Loading...
PC Min 05/10/1994CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY MAY 10, 1994 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 1994, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chairperson Perrine, and the following proceedings were had, to wit: Commissioners Present: Chairperson: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Jay Perrine I. Alne Alana S. Higgins Susan A. Kearns Mel Lindstrom Commissioners Absent: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Jane Meyer-Kennedy Dennis Lowe Staff Present: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Planner II: City Attorney: Reporting Secretary: Steve Piasecki Darryl M. Jones Curtis Banks William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, the Planning Commission minutes of April 26, 1994, were approved. (5-0-2; Commissioners Meyer- Kennedy and Lowe were absent.) COMMUNICATIONS Two letters regarding agenda item no. 1 were distributed as was a memo from the City Attorney regarding updates to the Brown Act. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 2 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. ORAL REOUESTS There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairperson Perrine read Item No. 1 into the record. 1. R 94-01/ Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Seth M 94-04 Bland, on behalf of Oil Changer, Inc., for approval of a reinstatement and a modification to a previously- approved Use Permit to allow the establishment of an auto service operation on property known as 1820 S. Winchester Boulevard in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, presented the staff report noting the following: · Applicant is seeking the reinstatement of an expired Use Permit for a former service station site. · A modification is required to change the business from a smog test facility to an oil changing facility. · Previous Use Permit was approved in 1991 to allow Acu-Tune and previously the site was a service station (site currently owned by Thrifty Oil). · Site is located at the southeast corner of S. Winchester & Latimer. · Business will include two service bays (same as previous use). · Hours of operation are 8 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. (Monday through Friday); 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. (Saturday); and 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. (Sunday). · Site is located in C-2 (General Commercial) Zoning District and the General Plan calls for commercial uses. Proposed use is permitted under both the Zoning and General Plan designations. · Site provides 8 parking spaces (4 more than required). · Twenty-seven percent (27%) of the site is to be landscaped (exceeds requirement of 10%). · Conditions of approval include an 8 foot screening and acoustical wall extending 20 feet past either side of the service bays to separate the service bays from the townhome development and to serve as a noise barrier. · Staff recommends approval of this application with clarifications to the following Conditions of Approval: Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 3 1. Condition 1 -- Clarify that the hours of operation should be 8 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. 2. Condition 3 -- Clarify that the 8 foot portion of the proposed fence would extend 20 feet beyond either side of the service bays. 3. Condition 10 -- clarify that all service on vehicles to be conducted entirely within the building. No work is to be done outdoors. 4. Condition 19 -- Applicant is responsible for street tree installation per the Streetscape Standards and for any necessary sidewalk repair. The decision of the Planning Commission is final, unless appealed within ten days. Commissioner Alne inquired whether additional needed to offer additional mitigation to noise. landscaping might be Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that the project already has substantial landscaping but that the Commission could require more if it so desires. Commissioner Mel Lindstrom presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: · The SARC committee accepted the proposed plan and recommended approval. Chairman Perrine opened the Public Hearing on Item No. 1. Public Hearing re Item No. 1 Mr. Seth Bland, applicant. · Made himself available for questions. · Clarified the stated hours of operation. · Stated his agreement to the proposed fencing plan, street tree requirement and restriction to work being conducted entirely within the building. Commissioner Kearns inquired whether the cars would be exiting at the rear of the site. Mr. Seth Bland replied that that was correct. Noise has never been an issue at the other sites in which Oil Changers operate which are located adjacent to residential sites. Chairman Perrine asked for clarification regarding signage for this project. Mr. Steve Piasecki replied that signage was not part of the proposal before the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 4 MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom, the Planning Commission moved to close the Public Hearing. (5-0-2; Meyer-Kennedy & Lowe absent) MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Lindstrom, seconded by Commissioner Higgins the Planning Commission adopts Resolution No. 2916 approving the reinstatement and modification (subject to amendment of Conditions 1, 3, 10, & 19) of a previously-approved Use Permit to allow the establishment of Oil Changers at 1820 S. Bascom Avenue by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Perrine None Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy Commissioner Alne expressed his belief that the concerns of the residents, which were raised in two letters distributed at the meeting, are addressed by the Conditions of Approval. This matter is final unless appealed within 10 days. Chairperson Perrine read Item No. 2 into the record. 2. TA 94-O2 Public Hearing to consider the City-initiated application for approval of a Text Amendment to Chapter 21.26 of the Campbell Municipal Code pertaining to outdoor displays and seating; on-site beer and wine consumption and live entertainment in restaurants; the parking requirements for existing buildings; projecting signs; the requirement for a Downtown Development Permit; and the type of uses permitted with and without a Use Permit. Mr. Curtis Banks, Planner II, presented the staff report noting the following: · The revisions to Chapter 21.26 were authorized by the City Council in May 1993. The revisions are intended to streamline the permitting process for business in the downtown. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 5 Use Permits Current Process: Proposed: Requires review by the Planning Commission and ratification by the City Council. This process costs the applicant $1,495 in fees and takes approximately 3 months. Staff proposes the elimination of the ratification of Use Permits by the City Council. The C-3 Zoning District is the only one for which Use Permits must be ratified by the City Council. Outdoor Seating Current Process: Proposed: Outdoor seating currently requires a Use Permit at a cost of $1,495 to the applicant and approximately 3 months to process. Outdoor seating and displays would be approved by staff subject to the criteria contained in the ordinance. There would be no cost to the applicant Beer and Wine (restaurants only) Current Process: Requires a Use Permit through the Planning Commission with ratification by the City Council. Cost is $1,495 and takes approximately 3 months. Proposed: Allow as a matter of right for restaurants in the C-3 district subject to criteria contained in ordinance. Live Entertainment Current Process: Requires Use Permit processing and a live entertainment permit which is processed by the Police Department and approval by the City Council. Proposed: Amendments outline criteria, developed by the Police Department, to allow staff to approve limited entertainment at downtown restaurants. Parking Current Process: Intensification of a tenant space requires additional parking. Many existing buildings have little or no opportunity to provide additional parking. Businesses required to provide additional parking can either provide the parking or request a waiver through the Use Permit process. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 6 Proposed: The City does not have a consistent policy regarding parking waivers. To make the downtown desirable to establish new retail and restaurant uses, staff proposes that these uses be allowed to occupy existing buildings without providing additional parking. Proposed: Downtown Development Permit (DDP) Current Process: New uses in the downtown area require a DDP. This is currently required only in the C-3 (Downtown). Staff believes the DDP is no longer needed, the C-3 ordinance provides sufficient review of new uses. DDP must be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council which takes approximately 3 months. Eliminate the Downtown Development Permit. Other Uses Current Process: Proposed: If a use is not called out as permitted in the Ordinance, the Planning Commission must make the determination as to whether a use is compatible and allowable in the downtown. To streamline the process, the Community Development Director would have the authority to approve uses consistent with the intent of the C-3 ordinance. This is consistent with the authority Directors have in other cities. Allowable Uses Current Process: Proposed: Includes beauty parlors, service businesses (such as photography studios and travel agencies) are currently permitted uses on the ground floor of parcels abutting E. Campbell Avenue (east of Second Street). Offices and commercial schools require a use permit. Limit beauty parlors, offices, commercial schools and service business to second story locations on Campbell Avenue (east of Second Street) or to any first-story parcels without frontage on Campbell Ave. Intent is to enhance the retail and restaurant environment of the downtown. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 7 Non-Conforming Uses Existing: Currently, whenever a non-conforming use has been discontinued for one year, the use may not be re- established. Proposed: Staff recommends to reducing the time period allowing the re-establishment of any non- conforming use in the downtown to six months. The reduced period was recommended by the Downtown Steering Committee. Projecting Signs Current Process: Businesses are allowed one wall sign or one projecting sign. Proposed: To assist downtown businesses in identifying their businesses, staff proposes allowing a 6 square foot projecting sign in addition to their primary wall sign. A-frames continue to be illegal. Setbacks: Any new buildings in the downtown are to be built to the back of the sidewalk. This requirement already exists on Campbell Ave. Staff is proposing that this requirement be expanded to Civic Center Drive, Orchard City Drive, and the side streets. Revisions/Technical Modifications are proposed as follows: Item No. 4 -- add language: ".... in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the downtown or the City as a whole," at the end of the first paragraph. o Item No. 4 (G): eliminate this subsection as the City Attorney has determined that it conflicts with State law. o Item No. 7: delete this section as it is covered under the Sign Ordinance which allows more than the C-3 Ordinance. The Downtown Steering Committee Reviewed the proposed modifications in February 1994. The Committee was supportive of the proposed amendments subject to staff developing criteria for projecting signs and reducing the period to re-establish non-conforming uses. The Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 8 modifications regarding outdoor seating and displays, projecting signs and setbacks was reviewed by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee recommended approval of the proposed modifications. Commissioner Alne requested clarification on what constitutes a "designer" as required within the ordinance as it pertains to the preparation of signs. Chairman Perrine inquired how live entertainment could be allowed in the downtown more easily than in the rest of the City? Mr. Curtis Banks replied that the C-3 Zoning which is being modified at this time pertains only to the downtown area. Only the downtown area will have the expedited process for live entertainment. Mr. Steve Piasecki added that this expedited process was believed to be a good plan for the downtown and, if it works out as well as anticipated, it may be implemented for the remainder of the City of Campbell. He also stressed that this pertained only to restricted live entertainment and was not intended for night club use. Commissioner Alne inquired whether there was any clear statement regarding A-frame signs in the C-3 Ordinance. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that under Section 4(B-2-f -- see page 4 of Ordinance), A-frames are stated to be prohibited. A-frame signs are prohibited City-wide with no exceptions. Commissioner Alne inquired whether outdoor displays would be approved at staff level. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that Mr. Alne was correct. The Site and Architectural Review Committee was supportive of the amendments to the C-3-S Zoning Ordinance. Public Hearing re Item No. 2 Mr. Bob Sneed, 241 Victor Avenue. · Asked for clarification as to what constituted the C-3 District. Mr. Curtis Banks clarified boundaries of C-3 District. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 9 Mr. Rich Citano, 400 E. Campbell Avenue. · Inquired why under materials allowable for projecting signs in the downtown area, the use of plastic fabric/material is not permitted when it is more durable than canvas? Mr. Curtis Banks replied that plastic does not last, tears and frays and appears temporary. Mr. Rich Citano reiterated his belief that plastic fabric is more durable than canvas. Commissioner Alne inquired what plastic fabric included? Nylon? Expressed his disagreement with the restriction of the use of plastic fabric. Mr. Curtis Banks clarified that signs were to be made of a lasting material. Canvass is more attractive and appropriate for a permanent sign. Mr. Steve Piasecki reiterated that the restriction is simply for aesthetic purposes but promised that the definition of allowable sign materials would be clarified. Commissioner Lindstrom asked whether the City Council could allow a variance on signage in the downtown. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that the variance would come through the Planning Commission before going to City Council. Commissioner Kearns asked what controls would be in place to oversee the beer and wine uses for businesses in the downtown and what restrictions and/or limitations would be in place for live entertainment. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that there are provisions for noise. Live entertainment is limited to four performers (specified in Ordinance). The Police Department is satisfied that the established criteria for beer and wine and live entertainment deal with potential problems. Currently, the Police field few problems at restaurants serving beer and wine. Ms. Jeanne Knight, 395 E. Campbell Avenue. · Asked that A-frame signs be reconsidered. Stated that she has never seen anyone walking or running into an A-frame sign and saw more of a Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 10 problem with youth skating and/or riding their bikes through downtown sidewalks. Believes that display tables will cause more hazard than A-frame signs. Questioned whether some sort of notation could be included on business license applications to offer the option of A-frame signs versus the use of outdoor displays. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that since A-frames are prohibited under the Sign Ordinance, the City Council would have to change the Sign Ordinance. Chairman Perrine stated that the Council has very strong views against A- frame signs. Mr. Steve Piasecki offered to forward the re-addressed concerns regarding A- frame signs to the Council. Commissioner Higgins sought clarification that a four foot pedestrian walkway would be required on the sidewalks when outdoor displays are set out. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that she was correct. Chairman Perrine ask Mr. Citano whether the Downtown Association had strong concerns regarding the restriction in the use of plastic fabric for projecting signs. Mr. Citano replied that it would impact some existing signs. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that the amendments would not impact existing signs or temporary banners as allowed under the Sign Ordinance (120 days per year of temporary signage allowed per each business). Mr. Citano mentioned that neon signs were to be prohibited in the future and yet that fact is not clear in the amended ordinance. Mr. Curtis Banks replied that he was correct and that neon signs would be removed from the ordinance. Commissioner Alne expressed his wish to see the elimination of page 21 (item G); item 6-G, item 7, item 9 and the additional wording of item 4. Upon further discussion by the City Attorney, William Seligmann, Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 11 Commissioner Alne was convinced of the need for the wording on item 4 and agreed to leave it in the ordinance. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Higgins seconded by Commissioner Kearns, the Planning Commission moved to close the Public Hearing. (5--0-2) MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Higgins the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council grant a Negative Declaration and of the Campbell Municipal Code and adopted Resolution No. 2917 recommending that the City Council approve the text amendments to Section 21.26 of the Campbell Municipal Code (deleting Sections 6G, 7 and 9 and clarification language for Section 4), by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Alne, Higgins, Kearns, Lindstrom, Perrine None Lowe, Meyer-Kennedy REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, was accepted with the following highlights: · Greenbriar Update: A memo of understanding has been signed by the City Council and there is activity on site. · William Wilson & Associates has taken ownership of the Pruneyard. · Historic Preservation Board Tea will take place on Wednesday, May 11, 1994, from 4 to 6 p.m., in the Orchard City Green (open space area between City Hall and the Library). AD!OURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m., to the next Planning Commission meeting of May 24, 1994, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1994 Page 12 SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ATTEST: , ~b"~in-ne A. Shinn, F,~cording Secretary lay Per[i~ Fhai~~