Loading...
PC Min 12/13/2005 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY DECEMBER 13, 2005 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of December 13, 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: Elizabeth Gibbons Bob Alderete George Doorley Mark Ebner Tom Francois Michael Rocha Bob Roseberry Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Planner I: Planner I: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: Sharon Fierro Jackie C. Young Lind Stephanie Willsey Melinda Denis William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: On motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission minutes of November 22, 2005, were approved as submitted. (7 -O) COMMUNICATIONS 1. Staff memo and information regarding Agenda Item No.4 (Cristich Lane). 2. Staff memo and correspondence regarding Agenda Item No.5 (Taco Bravo) Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 2 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS Chair Gibbons suggested that Item No.5 be heard first due to the large number of audience members present for this item. Commissioner Francois made the motion to hear Item No.5 at the beginning of the agenda. ORAL REQUESTS There were no Oral Requests. *** PUBLIC HEARINGS City Attorney William Seligmann advised that he must recuse himself from participating in Agenda Item No.5 as he is prosecuting this applicant on Code Violations. He left the Council Chambers for the duration of this hearing. Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.5 into the record as follows: 5. PLN2005-123 (UP) Wuollet, D Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Dennis Wuollet, on behalf of Taco Bravo, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2005-123) to allow late night uses at an existing restaurant on property owned Carol Hockenbury et allocated at 1960 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Melinda Denis, Planner I Ms. Melinda Denis, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Reported that the applicant is seeking Conditional Use Permit approval to allow late night operations for an existing restaurant located at 1960 S. Bascom Avenue. . Explained that Council adopted Ordinance 2002 in 2001 that eliminated non- permitted late night uses and gave a two-year grace period for existing businesses with late night operations to file for a Conditional Use Permit. . Said that this location consists of a single-story building that was constructed in 1967 and has housed a fast food restaurant since that time. . Reported that Taco Bravo was established at this location in 1976 and has operated until 3 a.m. since it was established. . Described the location as being on the northeast corner of S. Bascom Avenue and Fewtrell Avenue and is surrounded by commercial uses on the north, south and west sides and a day care on the east side. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 3 . Advised that the General Plan Land Use Designation for this site is General Commercial and the Zoning is C-2-S (General Commercial). The proposed use is consistent with both with the granting of a Conditional Use Permit. . Stated that the applicant is requesting the continuance of operational hours to 3 a.m. Current hours are from 9 a.m. to 3 a.m., 7 days a week. . Reported that the applicant states that a major portion of his business revenue is generated after 11 p.m. . Said that staff is recommending reducing these operational hours from 9 a.m. to 12 a.m., Sunday through Thursday, and from 9 a.m. to 1 a.m., Friday and Saturday. . Pointed out that landscaping on site is deficient and has not been maintained. A condition of approval is proposed that requires the refurbishment of the site's landscaping. . Added that an additional light fixture is proposed for the rear parking lot. . Said that a condition of approval is also proposed that requires a six-month review of this use following approval of this Use Permit. . Recommended that the Commission adopt a Resolution approving this Conditional Use Permit as conditioned. Commissioner Francois asked staff the hours of operation for the nearby Jack in the Box restaurant. Planner Melinda Denis replied that the restaurant is located in a Planned Development Zoning District and has interior dining hours up to 11 p.m. and drive thru service available 24 hours. The nearby Denny's is in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District and operates 24 hours with an approved Use Permit. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.5. Ms. Carol Hockenbury, Property Owner: . Advised that she concurs with staff's recommendations but would like to see this restaurant be allowed to have operational hours beyond the 1 a.m. time proposed by staff. . Stated that they have been a part of the City since 1967 and have never been anything but an asset to the City. . Said that she is not aware of any problems. . Assured that it is their intention to never disturb nearby residents. . Stated that they like being a part of Campbell. Mr. Mike Fieger, 1919 Montecito Avenue, #1, Mountain View: . Thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak. . Said that he is a 1 O-year customer of Taco Bravo, half of the time he goes there for lunch and the rest of the time he patronizes the restaurant after midnight. . Pointed out that after midnight is the busiest time for this restaurant. . Stated that most of the noise in this area is from Bascom Avenue itself and not from this establishment specifically. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 4 Mr. Enrico Principi, 10250 S. Foothill Boulevard: . Stated that there used to be a Taco Bravo in Cupertino that is no longer there. . Asked that this Taco Bravo location not be taken away. Commissioner Ebner asked Mr. Enrico Principi if his patronage is based upon a social situation or on the food served. Mr. Enrico Principi replied the food is the draw. Mr. Sean Adams, 787 W. Sunnyoaks Avenue, Campbell: . Identified himself as a Campbell resident and 10-year customer of Taco Bravo. . Said that he has never seen noise or violence occur at this Taco Bravo. . Said he is a business owner himself. . Stated that if this business is forced to shut down after 11 p.m. it would go out of business. . Pointed out that the Police Department has no objection to the continuation of this use. . Said that he has never heard of anyone who does not want Taco Bravo to continue to operate here. Mr. Dennis Wuollet, Owner of Taco Bravo, 1960 S. Bascom Avenue: . Said that he has been a resident of Campbell for a number of years. . Said that he has been at this location since 1970 and Taco Bravo was established here in 1976. . Stated that most of his business occurs after 12 a.m. and that between 1 and 3 a.m. are his busiest hours of operation. . Advised that it would be financially impossible for him to remain at this location if he has to close early. He needs these hours to stay in business. . Assured that he would do whatever is suggested by the City including the upgrade to the landscaping. Commissioner Ebner asked Mr. Dennis Wuollet what percentage of his gross revenue is generated after 11 p.m. Mr. Dennis Wuollet replied approximately 33 percent of his total revenue is earned after 11 p.m. and more than 10 percent of that is earned after 1 a.m. Commissioner Alderete stated that he likes the food at Taco Bravo too and has been going there for a number of years. He said that there is room for fixing up this location. Mr. Dennis Wuollet assured that he has started working on refurbishing the site recently. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 5 Commissioner Alderete asked if Mr. Dennis Wuollet has any additional issues or suggestions in addition to added lighting and landscaping on site. He pointed out that there is odor emanating from the existing enclosure that must be passed when leaving the restaurant. Mr. Dennis Wuollet said that the requirement for a trash enclosure is an expensive requirement that he would prefer to not have to incur. He added that all existing lights on site are in working order. Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Dennis Wuollet for further information on the trash enclosure requirement. Mr. Dennis Wuollet suggested that something could be done to improve the existing enclosure without having to install a new cement slab, which is expensive. He added that the grease container stored in the trash enclosure area is what emits odor and perhaps it could be relocated elsewhere. Mr. Mark Harmon, 2526 S. Bascom Avenue, Unit C-3, Campbell: . Said that he has patronized Taco Bravo since high school, through college and into his office career. . Pointed out that San Jose has a very restrictive policy from which Campbell has benefited. . Said that Taco Bravo's business is booming and is a benefit to the community. . Added that after bars close for the night, patrons come to Taco Bravo for food. . Reminded that there is not much available for late night dining. . Advised that this Taco Bravo location is one of two around. Mr. Keith Denison, 880 Brookwood Avenue: . Said he concurred with previous comments. . Said that Taco Bravo is a good wholesome family-run business that he would like to see continued and prospering in this community. Mr. Jerry Pelayo, 607 McGlincy Lane, Campbell: . Said that people make choices in life from clothing to where they will live. . Said that residents living around Taco Bravo were aware of this restaurant when they moved into the area. . Pointed out that he lives on McGlincy Lane, a busy roadway, and must tolerate the surroundings and environment in which he has chosen to live. . Reminded that Taco Bravo has been at this location since 1967 and he doubted that too many of the nearby residents have resided in the area as long. . Stated that he is a single man who often works late and likes to come to Taco Bravo for a good, cooked on site meal. Mr. Lex Van Den Berghe, 324 Prospect Heights, Santa Cruz: Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 6 . Said that he was a participant on reality show, Survivor in Africa, and was starving for 38 of 39 days he was there. He reported that he thought about Taco Bravo every day. . Added that he later participated on the All-Stars Survivor and thought about Taco Bravo the 27 days he was there. . Said he is a 25 year customer of Taco Bravo and his 11 year old son is a second- generation Taco Bravo customer. . Advised that he ate at Taco Bravo tonight. . Stated that Taco Bravo is a cultural icon and treasure. Without Taco Bravo the area loses culture. . Said that asking Taco Bravo to close at 11 p.m. would be like asking a donut shop not to open until after lunch. Eric Billingsley, 1100 Fewtrell Drive, Campbell: . Stated that he loves eating at Taco Bravo while his wife, not so much. . Said that noise in the area is from traffic on Bascom and Campbell Avenues. . Stressed the importance of enforcement of speed limits and noise violations. . Added that this business needs to say something when its customers are making noise that could be disruptive to residents in the area. . Said with that step, he can support this Use Permit. Mr. Tom Jacobson, 2349 Homewood Drive, San Jose: . Said that he has known this business owner for a number of years. . Said that Dennis Wuollet is a part of the Campbell scene for many years and offers low-cost, wholesome food late at night. . Stated that losing this business would take away from Campbell and the community and result in fewer options available. . Thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak in support of Taco Bravo. Mr. Phil Jakes, 827 McGlincy Lane, Campbell: . Concurred with previous comments. . Said that it would be sad to lose a business that has been in this community for so long. . Opined that this is the best place to eat in the area. Ms. Jan Conlon, 21107 Old Well Road, Los Gatos: . Stated that she is an 11-year customer of Taco Bravo who eats there two to three times a week. She said that they know what she wants to eat when she arrives. . Said that as a resident of Los Gatos she could patronize Los Gatos businesses, such as grocery stores, but tends to use Campbell businesses because Taco Bravo draws her to the area. Ms. Becky Banales, 1695 E. San Fernando Street: . Said that she has been an employee of Taco Bravo for nine years. It offers both a job and a family to her. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 7 . Said that she did not want to see Taco Bravo close early as she would not have a job. She wants to see the restaurant stay open. Ms. Kirsten Korpela, 3572 Mauricia Drive, Santa Clara: . Said that she used to live off of Dry Creek Road in Willow Glen and has patronized Taco Bravo for approximately 21 years. . Said that she goes to Taco Bravo almost every day and does not know what she would do without Taco Bravo. . Suggested that it would be a disservice to the City to shut down Taco Bravo. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.5. Commissioner Rocha asked staff for the nature and history of complaints and the dialog that has occurred on the complaints with the business owner. Planner Melinda Denis: . Reminded that Ordinance 2002 was adopted in 2001 that required all businesses City wide with late operations to obtain a Use Permit with a 24-month grace period offered. That grace period ended in 2003. . Reported that a complaint was received in June 2003 signed by 20 residents in the neighborhood. A letter was sent to the property owner in July 2003. In August 2003, the Code Enforcement Officer, Ben Mendoza, issued a Notice of Violation both to Taco Bravo and the property owner. In February 2005, a new Code Enforcement Officer, Steve Prosser, reopened the file and sent another notice. . Explained that shortly thereafter a phone call was received inquiring whether Taco Bravo had obtained the required Use Permit for late operations. . Said that in April 2005 a second notice, an Intention to Cite Notice. In June 27, 2005, a citation was issued. In August 2005 the Use Permit application was received. Commissioner Roseberry asked what the date was of the complaint signed by 20 residents. Planner Melinda Denis replied June 18, 2003. Commissioner Roseberry asked if there were subsequent complaints. Planner Melinda Denis said that there have been two inquiries on the status of processing the Use Permit application. Commissioner Francois pointed out that despite the formal complaint received in June 2003, there is no one hear tonight to speak against this Use Permit request. He asked staff if noticing to local residents occurred. Planner Melinda Denis assured that owners within 300 feet of the project site received written public hearing notification. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 8 Commissioner Francois asked if the violation in question for which a citation was issued is simply the lack of a required Conditional Use Permit. Planner Melinda Denis replied yes. Commissioner Roseberry: . Stated that it is nice to have everyone here this evening. . Said that it is interesting to have only one neighbor present tonight among the many speakers here. . Asked why 1 a.m. was chosen as a proposed closing time by staff. . Stated that he agrees that Taco Bravo represents a cultural thing for Campbell. . Added that although he does not stay up that late any more in the past Taco Bravo served as a source for a late meal. . Said that the conditions of approval are strict and that the patrons of Taco Bravo will have a key part in maintaining compliance with these conditions. . Reminded that the management must uphold noise standards. . Pointed out that the City, through action by the Community Development Director, will have the power to limit the hours of operation if substantiated complains are received. . Reiterated that the fate of this establishment is in the hands of the patrons. Commissioner Rocha: . Stated that the City is not picking on Taco Bravo. Rather all these types of businesses have been asked to obtain Use Permits for late hour operations. . Said that he is satisfied with the proposed conditions of approval. . Stressed that a lot will fall back on the behavior of the patrons of Taco Bravo as the Use Permit provides City staff with more authority to enforce these conditions. . Urged those present to act both as good citizens and a responsible business. . Advised that he would support this Use Permit. Commissioner Ebner: . Said that he concurs that the continued ability to operate late will fall back on the patrons who must police themselves and ensure that problems don't occur. . Said he will need to revisit this restaurant, which he used to patronize as a student at Campbell High School, from which he graduated in 1967. . Reminded that this Use Permit would be brought back before the Commission if problems crop up that are not corrected. . Said he is leaning toward supporting this application. Commissioner Doorley pointed out that the staff recommendation is for closure at 1 a.m. Commissioner Ebner said that with upgraded lighting, trash enclosure upgrades and covering of the grease barrels, he tends to support continued operations to 3 a.m. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 9 Commissioner Doorley said that he concurs with staff recommendations except that he too supports allowing the continuation of operation to 3 a.m. Commissioner Francois: . Stated that he too concurs. . Reminded that this business has been here for 35 years, which says a lot. . Pointed out that there have been no significant complaints since that of 2003. . Said he tends to support this request. . Said that since he has been a part of the Police Department for 28 years he supports the comment made by Mr. Harmon about bar patrons being able to come to Taco Bravo after bar closures so they can eat a meal to refresh themselves. . Said he would support this application. Chair Gibbons: . Said that a 3 a.m. closure seems reasonable. . Stated that nice points were made in one letter received that suggested the placement of signs in the windows at Taco Bravo cautioning patrons on the need to prevent noise impacts on nearby residences. . Reminded that this matter is before the Commission simply because a Use Permit is required for the operation of a business with late hours. Such a Use Permit allows better controls and quality of the environment. . Said that conditions requiring additional lighting, noise controls and allowing the Community Development Director to change hours if any complaints are received are tools to help resolve problems quickly. . Asked if the condition requiring a six-month review of this Use Permit includes fees being charged to the applicant. . Said that she is supportive of allowing the existing hours to 3 a.m. to continue. Commissioner Francois asked for information about the materials for the trash enclosure at the Baja Fresh location. Planner Melinda Denis reported that it is constructed of cyclone fencing with slats. Commissioner Francois asked about the possibility of this applicant doing something like that here too. Planner Melinda Denis said that Baja Fresh went into an existing restaurant location that had an existing trash enclosure. Mr. Wuollet wants to use his existing trash enclosure location. No additional cement pad would be required simply a cinderblock wall to meet current enclosure standards. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 1 0 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Francois, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3704 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2005- 123) to allow late night uses to 3 a.m., 7 days a week, at an existing restaurant on property owned Carol Hockenbury et al located at 1960 S. Bascom Avenue, with the edit to Condition of Approval No. 3 removing text "at the applicant's cost" for the six-month review of this Use Permit, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, François, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appeal in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.1 into the record as follows: 1. PLN2005-D6 (GP) PLN2005-88 (ZC) PLN2005-89 (PD) PLN2005-90 (TS) Mussano, M. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Mike Mussano, on behalf of Ward-Young Architecture and Planning, for a General Plan Amendment (PLN2005-06) from Neighborhood Commercial to Low-Medium Density Residential and from Medium-Density Residential to Low- Medium Density Residential; a Zone Change (PLN2005- 88) from C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) and R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development); a Planned Development Permit (PLN2005- 89) to allow the construction of eight small-lot single-family residences and a Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2005- 90) to allow the creation of eight lots on property owned by Kirkorian Enterprises, LLC, located at 1859 Bucknall Road and 145 Fulton Avenue in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) and R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning District. A Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed for this project. Tentative City Council meeting date: January 17, 2006. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that following review by staff, staff is recommending approval of a Negative Declaration for a project located on the northwest corner of Bucknall Road and Fulton Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 11 . Described one parcel as currently containing a single-story convenience store and the second parcel a two-story fourplex, both of which will be removed. . Said that the surrounding properties include fourplexes to the north and east and single-family residences to the south and west. . Advised that on May 23, 2005, Council reviewed conceptual plans and authorized the applicant to proceed with a General Plan Amendment application. . Said that the existing General Plan designation is Medium Density Residential for one parcel and Neighborhood Commercial for the other. It is proposed that both would be changed to Low-Medium Density Residential, which allows 9.3 units per gross acre. . Explained that a Planned Development Permit would allow for individual ownership of the units and some flexibility in design standards that allows for the creation of a better project than might be achieved with standard zoning requirements. Chair Gibbons asked about the differences in standards and how they help achieve a better project. Director Sharon Fierro said that the separation between units is less than required under standard zoning. Senior Planner Jackie C. Young Lind added that R-M Zoning requirements would result in greater separation between units, greater setbacks to the porches and greater setback from the north property line at five feet as opposed the proposed three feet. However, as proposed the density would comply. Director Sharon Fierro: . Added that this proposed project complies with policies, strategies and goals of the General Plan and Housing Element as well as with the Zoning Code with the issuance of a Planned Development Permit. . Explained that a Planned Development Permit allows slight deviations in standards to allow a superior development than would be achieved under standard zoning. . Said that the architectural style is Craftsman with hip roof shapes and porch elements typical of the style supported by the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. There will be picket fences at the street frontages and six-foot high good neighbor fences. . Stated that staff is recommending that the fencing for Lot 1 be relocated to provide a private yard space for this residence. . Added that parking requirements are met with this project that includes five driveway aprons along the street frontage and two shared driveways. . Said that staff is recommending a condition of approval that requires the use of decorative paving on these driveways to improve their appearance. . Stated that a landscape plan will be required utilizing 24 inch box trees. . Reported that the Tentative Subdivision Map would create eight residential lots, three of which are flag lots, two with shared driveway access. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 12 . Reported that a Homeowners' Association is required to ensure the maintenance of landscaping and shared driveways as well as architectural continuity. . Explained that the applicant objects to the condition requiring establishment of an HOA and redesigned their project to include more driveways with street frontage access so said HOA would not be required. . Added that this applicant owns the apartments across the street and has historically well maintained that landscaping. . Said that staff believes it is important to have common lots with an HOA to deal with landscaping maintenance along the perimeter of the property, maintenance of driveways and to ensure that garages are left available for parking and not simply used for storage. . Recommended approval and advised that SARC will report on its review of this proposal. Commissioner Ebner asked if the City is asking for the five-foot setback. Director Sharon Fierro replied no. If it were not a Planned Development, the five-foot setback would be required. However, with a Planned Development Permit the reduced three-foot setback is allowed. She added that staff is recommending approval of this project with condition to establish an HOA. Commissioner Alderete asked if the garage doors with raised panels and glass inserts have been conditioned. Director Sharon Fierro said that Condition 6 does require this but that condition could be enhanced by adding subsection C requiring these details for the garage doors. Chair Gibbons: . Said that she has a number of questions including whether this Planned Development project is better than using the current zoning requirements. . Stated that the question of whether or not to have an HOA is an issue. . Advised that she had asked to see the earlier proposal that included combined driveways. . Expressed concern about the percentage of driveway coverage visible from the street frontage. . Said that the three-foot side yard setbacks are of concern. . Asked staff to explain what makes this project better as a Planned Development. Director Sharon Fierro advised that the Architectural Advisor had reviewed the original proposal in July 2005. Chair Gibbons: . Said that the original proposal had driveways to the rear and frontages to the street. . Questioned whether a Planned Development is best for this area. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 13 Commissioner Alderete presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . Reported that SARC reviewed this project on November 22, 2005, and was supportive. . Said that SARC recommended the establishment of an HOA to maintain publicly visible landscaping, fencing and architectural integrity of the development. . Added that SARC also requested inclusion of decorative paving and more detailed garage doors. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Mr. Tim Ward, Architect and Applicant's Representative: . Explained that the design changes they made to the project were not done only to avoid establishing an HOA. . Added that the original design did not provide back yards for the front units or access from the street. . Said that they have tried to design a neo-traditional neighborhood with nine units per gross acre. . Described the homes as modest, small homes ranging in size between 1,600 and 1,900 square feet. Most are three-bedroom with a couple of four-bedroom units. . Said that they had tried to develop with four parking spaces per unit but were unable to reach that standard. . Said that carriage doors would be used for the garages and agreed that these garages needed to have some added character. . Assured that this is not some monolithic project but rather are individual homes. . Stated that they are in agreement with the recommendations made by staff on the issues of fencing, garage details and the creation of a back yard space for Lot 1. . Said he is open to questions. Mr. Dan Brodnick, Kirkorian Enterprises, LLC, 1630 W. Campbell Avenue, Campbell: . Stated that this project has been 16 months in the planning and he worked closely with Planner Tim Haley, talked with realtors and looked at the Summerhill project for inspiration. . Said that as designed, there are no common areas of ownership while the recent Cullen DeMattei project on Kennedy does have a common ownership lot included. . Said that to address staff concerns, they propose to file deed restrictions on the issues of landscape maintenance, fencing and architectural controls. . Stated that the concern with establishing an HOA is the on-going cost of maintaining it. There is a need for about $100,000 in insurance and results in approximately $200 per month per unit in HOA fees. . Added that an HOA can foreclose on a property simply for failure to pay HOA dues. . Assured that they want to maintain this property and that they own the apartments across the street. . Promised that the landscaping on this project would be maintained. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 14 . Added that this proposal results in a better project than what is there now, including a convenience store located in a residential neighborhood. City Attorney William Seligmann advised that the Subdivision Code provisions require an HOA when there is any shared access. Ms. Mary Carson, 4564 Bucknall Road, Campbell: . Stated that she lives across the street from this property. . Questioned the proposed price ranges for these homes and the potential traffic impacts on the area. . Pointed out that it is difficult to get out now due to nearby traffic such as that generated from nearby Harker Academy. Mr. John Kirkorian, Kirkorian Enterprises, LLC, 1630 W. Campbell Avenue, Campbell: . Thanked the Commission for its consideration of this project. . Said that this property has been owned by his family for 40 years. A long-term lease on the commercial property just recently expired. . Said that this project represents a nice plan that fits in well into this neighborhood. . Said he is not yet certain the sale price for these homes but anticipates approximately $800,000. . Said that there is nothing better for a new property owner than to take care of their own yard. Ms. Kim Carson, 4564 Bucknall Road, Campbell: . Expressed support for an HOA. . Stated that she resides directly across the street from this property and has owned her home here for 20 years now. Prior to that time, she rented from the Kirkorians. . Assured that the Kirkorians maintain their properties well. . Said that she is all for establishment of an HOA as someone needs to oversee the maintenance. . Cautioned that there is no street parking available in this area and that the parking lot of this convenience market often served as overflow parking for nearby residents. Director Sharon Fierro pointed to page 4 of the Initial Study regarding the traffic analysis for this project. She advised that the finding has been made that the parking from this development would be less than existing traffic for the fourplex and convenience market and would result in no significant impact. Chair Gibbons pointed out that 10 a.m. and 11 p.m. are the peak times for this convenience business. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Commissioner Doorley: Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 15 . Said that the Kennedy Avenue project is a logical one to use as a starting point of discussion. . Stated his support for the establishment of an HOA. . Asked staff if Council had kept that requirement for an HOA in the Kennedy project as a condition of approval. Director Sharon Fierro replied yes. Commissioner Doorley: . Said that the same reasons for imposing it there apply here. . Said he is not open to the request to remove the requirement for an HOA. . Pointed out to Chair Gibbons that the evaluation of a Planned Development versus an R-M-S (Multiple Family Residential) project includes aesthetic and upkeep benefits with ownership units versus rental units. Chair Gibbons: . Said that Commissioner Doorley's point is well spoken. . Said that the question she has is the quality of the open spaces provided which impacts how well they could be taken care of. . Added that she is concerned about the number of driveways and the amount of garage shown from the street. . Said that she is not sure the amount of landscaping that can be installed due to the small size of some of the planting areas at about 2.5 feet in depth. . Said that she loves the concept of ownership units versus rental units as there is a market need for such units. . Advised that State Law does not allow an HOA to foreclose on a property owner solely due to delinquent HOA dues. Commissioner Doorley added that a lien can be placed for such delinquent dues but that cannot be the sole reason for a foreclosure. Chair Gibbons stated that while this project is cleverly mapped out, it is too dense, has too many driveways, too many compromises and too small of setbacks. Therefore, she is not supportive. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Doorley, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission took the following actions: . Adopted Resolution No. 3692 recommending that Council adopt a Negative Declaration for the subject residential development; . Adopted Resolution No. 3693 recommending that Council approve a General Plan Amendment (PLN2005-O6) to change the General Plan land use designation from Medium-Density Residential for 145 Fulton Street) and Neighborhood Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 16 Commercial for 1859 Bucknall Road to Low-Medium Density Residential; . Adopted Resolution No. 3694 recommending that Council approve a Zoning Classification Change (PLN2005-88) from R-2- 5 (Multiple Family Residential) for 145 Fulton Street and C-1-s (Neighborhood Commercial) for 1859 Bucknall Road to P-D (Planned Development); . Adopted Resolution No. 3695 recommending that Council approve a Planned Development Permit (PLN2005-89) to allow the development of eight detached residential units; and . Adopted Resolution No. 3696 recommending that Council approve a Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2005-90) to create eight residential lots; by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, François and Roseberry NOES: Gibbons and Rocha ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chair Gibbons advised that this item would be considered by Council at its meeting of January 17, 2006, for final action. *** Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.2 into the record as follows: 2. PLN2005-125 (ZC) PLN2005-126 (PD) PLN2005-127 (PM) Almeleh, C. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Craig Almeleh, on behalf of Architectural Technologies, Inc., for a Zone Change (PLN2005-125) from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to C-PD (Condominium - Planned Development); a Planned Development (PLN2005-126) to allow the conversion of four approved commercial/industrial buildings into 46 commercial/industrial condominium units and a Tentative Parcel Map (PLN2005-127) for four lots for condominium purposes on property owned by Mr. James Chalmers located at 700 - 750 E. McGlincy Lane in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: January 17, 2006. Project Planner: Stephanie Willsey, AICP, Planner I Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval to allow the conversion of four approved commercial/industrial buildings into 46 commercial/industrial condominium units. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 17 . Described the General Plan land use designation as Light Industrial for which 46 condominium units would be consistent. The zoning is M-1-S (Light Industrial), which would have to be changed to C-PD (Condominium-Planned Development) to allow individual ownership of these condo units. . Informed that the applicant is proposing a Zone Change to allow this change. . Said that this proposal is consistent with the C-PD Zoning requirements. . Explained that the property would be divided into four lots with one building per lot. This would allow air space ownership with 10 units for Lot 1, 12 units for Lot 2, 13 units for Lot 3 and 11 units for Lot 4 for a total of 46. . Added that a common lot would consist of parking, landscaping and driveways. . Recommended that the Commission forward recommendations to Council to approve this project. Commissioner Alderete presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . Reported that SARC reviewed this project on November 22, 2005, and was supportive as proposed. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Chair Gibbons said that she supports this project and suggested adding a new Subsection H to Condition of Approval No.5 to read "The site is built out as far as square footage versus parking ratios so no mezzanines or added square footage can be incorporated into this site." Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rocha, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission took the following actions: . Adopted Resolution No. 3697 recommending that Council adopt a Negative Declaration for the subject residential development; . Adopted Resolution No. 3698 recommending that that Council approve a Zone Change (PLN2005-125) from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to C-PD (Condominium-Planned Development); . Adopted Resolution No. 3699 recommending that Council approve a Planned Development Permit (PLN2005-126) to allow the conversion of four approved commerciallindustrial buildings into 46 commercial/industrial condominium units with the added text to Condition No.5; and . Adopted Resolution No. 3700 recommending that Council approve a Tentative Parcel Map (PLN2005-127) for four lots for condominium purposes; by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, François, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None NOES: Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 18 ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chair Gibbons advised that this item would be considered by Council at its meeting of January 17, 2006, for final action. *** Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.3 into the record as follows: 3. PLN2005-157 (s) Sagarchi, S. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Salim Sagarchi, on behalf of Mr. Mohammad Khostavan, for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-157) to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on property owned by Mr. Mohammad Khostavan located at 1025 W. Parr Avenue in an R-1-10 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Melinda Denis, Planner I Ms. Melinda Denis, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Reported that the applicant is seeking a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of a new single-family residence and garage. . Advised that a single-family residence and detached accessory structure were recently demolished from this site. . Explained that it had been thought that the existing original foundation could be reused for the new home. However, it was determined not to be possible upon demolition of the original structure. . Stated that this parcel is surrounded by single-family residences on all sides. . Described the General Plan land use designation as Low Density Residential and the Zoning as R-1-10. . Informed that the STANP applies to this property. . Said that the project included the removal of the existing home, accessory structure and carport and construction of a new home with attached garage. . Said that staff is recommending that the proposed bay window be reduced in size in order to reduce the crowded appearance of the front façade. . Recommended that the Commission take action to approve this project. Commissioner Alderete presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . Reported that SARC reviewed this project on November 22, 2005, and was supportive with minor modifications to the bay window in the front elevation. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 19 Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Ms. Lynn Rodriguez, 1015 W. Parr Avenue, Campbell: . Reported that her son and his family reside next door to this property. . Said that they have a chain link fence in place and they want that fence to remain in place. . Expressed concern over the possibility of pit bulls being in the area. . Asked if her fence would stay in place. . Questioned what the requirements are regarding pit bulls in the City since she has a four-month old grandchild who lives here. Commissioner Doorley said that the fence ownership is mutual if the fence is located on the shared property line. Legally it is jointly owned, even if one owner paid for its installation. City Attorney William Seligmann added that if this fence is entirely on her side of the property line, no one can touch it. If it is located on the shared property line, a rule of reasonableness applies and both sides have a say. Commissioner Doorley said that if the chain link fencing stays in place and a new fence is constructed on the shared property line, would the new fence be mutually owned or would it belong to the new owners. City Attorney William Seligmann replied that it is mutually owned if on the property line. Ms. Lynn Rodriguez said that she wants this five-foot high chain link fence to stay. Chair Gibbons asked staff how the City handles animal control questions. City Attorney William Seligmann replied that at the present time, the cities of Campbell, Monte Sereno and Santa Clara are reviewing the Animal Ordinance and it will include requirements for maintaining pit bulls. He added that the Police Department manages the animal control services contract. Chair Gibbons suggested that Ms. Lynn Rodriguez leave contact information so a member of the Police Department can contact her regarding the proposed changes in the Animal Control Ordinance. Mr. Salim Sagarchi, Project Applicant: . Said that he is here to represent the property owner and is available for any questions. . Stated that there would be a new fence constructed as the chain link fencing is open view fencing that does not provide privacy for yard spaces. . Added that such fencing is usually constructed on the property line. . Assured that this issue can be worked out with this neighbor. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 20 Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3. Commissioner Rocha: . Stated that there are more look a-likes than there are actually pit bulls. . Said that inbreeding is the problem with this breed. . Admitted that he is a dog lover since childhood. . Said that any animal raised in a loving family is a kind animal. . Stated he understands the aversion to pit pulls but owners need to be responsible. . Suggested that pit bulls should not be black balled. Chair Gibbons expressed appreciation to staff for the inclusion of Condition No.7 that requires contractor contact information to be posted on site, saying that this information can be very helpful to neighbors. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3701 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-157) to allow the construction of a new single- family residence on property owned by Mr. Mohammad Khostavan located at 1025 W. Parr Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, François, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None None None NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appeal in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Commissioner Rocha recused himself from participation in Agenda Item No.4 because of a professional association with this applicant. Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No.4 into the record as follows: 4. PLN2005-144 (S) PLN2005-145 (V) Kaeding, B. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Brent Kaeding, on behalf of Kaeding Performance, for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-144) to allow the demolition of an existing residence and the construction of a new 5,347 square foot industrial building and a Variance (PLN2005-145) to allow a building that was destroyed by fire to be re-built one foot from a side property line on property owned by Mr. Howard Kaeding located at 813 Cristich Lane in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 21 decision final, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Jackie C. Young Lind, Senior Planner Ms. Jackie C. Young Lind, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: . Reported that this site and the two adjacent properties are home to Kaeding Performance, Inc., which sells parts for high end race cars. . Explained that a non-permitted industrial building located on this property was destroyed by fire on this site. Per the regulations for Non-Conforming Buildings, such a structure cannot be replaced as it was if it was constructed without permits as this one was especially if the cost to reconstruct is 75 percent or more of the cost to rebuild. . Advised that this applicant is seeking Site and Architectural Review Permit and a Variance. . Stated that the required findings for a Variance cannot be made in this case. . Described the project as including the demolition of an existing residence and the construction of a new 5,400 industrial building. A Variance is requested to allow one side setback at one foot from the property line where a setback of 12 feet, three inches is required. The standard requirement calls for a minimum of five feet or half the wall height, which equals 12 feet, three inches in this situation. The new building would consist of 3,600 square feet of retail space, 1,300 square feet of distribution area and a 430 square foot office in a mezzanine area. No automotive work will be done on site. Sixteen parking spaces are proposed with a 20 foot landscape area at the front and five foot landscape area along the northern elevation. . Said that a Lot Line Adjustment would be necessary as well as a 10-foot dedication for a Cristich Lane right-of-way. . Advised that no signs are part of this application. . Added that the General Plan and Zoning requirements are consistent with the exception of the proposed Variance for a reduced south side setback and landscape requirement. . Explained that five mandatory findings are required to support a Variance including a finding of hardship for the property without a Variance, exceptional circumstances to the property, a finding that a Variance would not equal special privilege, that the Variance is not detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. . Reported that there are no exceptional circumstances with this site. Exceptional circumstances usually include size, shape or topography of a parcel. . Recommended denial of the Variance. . Said that the Site and Architectural Review Permit creates a project that is consistent with the policies and strategies of the General Plan. It increases the integrity of the area, creates a building that meets current Fire and Building Codes, offers screening from the northern property line, and enhances the street frontage as well as screening the industrial portions of the site. A masonry wall will be constructed along Highway 17. The building will utilize stucco instead of exposed Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 22 concrete block and include vertical and horizontal articulation. The doors will be painted to match the body color of the building. A number of screening mechanisms will be implemented. . Reported that staff had suggested a different site layout to help meet setbacks but the applicant wanted to pursue his design. . Explained that a pending Zoning Code Update will include architectural standards for the Light Industrial Zoning District. . Recommended a condition of approval be added that increases the setback and landscaping for the southern setback, that a detailed landscape plan be submitted. These changes would eliminate the need for a Variance. . Recommended approval of the Site and Architectural Review Permit but denial of the Variance for the southern setback. Commissioner Alderete presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . Reported that SARC reviewed this project on November 22, 2005, and supported staff's recommendations regarding the exterior materials reflected on the plans changing from block wall to stucco with articulation. . Added that SARC felt that enforcing the larger southern setback is not a benefit to this project as it creates unusable space that is impractical and unusable. Commissioner Ebner asked what the Fire standard is if the project is constructed as proposed by the applicant with the one foot setback at the southern property line. Chair Gibbons replied four hour masonry. Commissioner Roseberry: . Pointed out that a lot of properties in this area consist of zero lot lines on one side. . Stated that the project creates a good driveway and site parking and that imposing a larger setback at the back property line would create neglected unusable space. . Said he is not sure about the required findings to support the Variance or how to evaluate potential Zoning Code updates at this stage. . Said that this is a good project. Commissioner Francois asked if SARC supported the Variance. Chair Gibbons said that SARC is supporting the project but has not provided language to support the Variance. Commissioner Roseberry said that an exceptional circumstance is the fact that this is a large narrow property. Chair Gibbons asked the City Attorney to verify that all five of the Variance findings must be made to support approval of a Variance. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 23 City Attorney William Seligmann replied correct. Commissioner Roseberry asked if these findings are as appears on Attachment #1 of the staff report. Senior Planner Jackie C. Young Lind said that the Variance findings are in Attachment #1. The first three findings serve as a preface and describe the project. Findings 4 to 8 represent the State's mandatory findings to support a Variance. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.4. Mr. Phil Jakes, 827 McGlincy Lane, Campbell: . Said that his home is located to the south side of the Kaedings' property. . Said he is in favor of the requested one foot setback as slightly larger area would simply serve as a catch all storage area. There is no way to use or landscape this area. . Pointed out that the property on which he lives will likely be redeveloped in the near future in a similar fashion. Mr. Brent Kaeding, Applicant, Kaeding Performance, Inc., 813 Cristich Lane, Campbell: . Pointed out that his family's business has been in the community for 65 years. . Explained that they experienced the disaster of a fire on July 19, 2005. . Said that this application represents an opportunity to redevelop this site to higher standards and allow them to build the building that they have always dreamed of having. Mr. John Neese, 872 Old Orchard Road, Campbell: . Explained that this has been a traumatic time for the Kaeding family with this fire destroying much of their site. . Pointed out that when the Kaedings originally developed their site, there was no freeway in place. . Stated that the site was developed not unlike others in the immediate area. . Reminded that in addition to some property being taken for the freeway, additional property is being taken for the expansion of Cristich Lane. . Said that since the 1950s, Campbell has been known due to the Kaedings and their reputation. . Said that this project offers a great design to allow a great family to continue to operate in Campbell. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.4. Commissioner Ebner asked if his calculations are accurate in saying that almost 1,000 square feet of area is lost with the five foot setback at the rear of the parcel. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 24 Chair Gibbons said that her calculation is well over 2,000 square feet. Commissioner Alderete added that the required setback per Code would actually be 12.3 feet which is even greater area lost. Commissioner Doorley: . Said that this fire is reminiscent of the South County Mountain fires a couple years back and the underlying issues that were raised when a number of structures were not to Code. . Stressed the importance of combining compassion over a tragic experience versus strict enforcement of Codes. . Suggested that if the site had conformed, perhaps damage would not have been as great. . Said that language would have to be contorted in order to meet the findings. Commissioner Francois said that he has compassion for what this applicant has gone through with this fire. He is trying to do the right thing and a Variance is right in this case therefore he will support it. Commissioner Roseberry: . Said that this Variance is for a setback within an industrial area. Zero setbacks are not a bad idea for industrial areas and helps create a functional working building. . Said that all buildings in this area are butted against the lot line. . Agreed that this issue should be looked at during the next Zoning Update go around. . Stated that the practical difficulty of this site is real. No one is deprived with the granting of the Variance. . Said that he can reach the findings necessary to support this Variance. . Stated that he is in favor of the Variance and the project. Commissioner Alderete said that he agrees with Commissioner Roseberry. Chair Gibbons: . Said that she too agrees with Commissioner Roseberry. . Said that this is an appropriate project for this site, use and neighborhood. . Stressed that Variances have to be granted cautiously. The Commission must look for appropriate language that applies to this project only and does not set any precedent. . Said that this issue is more complex than simply one project. . Expressed her support and questioned what the setback space would actually achieve other than creating a public nuisance to provide that setback. . Reminded that the dedications given for Highway 17 and Cristich Lane resulted in a hit on the property. . Said that the finding for hardship can be offset to have full value and use of the property. Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 25 . Said that specific language must be written for this project. . Added that it would be detrimental to the public to have an unutilized area behind this building. . Stated that no special privilege is being awarded. In fact, the site is penalized without allowing this Variance. . Reminded that the density meets Code and this project represents an improvement to the area and a new building constructed to current Code standards. . Stated that this project represents a public benefit including the Cristich Lane dedication. . Expressed support for the project and Variance with careful language. Commissioner Roseberry told Chair Gibbons that she has articulated the required findings very well. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that the shape of this property is a factor. Chair Gibbons added that the shape of the property resulted from the removal of land for the Highway 17 dedication and to expand Cristich Lane. These dedications impacted the developability of the land. City Attorney William Seligmann ran down the Variance findings for denial offered in the staff report in order to offer language that supports approval of said Variance as follows: . First set of findinQs: . Finding #1 - no change. . Finding #2 - no change. . Finding #3 - add sentence, "The setback would create an area that is difficult to maintain. " . Finding #4 - strike . Finding #5 - strike . Finding #6 - "The subject property is long and narrow and constrained due to Highway 17 and land dedicated to Cristich Lane.: . Finding #7 - strike . Finding #8 - strike . Second set of conclusionarv findinas . Finding #1 - strike the word "not" . Finding #2 - strike the word "not" . Finding #3 - strike the word "no" . Finding #4 - add the word "not" . Finding #5 - no change Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 26 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roseberry, seconded by Commissioner Francois, the Planning Commission took the following actions: . Adopted Resolution No. 3702 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-144) to allow the demolition of an existing residence and the construction of a new 5,347 square foot industrial building with changes to Conditions by striking Condition 1A (I & ii) and Condition 2; and . Adopted Resolution No. 3703 granting a Variance (PLN2005-145) to allow a building that was destroyed by fire to be re-built one foot from a side property line on property owned by Mr. Howard Kaeding located at 813 Cristich Lane with the revised findings as edited by the City Attorney, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, François, Gibbons and Roseberry NOES: Doorley ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Rocha Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appeal in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Commissioner Rocha returned to the dais at the conclusion of the hearing on Agenda Item No.4. *** MISCELLANEOUS 6. Election of 2006 Chair and Vice Chair Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, the Planning Commission unanimously elected Commissioner Alderete to serve as Planning Commission Chair for 2006 and Commissioner Rocha to serve as Vice Chair for 2006. (7-O) 7, Cancellation of the Planning Commission Meeting of December 27, 2005. Motion: Upon motion, the Planning Commission unanimously cancelled the regular Planning Commission meeting of December 27,2005. (7-0) *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, was accepted as presented with the following additions: Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2005 Page 27 . Reported that at its meeting on Monday, December 12, 2005, Council took action on the Planned Development on W. Hacienda and took action declaring weeds a public nuisance and setting the public hearing for January 17, 2005. . Advised that Jeanette Watson was elected Mayor for 2006 and Dan Furtado was elected Vice Mayor. . Reported that Public Works Director Bob Kass has forwarded a letter to VT A requesting relocation of the bus stop across the street from Dot Avenue at Campbell Avenue as discussed by the Commission during the public hearing for the Charities Housing project. . Wished the Commissioners a Happy Holiday Season and New Year. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:21 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of January 10, 20 6. SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Recor Ing Secretary APPROVEDBy~&i x!J t)~ . a h Gibbons, Chair ATTEST: ~L~ g--haron Fierro, Secretary