Loading...
PC Min 09/22/1992City of Campbell Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 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: Commissioners Absent: Staff Present: Chairperson, David Fox Commissioner I. (Bud) Alne Commissioner Robert Dougherty Commissioner Mark Wilkinson Commissioner Jay Perrine Commissioner Alana Higgins Commissioner Jane Meyer-Kennedy None Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki Associate Planner, Tim J. Haley City Engineer, Joan M. Bollier, P.E. City Attorney, Bill Seligmann Reporting Secretary, Karon Shaban APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES On motion of Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Wilkinson, the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 8, 1992, were unanimously approved as submitted, (7-0-0). COMMUNICATIONS: Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki, informed the Commission that communications received were included in the Commission packets and pertain to items on the agenda. One item regarding Item No. ! One item regarding Item No. 3 ORAL REOUEST$: There were no Oral Requests. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS; Planning Director, Steve Piasecki, recommended that Item No. 3 be moved forward and continued to the Planning Commission meeting of October 13, 1992, to provide the applicant sufficient time to address issues raised by the property owner, who is in opposition of the proposed use. Chairperson Fox elected to proceed with the agenda as posted. PUBLIC HEARINGS UP 92-10/ S 92-05 Fanelli, V. Continued Public Hearing to consider the application of Mrs. Virginia Fanelli for approval of a Use Permit and Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the expansion and remodel of an existing fast food restaurant (Jack-in-the- Box) located at 1450 West Campbell Avenue, in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Chairperson Fox read the application into the record. Planning Director, Piasecki presented the staff report noting the following: · Location of the site. · Requested use. · Explained that the Use Permit was required because the existing restaurant had not been required to obtain a permit. Site and Architectural portion of the application will allow for the remodel of the existing facility. The previous continuance was initiated to address concerns raised by Goodwill, the adjacent property owner. Goodwill is still concerned about the location of the proposed wall along the southern property line, and has expressed concern relating to lighting. Staff has added a Condition of Approval that will require the applicant to provide a revised site plan indicating the exact length of the southerly wall, for approval by the Planning Director. Staff recommends approval. Commissioner Alne presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting discussion of September 10, 1992, as follows: · The Committee was under the impression that all issues raised by Goodwill had been resolved. Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 2 · There was no discussion at the Committee relating to the length of the wall. · The Committee recommended approval. At the request of Chairperson Fox, asking why staff is involved, Director Piasecki explained staff's proposed condition would provide the opportunity for him to meet with a representative of Goodwill to see if there was resolution of concerns expressed relating to the length of the wall. If staff cannot find a resolution, this issue will be brought back to the full Commission. Chairperson Fox opened the public hearing. Public Comment: Mr. Joseph Fanelli, representative for Jack-in-the-Box, addressed the Commission, stating that he was not aware of concerns reported by staff, however, he is not opposed to the added condition initiated by staff. No one else wished to speak. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Higgins, it was unanimously ordered that the Public Hearing be closed. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Alne, it was unanimously ordered that Resolution No. 2813 be adopted, approving the Use Permit, and that Resolution No. 2814 be adopted approving the Site and Architectural Permit, incorporating that findings, and subject to Conditions of Approval, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Meyer-Kennedy Higgins, Perrine, Wilkinson, Dougherty, Alne, Fox None None TS 92-01 Bogdan, L. Continued Public Hearing to consider the application of Mrs. Louise Bogdan for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to allow the creation of six single-family lots on properties located at 1228 Harriet Avenue, in an R-l-9 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District. Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 3 Chairperson Fox read the application into the record. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the Staff Report, noting the following: · Background: This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of August 11, 1992, to provide the applicant with sufficient time to review staff's recommendation to phase the project. Phase I would create two lots allowing Mrs. Bogdan to satisfy a Superior Court order that the property be divided in half, and providing sufficient time for funding of City required street improvements. Phase II would allow the creation of 5 more lots, totalling a subdivision of 6 lots. · Current Status: Size of the lot and the location. Zoning and General Plan consistency. · Proposal: Each lot will provide access via the proposed cul-de-sac. Staff is recommending an adjustment to the lot lines between proposed lots one and two, and between lots five and six to provide additional street frontage for access to the cul-de-sac. · Historic Significance: There are three existing structures on the property, the main house, "Little-Martin House," the carriage house and a turn of the century barn. In February 1992, the City Council designated the main house, only as an historic landmark, not the surrounding property, nor the carriage house and barn. The Historic Preservation Board was apprised of the Tentative Subdivision proposed, and expressed concern regarding removal of an existing mature tree cited for removal; and that the barn and carriage house have significant historical value. The Board is requesting that the Commission review alternatives to demolition of these structures and the retention of the mature tree. Based upon these concerns, Staff has added a Condition of Approval requiring an historical assessment of all the structures prior to recordation of the final map. However, attached to the Staff Report is a professional arboricultural report indicating that the mature oak tree is in a state of advanced decay. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution requesting City Council grant a negative declaration and approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map. Commission Discussion Commissioner Perrine asked for a review of the Historic Designation Process as it relates to the existing structures. The information was provided by Mr. Haley. Commissioner Alne asked for justification of Staff's recommendation to phase the Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 4 project, suggesting that the tentative map approval be addressed at a later date. Mr. Haley responded that the applicant's request was prompted by a court settlement requiring that Mrs. Bogdan convey a portion of the property to her son. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if the Historic Preservation Board is the body responsible for assessing the historical significance of the structures. Mr. Haley stated that the burden has been placed on the applicant. Further, Mr. Haley stated that the Commission should consider the Tentative Subdivision Map approval, since the two structures in questions are not currently designated for their historic value. Chairperson Fox continued the public hearing for public discussion. Public Discussion · Mr. William Brooks, Attorney representing Mrs. Bogdan, 101 Park Center Plaza, San Jose, was supportive of the Staff's recommendation. · Chairperson Laura Moore, Historic Preservation Board, City of Campbell, discussed the Board's concerns: a) The Board conducted an on-site inspection of the property upon receipt of the applicant's Historic Landmark Designation Application. At that time the Board suggested that the barn and carriage house be included in the historic designation, however, there was no action taken by the City nor the applicant to do so. b) Historic Museum Coordinator, Patty Leach, was directed to survey the site at the last Board meeting, and she has provided a written survey and recommendation indicating that preservation of the barn and carriage house is appropriate. Further, there are only a handful of turn-of-the-century barns still in existence in the Bay Area. c) Removal or relocation of the structures should be considered. The Board would prefer that the structures be moved upon the lot where the Littleton-Martin House sits. Discussion ensued between Commissioners and Chairperson Moore relative to alternatives to demolition, including a suggestion to move the barn to the Ainsley House location for use as storage for the City's Historic Farm Equipment. Also, discussed was a structural analysis from the City's Building Official, Frank Cauthorn, indicating that the barn is without foundation and in poor condition. Commissioner Dougherty visited the site and was impressed by the property in its whole. He suggested that the City, the applicant, the Commission and the Historic Preservation Board work together to preserve the entire site as it exists. · Mr. Jim Tolosano, resident of the carriage house and son of Mrs. Bogdan, Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 5 explained the court agreement. He pointed out that a timeline was established by the court, therefore to defer the Tentative Subdivision Application would place a financial burden on him. Additionally, that keeping the property whole is not an option, since he is the owner of the barn and carriage house and it is his intent to demolish them or the City could to retain the structures for relocation if it is willing to purchase them. No one else wished to speak. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner Wilkinson, it was unanimously ordered that the Public Hearing be dosed. Commission Discussion: Commissioner Alne indicated that he could not support confiscation of private property. He further pointed out that just because property has legal designation as an historic landmark, does not determine whether the property is of historic value, however, designation was not obtained for the barn or the carriage house, which allows the property owners to do what is legally within their rights to do. He indicated support of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Dougherty indicated that he could not approve the lot split without knowing about the historic value of the structures in question, but more importantly he was concerned that the proposed street improvements are out of character with the surrounding area and with the Little-Martin House. City Attorney Seligmann pointed out that the Commission is not required to respond to a court settlement; that, as a matter of law, it is not required to consider the historical significance, since landmark designation has not been attached to the property or the structures in question. The Commission ceased discussion of the historical significance of the barn and carriage house and focused on the lot split. Commissioner Dougherty was still bothered by the proposed street improvements. Commissioner Wilkinson would not consider taking away an owner's property rights. Discussion of the suggested adjustments as Conditioned by Staff ensued. Chairperson Fox circulated a redlined subdivision map and reviewed the proposed Conditions of Approval. The circulated redlined plan was agreeable to the Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 6 Commissioners, except for Commissioner Dougherty. Mrs. Bogdan, Mr. Tolosono, and their attorneys indicated acceptance of the redlined drawing. The drawing was marked as "Exhibit A," to be included as an attachment to the Conditions of Approval. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by Commissioner Wilkinson, it was unanimously ordered that Resolution No. 2815 be adopted, approving TS 92-01, incorporating the findings and map labeled Exhibit A, subject to the Conditions of Approval, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Meyer-Kennedy, Alne, Higgins, Perrine, Wilkinson, Fox Dougherty None 3. UP 92-04 Irani, M. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mahyan Irani, for approval of a live entertainment permit at 499 East Hamilton Avenue, in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Chairperson Fox read the application into the record. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report noting that a communication item received by the Planning Department was forwarded to City Attorney Seligmann who has determined that the applicant has a valid lease which will allow him to act as the property owner in this case. Staff is recommending a continuance to allow the applicant time to meet with the property owner. Chairperson Fox opened the public hearing. No one wished to speak. Commission Discussion There was no Commission discussion. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Dougherty, it was unanimously ordered that the public hearing be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of October 13, 1992. Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 7 MISCELLANEOUS Chairperson Fox deferred Item No. 4 until after discussion of Item No. 5. 5. SA 92-33 Spoons Consider the application of Mr. Jeff Escott, on behalf of Spoons Restaurant, to allow a wall mounted sign on property located at 1555 South Bascom Avenue, in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Chairperson Fox read the application into the record. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report noting the following: The applicant is requesting a second free-standing sign to identify the restaurant's entrance. The request exceeds the current sign ordinance. Staff is recommending denial. Commissioner Alne discussed the Site and Architectural Review Committee's discussion of this item at its meeting of September 10, 1992, noting the following: The Committee did not feel that the request was excessive due to the unusual location of the signage and the location of the restaurant. Limited visibility of the current signs at two major arterials creates a need for identification. The purpose of the proposal is for identification rather than advertising. Presented calculations to support the issue of limited visibility. The proposed sign is architecturally compatible with the building. Staff's recommendation for denial cannot be substantiated. The Committee urges approval of the sign request. Commissioner Perrine asked staff if they would pursue denial in light of the Committee's recommendation. Mr. Haley stated that staff's position is based upon the current sign ordinance; that staff would support the relocation of the existing signs. Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy asked staff to discuss the visibility concern. Mr. Haley stated that the trees blocking the existing signage belong to an Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 8 adjacent property owner; that the canopy attached to the adjacent chevron Station further blocks the view of the existing sign. Chairperson Fox concurred with Commissioner Alne's support of the proposal. Commissioners Dougherty and Meyer-Kennedy indicated support for staff's recommendation of denial. Chairperson Fox asked the applicant to come forward. Mr. Jeff Escott, on behalf of Spoons Restaurant, stated that the purpose of the additional sign was to identify the entrance to potential customers; the sign is compatible with the building; and helps to establish a festive atmosphere to the entrance. Further, Mr. Escott pointed out that the plan presented was previously approved by the Planning Commission, and that review of the design elements was the only item that was to come before the Commission. He requested support. Commissioner Alne reviewed the previous approval in support of the applicant's statements noting that the sing request is approved, that the Condition of Approval requiring the applicant to return to the Commission was for design detail, only. He suggested that deferring design issues creates situations of this type. He urged the Commission to express all reservations at the time the application is heard in order to prevent confusion, and to provide the applicant with a clear understanding of the Commission's intent. MOTION: A motion by Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy to support staff's recommendation and deny the application failed (2-5-0). MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Alne, seconded by Commissioner Higgins, the signing request was approved, (5-2-0) Commissioners Dougherty and Meyer-Kennedy voting no. Chairperson Fox directed staff to present the Item No. 4, relating to establishing a tree ordinance to preserve heritage trees in Campbell. Mr. Steve Piasecki stated that during a recent Study Session between the City Council and the Planning Commission, the Council indicated that it would not be interested in pursuing a tree ordinance at this time; that the tree Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 9 ordinance should not be done in conjunction with the Land Use Element; and, that a tree policy could be studied and implemented. However, if the Commission wants to pursue implementation of a policy the Commission should consider the following: The current budget does not include a work program to support development of a tree ordinance. There is no staff available to support enforcement of such an ordinance. Commission Wilkinson suggested that the public would provide enforcement, since when a mature tree is in danger of being removed, they call Commissioners and the Planning Department. Chairperson Fox suggested developers to be required to provide arborist reports for any mature trees cited for removal. Mr. Piasecki argued that since development of such an ordinance is not appropriate at this time since the department's authorized work program would require too much staff time such as: A detailed survey would have to be done to identify all trees in the City, distinguishing which trees would have to be designated as heritage trees, A review of a tree protection plan would be required, Investigation of trees cited for removal, and Enforcement. Commissioner Dougherty asked that staff investigate providing more public awareness of tree maintenance and preservation. Mr. Tim Haley, Associate Planner, cautioned that the Commission against placing too many restrictions on developers, suggesting that developers could potentially remove all trees prior to filing an application in order to avoid stringent requirements. REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR The written and oral report of the Planning Director was accepted. Discussion relating to the Congestion Management Deficiency Plan was initiated by Chairperson Fox who expressed concern relating to restriction of on-street parking. Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 10 ADIOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m., to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of October 13, 1992, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. ATT Steve- Piasecki, SECRETARY Respectfully Submitted by: Karon Shaban, Reporting Secretary Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1992 11