the applicant would be required to pay for the entire full street improvement if they technically only own the alley to the Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Page 9 midpoint. Does not find it fair for the applicant to be burdened with the entire cost. What if the other owner(s) do not want the improvements? Tim Haley advised that in the event that the neighbor is not supportive of the improvements, the applicant can enter into a deferred maintenance agreement. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy asked the City Attorney for his feedback. William Seligmann, City Attorney, stated that he would need further information. Three options come to mind. One, the applicant can acquire the property for the entire alleyway width. Two, an Assessment District can be formed. Three, the project can not go forward. Commissioner Alne opined that it was inappropriate to ask the applicant to do anything until ownership of the alleyway is established. Suggested that the Conditions of Approval be modified to require the applicant to join a Maintenance District Approvement Program. Commissioner Higgins asked if the applicant could deed his portion to the City. If not, the costs of the alleyway improvements will become the burden of the new property owners. Commissioner Lowe stated that at this time the project could go forward or be tabled. He is not in favor of the application. The parking on-site is needed. Commissioner Alne suggested that the project be continued until the City can evaluate and establish ownership of the alleyway. If the applicant believes this will cause his project to suffer, the condition for alleyway improvement should be removed. Mr. Omid Shakeri advised the Commission that a delay would hurt the development process. He is willing to work with staff to determine the legal status/ownership of the alleyway before Council meeting. Has no problem paving if public right-of-way. Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that in the event that the applicant is precluded from paving, he will simply be obligated to pay his half. Commissioner Lowe found this unacceptable. Suggested that the Condition be stricken or this item continued. Commissioner Perrine advised the Commission that this item will go forward to the City Council. Commissioner Lowe felt that the City should assume responsibility for the Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Page 10 alleyway. Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that the alleyway serves for utility provisions and garbage pickup, services that directly benefit the adjacent property owners. Commissioner Lowe again said that this was not fair and the requirement should be struck. Commissioner Alne asked if the applicant was responsible to the centerline of the alleyway. There is no vehicular access to the alleyway from the project site. Will not support the requirement for alleyway improvements. It is an unfair requirement which should be struck. Commissioner Perrine advised that the City has two weeks to figure out the status of the alleyway. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy advised that the Condition should be left as is and allow staff to settle. Commissioner Lowe said that it does not make sense. Commissioner Higgins suggested that the Condition of Approval for paving of the alleyway be removed. Commissioner Alne again stated his belief that the requirement was unfair and that he would not support it. Commissioner Lowe stated that delaying the project will hurt the applicant. Remove the requirement for alleyway improvement and ensure that all parking required under the Parking Ordinance be included on site. Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy asked if the Condition was left out, whether it could be revised. Mr. Steve Piasecki said that the Commission could strike the requirement and discuss with Council. Council has the option to take other action or to follow the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mr. Denapoli added that the precedent was established in 1989 when his builder was asked to improve the alleyway. Feels that it is wrong to go forward without a decision. If the developer has a problem with delays, let them bear the cost of the improvements. Commissioner Kearns advised that she agreed with the staff recommendation. Planning Commission Minutes of June 27,1995 Page 11 Commissioner Alne stated that the Commission could not do wrong in 1995 just because it was done in 1989. There is no justification. It must be determined if the alleyway is public or private property. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Kearns, the Planning Commission moved to close the Public Hearing (7-0). Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy advised that she agreed with the parking requirement. In addition, she advised that No. 15 be left in the Conditions of Approval. Let staff and the applicant work out the details before the City Council meeting. Commissioner Lindstrom advised that he too agreed with the parking. Suggested that Condition of Approval No. 15-C be reworded: Installation of the pavement section when the City has proper designation to be sure this is correct." Mr. Steve Piasecki advised that that wording would work fine. Commissioner Alne asked since the applicant is being asked to improve the alleyway due to improvements, if in the future other property owners across the alleyway improve their property, will they be required to reimburse this applicant. Mr. William Seligmann, City Attorney, advised that if the City accepts the alleyway as a public right-of-way, the City can place a lien against the property to recover the cost of the roadwork. Commissioner Alne said that if the alleyway is improved, all property owners should pay the costs. Mr. William Seligmann, City Attorney, stated that that is not the law. MOTIO~ On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Perrine, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, adopted Resolution No. 2983 recommending approval of a Planned Development Permit (PD 95-02) with added language to Condition of Approval 15-B to read, "...when the City has proper documentation to ensure that this is proper procedure," and Resolution 2984 recommending approval of a Parcel Map (PM 95- 07) to allow the construction of four townhomes on property located at 33 Sunnyside Avenue in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District, by the following roll-call vote: Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Page 12 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy, Perrine Alne None None Commissioner Lowe suggested a friendly amendment to remove Condition 15-B. Mr. Tim J. Haley stated that to do so also impacts Condition 15-C. Mr. Darryl Jones advised that both Conditions 15-B and 15-C are connected with one requiring the pavement and the other the structural components necessary for the paving. Commissioner Alne again stated that all adjacent property owners must bear the cost. Mr. William Seligmann, City Attorney, advised that the applicant's development is what is creating the demand for the improvements. 3. S 95-07 Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Emily Chen for a Site and Architectural Approval (S 95-07) to allow a move-on single-family dwelling on property located at 1630 White Oaks Road in an R-l-6 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Ms. Gloria Sciara, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: Applicant is seeking approval to bring a move-on single-family dwelling onto the project site, located at the northeast corner of Shelley and White Oaks Road. · Approved map has not yet been recorded. Recordation of the map is listed within the Conditions of Approval for this application. · Move-on structure is a 2,500 square foot residence with a two-car detached garage. · Structure is compatible with the area and staff is supportive of the request. Commissioner Lindstrom presented Committee report as follows: · SARC was supportive of the request. the Site and Architectural Review Chairwoman Meyer-Kennedy opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. There were no parties interested in addressing Agenda Item No. 3. Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1995 Page 13 MO~O~ MOTION: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: On motion of Commissioner Perrine seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission moved to dose the Public Hearing (7-0). On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2985 to allow a single-family move-on dwelling on property located at 1630 White Oaks Road, by the following roll-call vote: 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 as presented, with the following highlights: · Council approved the project at San Tomas Aquino Road at Elam with a reduction from 26 units to 24. · Council was updated regarding the proposed remodel of the E1 Paseo de Saratoga Shopping Center to create a small box retail center. Concerns have been raised regarding the impacts on traffic in Campbell which the City's Traffic Engineer believes to have been under-reported. This matter will be on the San Jose Planning Commission Agenda on July 12th. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:13 p.m. to the next Planning Commission meeting of July 11, 1995, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. SUBMITTED BY: ~~ APPROVED BY: ATTEST: Corinne A. Shinn, Recording Secretary in