Loading...
PC Min 06/09/1992City of Campbell Planning Commission Minutes 7:30 P.M. City Council Chambers, 70 North First Street June 9, 1992 The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular session, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California, and the following proceedings were had to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chairperson David Fox Vice Chairperson I. (Bud) Alne Commissioner Jay Perrine Commissioner Robert Dougherty Commissioner Jane Meyer-Kennedy Commissioner Alana Higgins Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Mark Wilkinson Staff Present: Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki Associate Planner, Tim J. Haley Planner I, Gloria Sciara City Attorney, Bill Seligmann Senior Civil Engineer, Michelle Quinney Reporting Secretary, Karon Shaban APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES On motion of Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Higgins, the May 12, 1992, minutes of the Planning Commission were approved as submitted. (5-0-1-1), Commissioner Alne abstaining due to his absence at the May 12th meeting and Commissioner Wilkinson was absent. COMMUNICATIONS Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki, noted one item of communication that was not included in the Commission Packets, as follows: Memo from Associate Planner, Tim J. Haley, relating to the review process of the Site and Architectural Review Committee. Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS Chairperson Fox noted that the Site and Architectural Review Committee was requesting a continuance of Item No. 1, UP 92-08, the application of Mr. Cot& for an off-sale liquor license. MOTION: A motion was made to continue the item to the next Planning Commission meeting of June 23, 1992, by Commissioner Meyer- Kennedy, and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Higgins. City Attorney Seligmann reminded the Commission that in order to continue the hearing, it must first be opened. Chairperson Fox suggested that the item be heard as scheduled on the agenda. Commissioners Meyer- Kennedy and Higgins rescinded their motion. ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. UP 92-08 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Alan Cot~, A. Cot~ for approval of a Conditional Use Permit allowing a general off-sale liquor license for property located at 1400 West Campbell Avenue, in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Chairperson Fox read the application into the record, and opened the public hearing on the item. There was no one present wishing to address the Commission. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Dougherty, it was unanimously ordered that the item, UP 92-08, be continued to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission of June 23, 1992, (6-0-1, commissioner Wilkinson being absent). R 92-04 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Kurt Anderson, K. Anderson for Reinstatement and Revised Development (PD 90-04) Schedule of a previously approved Planned Development Permit (PD 90-04), to allow the construction of 4 townhomes on property located at 875 Apricot Avenue, in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District. Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 2 Chairperson Fox read the application into the record. Planner I, Gloria M. $ciara, presented the staff report providing a brief background of the project, noting that there were no changes to the previous approval. Staff is recommending that a recommendation of approval be forwarded to the City Council. Ghairperson Fox opened the public hearing and no one wished to address the Commission on this item. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, it was unanimously ordered that the Public Hearing be closed. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Higgins, it was unanimously ordered that Resolution No. 2803 be adopted, approving the Reinstatement and Revised Development Schedule, incorporating the findings, and subject to Conditions of Approval, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Perrine, Dougherty, Meyer-Kennedy, Higgins, Alne, Fox None Wilkinson o R 92-05 Tollick, M. (PD 91-02) Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Matthew Tollick for approval of a Revised Development Schedule for a previously approved Planned Development Permit (PD 91-02) to allow the construction of a new single-family home and a residential addition on property located at 100 South Second Street in a PD (Planned Development/Low- Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. Chairperson Fox read the application into the record. Associate Planner, Tim J. Haley, presented the staff report, reviewed the previously approved application and noted that no changes to the approved project have been requested. He mentioned that staff has imposed the following additions to the Conditions of Approval, relating to street improvements: · The provision of monolithic sidewalks, and · Increase of park land dedication fees to reflect the current fee schedule. The Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 3 staff recommends that the Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council. Chairperson Fox opened the public hearing, and no one wished to address the Commission on this item. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Alne, it was unanimously ordered that the Public Hearing be closed. MOTION: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: On motion of Commissioner Higgins, seconded by Commissioner Dougherty, it was unanimously ordered that Resolution No. 2804 be adopted, recommending that the City Council approve the request, incorporating the findings, and subject to the amended Conditions of Approval, by the following roll call vote: Commtssioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Perrine, Dougherty, Meyer-Kennedy, Higgins, Alne, Fox None Wilkinson MISCELLANEOUS 4. UP 91-20 Six month review of a previously approved Use Permit Staff Report of Mrs. Mary Avalos for a large-family day care facility (7- 12 children) located at 650 Aram Avenue, in an R-I- (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District. Chairperson Fox read the application into the record. Planner I, Gloria M. Sciara, presented the staff report noting the following: · A brief history of the application. · Staff has conducted several inspections of the property and found it to be in compliance with the approved use. · A courtesy notice was mailed to neighbors within a 300 foot radius of the subject property. · Staff recommends that the Commission continue the Use Permit, note and file the report, and send an informational referral to the City Council apprising it of the Commission's action. Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 4 Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy discussed an issue raised at the City Council meeting, suggesting that an additional six-month review be imposed. Ms. Sciara pointed out that the suggestion was not part of the final motion. Chairperson Fox asked about the letter of objection attached to the staff report. Ms. Sciara clarified that the author of the letter assumed that the project had not yet been approved, and was requesting denial of the Use Permit. Commissioner Dougherty asked about the letter which indicated that two additional letters were submitted to the Planning Department. Ms. Sciara suggested that perhaps the author had submitted letters to the Commission prior to its meeting of October 22, 1991. Chairperson Fox asked if any one in the public wished to address this issue. Public Comment: Mr. William Fulk, 647 Stokes Street, San Jose, previously had opposed the approval of the Use Permit, stated that the Condition of Approval added by the Commission relating to limiting the number of children to 6 children in the yard at one time, has decreased the noise levels considerably. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, it was unanimously ordered that the report be noted and filed, and that an informational referral be transmitted to the City Council. (6-0-1, Commissioner Wilkinson being absent.) 5. SA 92-19 McClure, W. Consider the application of Mr. Wade McClure, on behalf of Ross Dress for Less, for approval of a Sign Application, located within the Hamilton Plaza Shopping Center at 1750 South Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Chairperson Fox read the application into the record. Tim Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report noting the following: · The sign is before the Commission because the applicant is requesting more square footage for the Sign Program than the ordinance allows. · The proposed sign is consistent with the Sign Program approved for the building. · The applicant requested approval of chrome returns to be consistent with company standards, and staff suggested that the depth of the letter returns be reduced. Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 5 Banner signs are being requested for the grand opening. The staff recommends approval of the request. Commissioner Alne presented discussion from the June 1, 1992, meeting of the Site and Architectural Review Committee, as follows: · The square footage requested has been reduced since the first submittal. · This company is a major tenant within the shopping center. · The sign requested looks appropriate for the location. · The Committee recommends approval. Chairperson Fox asked if anyone wished to speak to the Commission. Public Comment: Mr. Wade McClure, the applicant, stated that he accepts staff's recorrLrnendation and modifications to the conditions. Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy noted confusion relating to the approved dark bronze returns and the requested bright chrome returns. Mr. Haley explained that the returns are a material to reflect light off of the building wall, and will not have a significant visual impact on the approved sign program. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Higgins, seconded by Commissioner Perrine, it was unanimously ordered that the requested sign program be approved, as modified by Staff. (6-0-1, Commissioner wilkinson being absent for the vote.) 6. E 92-04 Wright, T. Consider the fencing request of Mr. and Mrs. Tim Wright for approval of a seven-foot fence along the rear property line of 121 South Leigh Avenue in an R-l-6 (Single- Family Residential) Zoning District. The Chairperson read the application into the record. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report noting the applicant's request for a seven foot fence is an exception to the Fencing Ordinance. He also noted the following: · The specific Zoning Ordinance that relates to the fencing policy does allow a six foot fence by right in a residential area. · The Commission is required to review the request since an adjoining property owner is opposed to the seven foot fence. Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 6 The objecting homeowner has expressed concerns about the height and the design of the fence, since her home is a designated historical site. Staff recognizes the concerns relating to the historic home, however is recommending approval of the seven foot fence, since the staff cannot review the fencing design issue raised by Mrs. Podesta. Chairperson Fox asked for clarification of the issue before the Commission. Mr. Haley explained that since the fence height issue is before the Commission, that the Commission has the option to also review the fencing design. Chairperson Fox asked if anyone wished to address the Commission. Mrs. Hellis Podesta, 140 Peter Drive, spoke in opposition of the request, she read the Zoning Ordinance relating to fence exceptions, and noted the following: · The historic significance of the home. · The proposed fence would detract from the historical merit and value of her home. · Her desire to preserve her home for public view. · The front room and front bedroom face Leigh Avenue, therefore, the fence creates a visual impact. · The Leigh Family entrance has been designated by a gate facing Leigh Avenue, the fence would abut this gate, and destroy the historical importance of the gate. · She circulated photographs of the existing fences surrounding the swimming pool, pointing out that they are of legal height and meet necessary safety standards. · She suggested that a fence be redesigned such that it would be compatible with the historic character of her home, and provide adequate safeguards to the Wright children. Mrs. Marlena Wright, the applicant, addressed the Commission making the following statements: · In response to the visual impact created by the fence, she pointed out that the area is nearly overgrown with plants and shrubbery. · Mrs. Podesta's home once belonged to Mrs. Wright's children's great- great grandfather, and she is sensitive to its historic nature. · The existing fence is an old basket-weave solid fence. Commissioner Alne asked Mrs. Wright to provide the Commission with Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 7 overriding reasons to approve her request for a seven foot fence. Mrs. Wright explained her concerns, as follows: The seven foot fence would be more compatible with the existing fence. Since the property is sloped a fence constructed of lesser height would have to be constructed in a stepped fashion. Her children's safety relative to the swimming pool. An open-style fence would cause her dog to bark at activities in Mrs. Podesta's yard. Chairperson Fox discussed the distance between property lines and fence placements. Commissioner Higgins asked Mrs. Wright to explain the type and size of trees and shrubbery mentioned earlier. Mrs. Wright briefly explained the types of trees and shrubbery located in the fence area. Commissioner Alne presented the comments from the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting of June 1, 1992, noting that: · Mrs. Wright is allowed to construct a six foot solid fence by right. The ordinance states that exceptions can be granted if there are no objections from the neighbors, and if there are overriding reasons why an exception should be granted. The Committee found no overriding reasons to recommend granting the exception. · The fencing that exists on the sideyards is currently stepped in three places. · The existing fences upon Mrs. Podesta's property do meet safety standards relative to concerns about Mrs. Wright's children and the open swimming pool. · The Committee recommends that the exception not be approved. Commissioners discussed the issues raised above and resolutions were discussed. Commissioner Dougherty asked Mrs. Wright if she would consider designing a solid picket-style fence. Mrs. Wright expressed concern that it was unfair to ask her to invest more time and money to redesign the fence and indicated that she would not compromise with the design issue. Mrs. Podesta stated that she had previously investigated the existing fencing that Mrs. Wright is trying to match, and found that no permits were issued until after the fences were constructed and the Building Division became aware that they were built without a permit. Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 8 Mr. Haley confirmed that retroactive fence permits were recently issued for the existing fences. Mrs. Podesta suggested that she and Mrs. Wright could work out a design compatible to both properties, and Commissioner Dougherty suggested continuing the item to allow negotiations to take place. Mrs. Wright did not agree, noting that she will construct a six foot solid fence. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Higgins, it was unanimously ordered that the request of the fence exception be denied, without prejudice, adding the following finding, as suggested by City Attorney, Bill SeHgmann: The construction of a seven foot fence would be detrimental to the comfort or general welfare of persons residing in the neighborhood and detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood, in that the fence abuts an historic home and the design and height of the fence would not be compatible with the traditional design of the adjoining historic home. (6-0-1, Commission Wilkinson being absent.) o Staff Report Review of the Planning Department Budget and Work Program for the 1992/93 Fiscal Year. Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki, presented an oral overview of the Planning Department's Budget and Work Program for Fiscal Year 1992/93. There was brief discussion between Commissioners. Commissioner Alne suggested that a computer based tracking system already exists and could be purchased at a minimal cost, loaded into the computer, and suggested it would be more reasonable than preparing a program that would take two years to implement. REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR The report of the Planning Director was accepted. OTHER ISSUES DISCUSSED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy spoke about the Site and Architectural Review Committee review process and the Communication Item received, from Tim Haley. Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 9 Further, she asked to be updated on the project on 50 Catalpa Lane. Commissioner Dougherty informed the Commission that the fencing request from Mr. Shemirani at 50 Catalpa Lane was reviewed by the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting on June 1, 1992. He noted that the Committee was supportive of the fence request proposed by Mr. Shermirani, however, that the Director of Planning was not. Planning Director Piasecki stated that there were additional problems associated with the project relating to transplanting of Redwood trees. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m., until the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of June 23, 1992, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. Respectfully Submitted by: Steve Piasecki, SI~CR~TARY Karon Shaban, Reporting Secretary Planning Commission Minutes of June 9, 1992 10