Loading...
PC Min 10/11/2005 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY OCTOBER 11, 2005 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of October 11, 2005, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Gibbons and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Associate Planner: Planner I: Housing Coordinator: Redevelopment Mgr: Traffic Engineer: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: Elizabeth Gibbons Bob Alderete George Doorley Mark Ebner Tom Francois Michael Rocha Bob Roseberry Sharon Fierro Jackie C. Young Lind Tim J. Haley Stephanie Willsey Sharon Teeter Kirk Heinrichs Matthew Jue William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Rocha, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission minutes of September 27, 2005, were approved as submitted with one edit. (7-0) COMMUNICATIONS 1. Letter regarding Agenda Item No.3. 2. Conditions for Tree Removal Permit for Agenda Item No.3. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11,2005 Page 2 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. ORAL REQUESTS Mr. Robert Nicholas, P.O. Box 112272, Campbell, CA 95008: . Reminded that he had appeared before the Planning Commission two weeks ago and mentioned his concerns about his adjacent neighbor's plans to go with a two story remodel due to concerns with the processing for Tree Removal Permits. . Pointed out the irony that a neighbor who wants to go with a shared fence higher than six feet must obtain neighbor concern while someone planning a second story residential addition is not obligated to consult with neighbors. . Reported that when Variances have been requested through public hearing neighbors always mention privacy concerns. . Urged the Commission to consider changes to Ordinances to help preserve privacy. . Cautioned that the character of neighborhoods would change. . Suggested that if a neighbor should object to the second story addition, that second story should not be allowed. *** PUBLIC HEARING Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.1 into the record as follows: 1 PLN2005-108 Goesling, J. Public Hearing to consider the application of Von and Jhaine Goesling for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-108) to allow a remodel and second story addition to an existing single-family residence on property owned by Von & Jhaine Goesling located at 1384 Walnut Drive in an R-1-10 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, Planner I. Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicants are seeking a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the remodel and second story addition to an existing residence. . Informed that the applicants had received a previous approval on January 28, 2003, that was valid for one year. That "approval expired on January 28, 2004. . Explained that there are no changes to the originally approved plan and the conditions of approval are the same. . Described the property as being located on the east side of Walnut Drive, between Chapman and West Parr Avenue. . Said that the property is surrounded by single family residences to the north, south and west and with commercial use to the ease. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 3 . Stated that the Zoning designation is R-1-10 and this project is consistent with the requirements of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. . Advised that an existing accessory structure would be removed. . Recommended approval of this request. Commissioner Alderete presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project at its meeting of September 27, 2005, and was supportive with no comments or conditions. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3677 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-108) to allow a remodel and second story addition to an existing single-family residence on property owned by Von & Jhaine Goesling located at 1384 Walnut Drive by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, François, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None None None Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.2 into the record as follows: 2 PLN2005-100 Lancaster, J. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. John Lancaster, on behalf of British European, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2005-100) to allow retail auto sales at an existing auto repair shop on property owned by Mr. Hab Siam located at 2921 S. Winchester Boulevard in a C-2 (General Commercial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, Planner I Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 4 . Reported that the project site is located on the west side of Winchester Boulevard between Sunnyoaks Avenue and Bedal Lane. . Described the surrounding uses as commercial to the north, south and east and percolation ponds to the west. The General Plan Land Use designation is General Commercial and the zoning is C-2 (General Commercial). . Explained that this proposed use, retail auto sales within an existing auto repair facility, is consistent with issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. . Said that 1,050 square feet of interior space would be converted into a showroom. No vehicles for sale would be stored outside. . Added that operational hours are Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. . Said that the applicant would be repainting the building, re-striping the parking lot, building a new trash enclosure and improving the landscaping as well as adding irrigation to maintain the improved landscaping. . Recommended that the Commission adopt a Resolution approving this Use Permit. Commissioner Alderete presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . Reported that SARC reviewed this project on September 27, 2005, and requested that the applicant provide a preliminary landscaping plan. . Added that this requirement has been incorporated into the report. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Motion: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3678 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2005- 100) to allow retail auto sales at an existing auto repair shop on property owned by Mr. Hab Siam located at 2921 S. Winchester Boulevard, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, François, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None None None Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.3 into the record as follows: Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 5 3 PLN2005-77 (GP) PLN2005-78 (ZC) PLN2005-79 (PD) PLN2005-80 (TS) PLN2005-81 (TRP) Robinson, K. Public hearing to consider the application of Ms. Kathy Robinson on behalf of Charities Housing, Inc., and Santa Clara Valley Water District, for approval of the following applications: . General Plan Amendment (PLN2005-77) from low density residential to low-medium density residential for 511 W. Campbell Avenue . Zone Change (PLN2005-78) from R-1-6 to P-D for 511 W. Campbell Avenue. . Planned Development Permit (PLN2005-79) to allow the construction of 24 attached single-family residences, 16 detached single-family residences and extraction well facilities. . Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2005-80) to create 44 lots . Tree Removal Permit (PLN2005-81) to remove 20 of 29 protected trees; on properties located at 511 and 555 W. Campbell Avenue in an R-1-6 (Single-Family Residential) and P-D (Planned Development) Zoning District. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: November 1, 2005. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: . Reported that the applicant is seeking approval for the redevelopment of the property located on the northeast corner of San Tomas Expressway and West Campbell Avenue. . Said that the property is currently developed with a single-story office, smaller storage buildings, Water District facilities and a single-family residence. . Described the surrounding uses as including a church and multi-family residences to the south; a town home development to the north, single family residences to the east and San Tomas Expressway to the west with single family residences on the other side of the Expressway. . Advised that this project has been in the planning stages for the last year and a half. In February 2005, the Redevelopment Agency entered into a purchase agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District to purchase 2.8 acres. On April 19, 2005, Council and the Redevelopment Agency approved the execution of a DDA. . Explained that the Redevelopment Agency is selling the property to Charities Housing for an affordable housing development. Eligible buyers will earn between 50 and 120 percent of the County's median income. Forty units are proposed as affordable. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 6 . Said that Council also approved the processing of a General Plan Amendment for the smaller property, which is currently Low Density Residential and proposed for amendment to Low-Medium Density Residential. . Reminded that the Commission held a Study Session in May and a neighborhood meeting was held on June 15, 2005, at the Campbell Community Center with about 40 in attendance. . Described the components of this project as consisting of: A General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Low-Medium Density Residential; a Zone Change from R-1-6 to P-D (Planned Development); a Planned Development Permit to allow the construction of 40 residential units on the 3-acre site; a Tentative Subdivision Map and a Tree Removal Permit to allow the removal of 20 of 29 protected trees on site. . Advised that the allowable density range is between six and 13 units per gross acres. This proposed project consists of a density of 9.4 units per gross acre. . Stated that the project is consistent with General Plan Policies and Strategies as is helps provide a variety of residential types and densities. . Said that the current zoning for one of the parcels would be changed from R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development). The Planned Development Zoning allows units to access to a private drive, offers common open space and allows reduced setbacks. . Said that two large trees would be retained and 30 percent of the site would be landscaped. The building design uses simple traditional building forms that include three-story format town homes with parking below and two-story detached residences. The well service buildings are single story. . Stated that a sound wall between eight and ten feet would be constructed along San Tomas Expressway and Campbell Avenue. Staff has requested more details on the sound wall. . Reported that there would be 110 parking spaces or 2.75 spaces per unit. This is similar parking to that of other recently approved projects near the downtown area. . Explained that a Traffic Report was prepared for this project and that circulation to the site would be via one driveway located along the easterly portion of the site off Campbell Avenue. . Added that staff is recommending that no left turns be allowed from eastbound traffic onto this property. . Said that staff is also recommending that a more detailed landscaping plan be provided. . Stated that 62 24-inch box trees would be placed throughout the development to replace the 20 trees to be removed. . Advised that CC&Rs would be adopted for maintenance and operational restrictions of the development. . Recommended approval through the adoption of Resolutions that recommend Council grant final approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Planned Development Permit, Tentative Subdivision, Tree Removal and Mitigated Negative Declaration. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 7 Commissioner Alderete presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . Reported that SARC reviewed this project at its meeting of September 27, 2005, and was supportive of the project with the request for more detailed landscaping and sound wall plans. Commissioner Doorley asked staff to highlight any significant changes to the project since the Study Session occurred. Planner Tim J. Haley said that some significant changes include the introduction of trees along the northern property line between the proposed development and the single-family homes to the north. Also the walkways within the development have been revised and landscaping increased. Commissioner Doorley asked whether the recommendation to prohibit left turns onto the project site has been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. Planner Tim J. Haley replied yes. Department's Conditions of Approval. That is included within the Public Works Commissioner Doorley asked if left turns out from the site would be allowed. Planner Tim J. Haley replied yes. Commissioner Doorley asked what the difference might be between left in and left out from the project site. Planner Tim J. Haley said he would defer this question to the Traffic Engineer who is here this evening. He explained that stacking for left turns onto the site would leave cars stopped in traffic and unprotected, creating a safety concern. Commissioner Francois said that with no left turns allowed for eastbound traffic, drivers would likely have to go up Campbell Avenue to streets such as Milton and Hardy in order to make a U-turn. Planner Tim J. Haley agreed that drivers might go up to Llewellyn, Hardy and Milton to make a U-turn on the left or make a right onto Dot. However, the most likely scenario would be to use residential streets to turn around. Commissioner Rocha asked how the requirement to have garages remain available for parking could be enforced. Planner Tim J. Haley said that failure to comply would represent the violation of the Planned Development Permit and CC&Rs. This is a fairly standard condition for town home projects now. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 8 Commissioner Alderete said that he sees significant changes to this project since the Study Session to what is being seen tonight. He pointed out that other changes include the flipping of buildings, placement and relocation of trees, driveway onto Campbell Avenue that has been re-aligned to match Dot across the street. Tim J. Haley agreed that there have been a significant number of changes and that he had just outlined the more significant visual changes to the project. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Mr. Mark Spencer, Traffic Consultant, DKS Associates: . Identified himself as the Consultant who prepared the Traffic Analysis for this project. . Said he would be available for any questions. Commissioner Doorley asked Mr. Mark Spencer for his comments about egress and safety for exiting the site. Mr. Mark Spencer: . Stated that there is a two-fold issue here: left turns in and left turns out. . Pointed out that cars would be unprotected when traveling eastbound and stopping to make a left turn onto the project site. As cars stack on Campbell Avenue, other cars would swerve to go around the stopped cars. . Explained that the projection for vehicles entering the site in the a.m. peak is two and nine in the p.m. peak. . Assured that the number of vehicles is low overall. . Said that it is not possible to safely put in a left turn pocket for access to this site, which is the reason that the recommendation is to not allow left turns onto the site from Campbell Avenue in order to leave traffic flowing on Campbell Avenue. . Pointed out that currently many drivers make illegal U-turns using side streets without actually entering onto that side street. . Said that residents to this site would have to come in on westbound Campbell Avenue. . Assured that regular users would find a different path or travel pattern. . Stated that if traffic stacks up on site itself that is not a safety issue. When a gap in traffic occurs, they would be able to safely make a left turn on to eastbound Campbell Avenue. This does not represent a level of service problem if they wait to make a turn safely. . Added that if the left turn out is prohibited, this would funnel more traffic toward San Tomas Expressway and no U-turns are allowed at the San Tomas Expressway intersection. . Reiterated that for safety, in-bound left turns should be restricted. Allowing exiting traffic to make left turns is the best option. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 9 Commissioner Doorley asked Mr. Mark Spencer how he envisions the median on Campbell Avenue at that point. What would stop people from making a left turn onto the site? Mr. Mark Spencer said that things such as a modified pork chop, curbs, double yellow lines can be used. That is up to the City. Additionally, signage can be used or pavement treatments, anything short of a barrier or wall. Enforcement is up to the City. Commissioner Doorley asked if one can make a legal U-turn at the light at the Community Center. Mr. Mark Spencer replied yes. Commissioner Ebner: . Pointed out Table 2 on the Traffic Report that gives a current a.m. peak rating as D and the current p.m. peak rating as E. The post project ratings are projected as going to E and F. . Said that there is a major problem there now. . Advised that he commutes that way and can see big impacts to the neighborhood from traffic. . Reminded that there is a large parcel at the corner of Dot and Campbell that is likely to be developed in the future. . Asked what can be done to deal with existing and future traffic impacts. Mr. Mark Spencer agreed that this is a heavily congested intersection right now. The current situation will remain the same with or without this project. Sometimes, drivers will not clear an intersection on one light cycle. Commissioner Ebner asked about the F rating. Mr. Mark Spencer said that the rating is D in the morning and E in the afternoon. A level of service ranking of E is an acceptable level per VT A standards. Commissioner Ebner said that even without this project the level of service could be F in the future once the economy improves. Mr. Mark Spencer said that an F level of service ranking equals an 80 second delay per vehicle. There is room there to accommodate additional traffic as the level of service is E right now. Commissioner Ebner said that it was F before but is not now. Mr. Mark Spencer said that this is the nature of traffic that is growing in this Valley. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 1 0 Commissioner Francois said that it is hard to digest this information, including nine cars going eastbound on Campbell. With 80 cars in the complex, how was the level of nine cars determined? Mr. Mark Spencer: . Explained that not all residents travel at the same time during any peak hours. Forty residential units generate 23 trips in the a.m. peak hours that are spread out between 6:30 a.m. through 9 a.m. . Added that there is the highest hour and fringe traffic. . Said that not everyone arrives at the same time but rather arrivals are spread out. . Said that they evaluate prevailing traffic patters. Commissioner Francois said that surface streets will take extra traffic as a result of this project. Mr. Mark Spencer agreed that some surface streets do provide cut through. Commissioner Rocha asked about the time criteria for a.m. and p.m. peak. Mr. Mark Spencer replied that a.m. peak hour is 7:30 to 8:30 a.m. in this area. This is based upon observation and traffic counts. The p.m. peak is between 5 and 6 p.m. Commissioner Rocha said he went to the site and observed. He asked about potential impacts on Dot Avenue as they try to go westbound on Campbell Avenue. Mr. Mark Spencer said that they face the highest delays now. It is a tough turn and takes time. He suggested using "don't block the box" markings on the street. Commissioner Rocha said that perhaps not allowing left turns from the project during peak times might work. Chair Gibbons said that a median cannot be installed to prevent eastbound left turns as it would also block westbound lefts and northbound lefts from Dot Avenue. She asked about potential impacts to the future development of the Dot/Campbell Avenue property. Mr. Mark Spencer said that it would impact traffic in the area and would depend upon how many units and what the access point might be. Development of that lot would generate more traffic and increased congestion. Director Sharon Fierro: . Explained staffs support for this development of 40 residential housing units being developed at slightly above single-family residential density. . Advised that there are approximately 10 houses per block on average so this project represents four blocks. . Said that the number of trips generated by this development is insignificant. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 11 . Said that there is a narrow window of time when traffic is heavy and by 5:30 p.m. the gridlock is generally gone and most of the time traffic in the area is a breeze. . Reminded that this is an affordable housing project that will provide homes for nurses, teachers and other people a community needs to function. This housing is provided at less than market rate. . Stated that staff feels this is a reasonable project. Commissioner Francois: . Said that the Community Development Director has made valid comments. . Agreed that this is a great project. . Added that there are serious safety issues including for pedestrians. . Stated that he loves this project and is totally supportive. Chair Gibbons agreed that places are needed for pedestrians to cross. Mr. Mark Spencer said that as this is not a large project, traffic will feel the same as it does now when this project is done. If there are problems now, they will still be there after completion of this project. Commissioner Ebner: . Said that he too thinks this is a great project. . Added that he sees serious problems with traffic particularly for Milton, Llewellyn, Carlyn and Dot. . Stated that these problems need to be figured out now. Hardy, Mr. Mark Spencer said that a good compromise is to restrict eastbound left turns onto the project site. Mr. Les Boyd, 75 Llewellyn Avenue, Campbell: . Said he appreciates the Planning Commission's recognition of the situation on Campbell Avenue as it exists today. . Advised that he walks in the area in the morning. . Said that while U- turns at the signal at the Community Center are legal but that signal is also far away from this project site. . Added that most would turn left before reaching this signal for a legal U-turn. . Stated that the Traffic Study is flawed. . Reminded that there was only an office building on site now with between three and five cars. Now it is empty with zero cars. . Stated that he looked at the plans and is seeking reassurance for owners along Llewellyn Avenue, which is mostly single-story single-family residences, to make sure that their lifestyles will not be wiped out with two-story structures overlooking their yards. . Assured that he is not against this project that will provide low-income housing. . Stated that just because the property is there and available does not mean that this is the right place. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 12 . Added that maybe something else might be more appropriate. Mr. Kenneth Long, 117 Hardy Avenue, Campbell: . Stated that he had not intended to speak this evening. . Expressed his respect for the work of the Commission. . Reported that he had recently purchased a home in this neighborhood and notices the traffic on Hardy Avenue. . Stated that he is all for low-income housing but is concerned about cramming houses in closer and closer together. . Questioned if this density is consistent with the neighborhood. . Pointed out that his lot is close to 10,000 square feet. . Agreed that this is a great project but suggested six units per acre instead of nine. . Questioned the number of cars during the afternoon peak being nine. . Said that having no left turns in or out of this site will lead to people turning onto nearby side streets. . Advised that postal vehicles already use the street to pass through. . Said that he struggles with this project as proposed. . Thanked the Commission for its time. Chair Gibbons advised that the Commission had a Study Session so it understands the traffic information being provided a bit better. Ms. Shery Ertzner-Groo, 131 Hardy Avenue, Campbell: . Advised that she has lived on Hardy for 19 years. . Said that she has several issues. . Stated that the traffic answers provided are too vague. . Reminded that since the Study Session occurred another project was approved nearby with six new single-family houses on Llewellyn Avenue, which also adds 12 cars to the area. . Reported that Hardy Avenue has always been a cut through used by the Post Office, schools and apartments. . Said that she has been rear ended on Campbell Avenue trying to get onto her street. . Assured that traffic does not end at 5:30 p.m. and she has waited for up to 10 minutes to make a left from Hardy onto Campbell Avenue. . Added that she often has to wait just to back out of her driveway. . Opined that statistics are used for the convenience of getting things approved. . Said that she agrees that this is a great project but not a great area for that project. . Suggested using this land for a dog park or other community based use. Mr. Bill Barnes, 552 Latimer Circle, Campbell: . Advised that his townhome is located behind this project. . Said that he participated in the neighborhood meeting held in June. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 13 . Said that he raised questions at that time about the differences in elevation between this site and his adjacent property. The difference is up to three feet. . Said that for the last 30 years, the drainage system for his development has been located on the property line. . Questioned how that drainage system would be handled with the development of this site. . Expressed concern for the proposed removal of the eight-foot-high chain link fence with barbed wire as it barely keeps teenagers from using the site for a shortcut. . Said that he is concerned about security with the removal of this fencing and replacement with wood fencing. . Said that site drainage and the existing drainage system are of concern to him because he experiences flooding during heavy rains. It is important to have this issue addressed. . Pointed out that his development has more than one guest space per unit while this new development is proposing .8 spaces per unit for guests. Fairmeadow has a parking problem even though the provide more than is proposed here. . Suggested the need for more parking. . Reiterated his concerns as being site drainage and the security impacts of removing the chain link fence. . Said that other than those concerns, this is a progressive planning development. Commissioner Doorley asked Mr. Bill Barnes if he is concerned about the removal of mature trees along the northerly border. Mr. Bill Barnes: . Replied no. . Said that the Oak tree right behind his house is remaining. . Added that the leaves from these trees cause problems for him anyway. . Agreed that trees are needed there but he has no problem with the removal of these existing mature trees. Mr. Dan Wu, Representative, Charities Housing: . Said he was available for questions. Chair Gibbons asked if Santa Clara Valley Water District would be participating in the Homeowners Association. Mr. Dan Wu replied no, Santa Clara Valley Water District will not be a part of the HOA. He added however that the HOA would maintain their landscaping so the project maintenance would be cohesive. Chair Gibbons pointed out that the parking standard is 3.5 spaces per unit and this project is proposed at 2.75. She asked if these homes were two and three bedroom. Mr. Dan Wu replied yes. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 14 Chair Gibbons asked Mr. Dan Wu if he believes their proposed parking is appropriate. Mr. Dan Wu replied yes the parking proposed is adequate. He added that these buyers will be first-time homebuyers. They are currently renters with one to two person households. A small percentage of them will have two cars. Commissioner Gibbons pointed out the clean sweep of the trees in the area. She suggested that a mixture of 24 and 36-inch box trees would add richness to the aesthetics of the landscaping. She asked for feed back on the concerns raised about fencing and drainage. Mr. Rick Williams, Project Architect: . Stated that his firm specializes in affordable housing development. . Said that the current drainage condition is a pipe that runs along the property line and drains onto San Tomas Expressway's right-of-way. . Assured that such an installation would not be allowed by today's standards. . Advised that they met with Mr. Barnes on site and are interested with working with Mr. Barnes and the Fairmeadow HOA to alleviate the concerns regarding drainage. . Said that they are willing to get drainage set in correctly including removal of the existing pipe that is likely asbestos lined. He added that it would be important to make sure the County will allow whatever is decided upon and that the drainage solution is equitable to both sides. . Stated that the proposed fence is wood and six-feet high. . Added that since the site will now be developed with residences, it would likely increase security and prevent the property from being used as a pass through negating the need for the barbed wire, which is not acceptable for a housing development. . Said that they would be placing landscape trees along the shared property line with single family residences. . Said that he understands the issues of privacy and security. Chair Gibbons asked if the plans are to scale. Mr. Rick Williams replied yes. He added that they successfully constructed a similar development in Fremont with similar setbacks. Commissioner Doorley asked about installing two fences all around and questioned why build one outside of the existing fencing. Mr. Rick Williams advised that there is relatively new fencing in part of that area. Commissioner Doorley said that it seems odd to not remove the existing fencing before constructing new. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 1 5 Mr. Rick Williams assured that this issue could be worked out. Commissioner Roseberry asked Mr. Rick Williams to clarify the drainage issue. He sought assurance that all on-site water would be contained through the storm water system. Mr. Rick Williams replied yes. Commissioner Roseberry asked about the adequacy of the existing drainage pipe and whether it would be removed. Mr. Rick Williams said that the existing pipe would be removed and that they would work to find a remedy with the adjacent property. Commissioner Roseberry asked who pays for this. Mr. Rick Williams said that an equitable solution, a win-win solution, will be reached. Commissioner Roseberry asked about the elevation change and whether it is three feet. Mr. Rick Williams replied yes. Commissioner Roseberry: . Said that though this project is consistent with the General Plan, traffic is a huge issue. . Said that it is difficult to balance uses here. . Asked how far the Light Rail station is from this property. Director Sharon Fierro replied about one mile. Chair Gibbons asked for an explanation of the financial criteria to qualify for these affordable homes. Mr. Dan Wu: . Reported that the goal is to have owners spend no more than 30 percent of their income on housing expense, including mortgage, taxes, insurance and homeowner's fees. . Said that the family income range is between $50,000 and $120,000 per year. There is a wide range of income and occupations. . Explained that this is achieved through public subsidy and favorable financing and includes State mortgage assistance programs. Mr. Kirk Heinrichs, Redevelopment Manager: Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 16 . Clarified that 30 percent of these units would be low-income units and the remaining 70 percent would be affordable that requires an income of between $75,000 and $110,000 per year. . Added that at market rate, these homes would range in cost between $750,000 and $850,000. There is an approximate subsidy of between $200,000 and $400,000 per unit. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Commissioner Roseberry: . Said that the project does address the needs of the neighborhood. . Added that it is a pretty nice project with close proximity to community resources. It is within walking distance to the downtown center. . Said that traffic is the biggest negative but is not a problem specific to this project. Traffic is already bad. . Pointed out that people drive faster now. . Said that he once lived next to a similar project and didn't notice the cars. . Stated that the Traffic Engineer has a tough job and requires a little bit of a crystal ball with some statistics. . Said that left turns across two lanes is dicey. . Stated that housing is expensive and land is scarce leading to infill projects such as this. Housing is needed. . Said that he is not discounting traffic impacts but they are not reason to turn this project down. Traffic is already bad and will only be marginally worse with this project. Commissioner Rocha: . Said that this is a very difficult site. . Added that hard work has been spent on this project. . Said that he would prefer a few less units as this project is a little dense for his liking. . Said that this is a self-contained project and that people will park within. . Stated that traffic affects the quality of life and this is a difficult situation for pedestrians. . Said he will support the project but would like to see no left turns coming out of the project during peak hours, perhaps 7 to 9 a.m. and 4:30 to 6:30 p.m., to prevent some safety concerns. Commissioner Ebner: . Said that he agrees that this is the right spot and time for this attractive project. . Suggested that the Commission take time to find a solution to the traffic issues. . Stressed the importance of being smart and considering the rest of the citizens in the area who will be impacted. . Added that he cannot support this project until that time. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 17 Commissioner Francois: . Said that this is a beautiful project and he really likes it. . Said that there will be serious traffic and safety issues here with pedestrians and the bus stop. He sees a potential disaster. . Said that the two left turn pockets onto San Tomas Expressway might not be needed, leaving room for a left turn pocket onto the project site. . Said he would like to support the project but have safety concerns. Commissioner Doorley: . Said that he cannot envision what restrictions can be imposed for peak left turns. . Stated he is also concerned with left turns northbound from Dot. . Expressed support for outright prohibiting left turns out of the site and suggested a physical barrier as a minimum for him to consider supporting this project. . Pointed out that traffic studies never shows a problem and that he uses a gut check more than relying on a traffic study. . Reiterated that double fencing seems weird. Director Sharon Fierro said that it happens and she has one herself. Sometimes it makes sense. A property owner has the right to construct a fence completely on their own property. Installing fencing on the property line may be difficult due to grade differences. Commissioner Doorley expressed concern about a potential two-foot gap between two fences that could cause problems with the drainage pipe. Director Sharon Fierro assured that there would not be a two-foot gap allowed to create a "no-man's" land. The area must be kept weed free and safe and typically would not be more than a couple of inches apart. Chair Gibbons asked if the existing drainage pipe is located on Water District property. Redevelopment Manager Kirk Heinrichs assured that fencing would be worked out so that there would be only one fence that would be aesthetically pleasing. Commissioner Rocha expressed support for a median on Campbell Avenue to prevent left turns. Commissioner Alderete said that some alternative is needed for traffic safety. Redevelopment Manager Kirk Heinrichs said that the only issue appears to be how to safely get on and off site. He recommended that the Commission take action to forward a recommendation to Council to approve this project based upon a condition to find a satisfactory solution to getting on and off site safely. Director Sharon Fierro suggested being more specific such as prohibiting left turns. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 18 Commissioner Doorley reiterated his preference for a physical barrier to prevent such turns. Director Sharon Fierro said that the solution must help mitigate traffic impacts. Chair Gibbons said that the three key concerns are left turns into the project site, left turns out of the site and left turns from Dot onto Campbell Avenue. Commissioner Roseberry asked who determines traffic safety solutions for the City. Redevelopment Manager Kirk Heinrichs reminded that the Traffic Study states that no mitigation is required. Commissioner Roseberry said that he does not want to suggest a specific solution as the Planning Commission is not qualified to do so. Director Sharon Fierro said that the Traffic Engineer and Engineering Department offer this expertise to the City. Redevelopment Manager Kirk Heinrichs said that the Commission can notify Council that this is an unsafe situation getting in and out of the project site and that Council should come up with a solution for ingress and egress. Commissioner Ebner stressed the impacts on the existing neighborhoods. Redevelopment Manager Kirk Heinrichs said that the solution exacerbates the problems on existing conditions with the elimination of left turns. Commissioner Francois reiterated that he is 110 percent supportive if safety and traffic issues can be resolved. Redevelopment Manager Kirk Heinrichs said that this project won't get built for two years and there is time to find solutions. Commissioner Doorley said that he feels like the Commission would be dumping on Council by forwarding this project without a resolution to the traffic concerns. He said that it is the responsibility of the Commission to address this issue to the best of its ability. Mr. Kenneth Long said that he concurs with Commissioner Doorley that it is not acceptable to pass the buck on to Council. Solutions must be decided upon before the project gets approved. Chair Gibbons re-closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Commissioner Alderete: Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 19 . Said that the City is willing to look for answers for these safety concerns. . Said that sending the project on is moving it forward not passing the buck or dumping on Council. . Said that it appears, if everyone is sincere, that this is a great project with 30 percent low income and 70 percent affordable units. . Added that to provide them there is a price to the community. . Reported that he recently adjusted his 26 year commute following the commencement of the Light Rail. . Added that not all progress is pleasant or easy. . Agreed that he too does not like traffic reports. . Stated that the Commission needs to take steps to look into all safety issues. . Said that he sat through Study Sessions and SARC review of this project. . Advised that he would be supporting this project with the addressing of safety issues. Chair Gibbons asked if this project moves on to Council if approved by the Commission. City Attorney William Seligmann replied yes. Commissioner Doorley suggested a continuance to the next meeting to resolve the fence issue and to offer a proposed solution to the traffic safety issue. He said he has a hard time approving without a solution to traffic concerns. Commissioner Rocha agreed that more work is needed and more time is both warranted and available. Chair Gibbons: . Said that she would like to see a condition of approval for a landscaping plan that requires that 30 percent of the replacement trees be 36-inch box as opposed to all being 24-inch box. . Added that another condition should be imposed that if the relocated Oak does not survive that tree must be replaced. . Said that she is uncomfortable with the proposed parking ratio. . Said that the Commission very strongly supports a solution to the drainage pipe and recommends that the applicant work to resolve this issue with the adjacent property. . Stated that she is uncomfortable with the bus stop and pedestrian crossing. . Said that all outstanding issues should be incorporated into the solution. This includes left turns in, left turns out, north turns from Dot, and the location of the bus stop. . Said that it is also important to understand alternative traffic paths. . Suggested that there are several options to consider. The first is to approve this project as it is. The second is to approve the project with a condition of approval that asks Council not to grant final approval until traffic and safety concerns have Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 20 been addressed. Third is to continue this item for more information. The fourth option is to not accept or reject this project. Commissioner Francois expressed support for a continuance. He said that while Council is competent to deal with the traffic and safety issues, the Commission should do so. Commissioner Ebner concurred. Director Sharon Fierro cautioned that there is a funding issue that might need to be taken into consideration and asked Redevelopment Manager Kirk Heinrichs to clarify if that is so. Redevelopment Manager Kirk Heinrichs: . Advised that Charities Housing is applying for State funding for this project. They were given an extension for filing for those funds due to this entitlement process. . Added that if there is a delay with project approvals, they will probably lose this funding cycle as they will have to have Council approval to be eligible for this money. . Suggested that the Commission forward a recommendation for approval subject to a condition that the traffic and safety concerns are resolved. Commissioner Doorley reiterated that his solution is a physical barrier to prevent left turns. Director Sharon Fierro reminded that the relocation of the bus stop was also considered. Commissioner Ebner said that feels pressured by the funding issue raised by Mr. Heinrichs and feels it is important to obtain the correct facts and information and continue to the next meeting. Commissioner Doorley said that as long as solutions are set out he might be willing to send the project on to Council. Chair Gibbons reminded that the Commission is not sure right now what those solutions might be. Commissioner Francois: . Suggested leaving those solutions to the experts. . Said he would hate to lose this project. . Stated that he has no problem with the requirement that Council handle final traffic solutions. . Supported passing this project on to Council. Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 21 Chair Gibbons asked if Commissioner Francois is proposing a motion to forward on to Council with conditions. Commissioner Francois replied yes. Commissioner Alderete asked where the Commission is at this point. Chair Gibbons said that while she prefers a continuance if that is not reasonable the next best option would be to send this project on to Council with a recommendation that traffic and safety concerns be resolved. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Francois, the Planning Commission took the following action: . Adopted Resolution No. 3679 recommending the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration; Adopted Resolution No. 3680 recommending approval of a General Plan Amendment (PLN2005-77) from low density residential to low-medium density residential for 511 W. Campbell Avenue; Adopted Resolution No. 3681 recommending approval of a Zone Change (PLN2005-78) from R-1-6 to P-D for 511 W. Campbell Avenue. . Adopted Resolution No. 3682 recommending approval of a Planned Development Permit (PLN2005-79) to allow the construction of 24 attached single-family residences, 16 detached single-family residences and extraction well facilities with the added conditions: . That 30 percent of the replacement trees be 36-inch box; . That Council be requested to further study and resolve traffic and safety concerns that include: 1. Left turns onto the site; 2. Left turns out of the site; 3. Northbound left turns from Dot Avenue; 4. Bus stop location; 5. A study of potential alternate route patterns; and 6. Consideration of pedestrian foot traffic. . Adopted Resolution No. 3683 recommending approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2005-80) to create 44 lots with the added conditions: . That 30 percent of the replacement trees be 36-inch box; . That Council be requested to further study and resolve traffic and safety concerns that include: 1. Left turns onto the site; 2. Left turns out of the site; 3. Northbound left turns from Dot Avenue; . . Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2005 Page 22 4. Bus stop location; 5. A study of potential alternate route patterns; and 6. Consideration of pedestrian foot traffic. . Adopted Resolution No. 3684 recommending approval of a Tree Removal Permit (PLN2005-81) to remove 20 of 29 protected trees with the requirement that 30 percent of the replacement trees be 36-inch box; on properties located at 511 and 555 W. Campbell Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, François, Rocha and Roseberry Gibbons None None NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair Gibbons advised that this item would be considered by Council for final action at its meeting of November 1, 2005. *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, was accepted as presented with the following additions: . Advised that Council took action to revise the Housing Rehab Loan Guidelines. . Pointed out that a memo was included in the Director's Report that responds to the issues raised by Mr. Robert Nicholas at the last meeting during Oral Request. . Informed that she had attended the Annual League of California Cities Conference in San Francisco last week and will be working on the Planners Institute that will be held in Monterey in 2006. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned Planning Commission Meeting of October 25 SUBMITTED BY: p.m. to the next Regular Corinne A. Shinn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: ~ÆJ~ {, . ab Gibbons, Chair ~~ ATTEST: