PC Min 07/09/1991PLANNING COMMISSION
City of Campbell, California
7:30 P.M. July 9, 1991
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY
MINUTES
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:
Vice Chair, David Fox
Commissioner Robert Dougherty
Commissioner Mark Wilkinson
Commissioner Jay Perrine
Commissioner Alana Higgins
Commissioner I. (Bud) Alne
Chairperson Jane Meyer-Kennedy
Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki
Senior Planner, Randy Tsuda
Planning Assistant, Damon Golubics
City Attorney, Bill Seligmann
Engineering Manager, Bill Helms
Planning Dept. Secretary, Karon Shaban
Reporting Secretary, Lisa Burrus
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
On motion of Commissioner Higgins, seconded by Commissioner
Wilkinson, the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 25,
1991, were unanimously approved as submitted, (6-0-1), Chairperson Meyer-
Kennedy being absent.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 2 Jul~ 9, 1991
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. Items received after the packets were
delivered include:
· Letter from Robert Nicholas, dated June 20, 1991, relating to issues
regarding Home Depot, USA, Inc., for the Hamilton School Site and
Salmar Avenue.
· Findings and Conditions of Approval for Item No. 1, S 91-07 - 1265-1271
Burrows Road - Kurt Anderson, Applicant
ORAL REQUESTS:
There were no Oral Requests.
AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS
· Vice Chair Fox noted that Chairperson Jane Meyer-Kennedy would not
be present due to illness.
· The following items were considered at the beginning of the meeting:
o
GP 90-04/
ZC 90-13/
PD 90-08
Bowen, B.
Continued Public Hearing to consider the application of
Mr. Bruce Bowen, on behalf of Ainsley Development, Inc.,
for approval of a General Plan amendment from
Public/Semi-Public to Commercial; approval of a Zone
Change from PF (Public Facilities) to PD (Planned
Development); and, approval of a Planned Development
Permit to allow a 15,000 square foot retail center and a 4000
square foot fast-food drive-through restaurant, on
property located at the southwest corner of Hacienda
Avenue and Winchester Boulevard (3101 South
Winchester Boulevard)
Vice Chair Fox read the application into the record.
Mr. Steve Piasecki, Director of Planning, informed the Commission that Mr.
Bowen has requested a continuance to address concerns of the surrounding
neighbors. However, staff recommended that a public hearing be opened to
receive testimony.
The Vice Chairperson continued the Public Hearing.
Public Discussion
Mr. Rollins Cushman, 1274 Walnut Drive, expressed opposition due to the
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 3 Jul~ 9, 1991
following:
· Legal questions regarding flood control, public bid process required by the
State, City, and Federal government, and laws regarding property
condemnation process.
· Use of the property, i.e., park use.
· Possible legal action by West Parr Homeowners Association.
· Improper Negative Environmental Impact Report.
· Health issues.
Commission Discussion
There was no Commission discussion.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by
Commissioner Perrine, it was unanimously ordered that the
Public Hearing be continued to the next regularly scheduled
Planning Commission meeting of July 23, 1991.
o
R 91-04
(S 89-14)
Bamburg
Public Hearing to consider the request of Mr. Marvin
Bamburg, for a one year extension of a previously
approved Site and Architectural application to allow the
construction of a professional office building on properties
located at 1830-1836 East Hamilton Avenue, and 1670
Grace Avenue, in a PO (Professional Office) Zoning
District.
Vice Chair Fox read the application into the record.
Planning Intern, Damon Golubics, presented the staff report noting the
following:
· Size and location.
· Reinstatement and expiration of the Planned Development Permit.
· No changes in General Plan and zoning designation.
· Staff recommended approval of the Reinstatement.
Vice Chair Fox opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
There was no public comment.
Commission Discussion:
Planning Commission Minutes 4 Jul[ 9,1991
There was no commission discussion.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by
Commissioner Higgins, it was unanimously ordered that the
Public Hearing be dosed.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by
Commissioner Higgins, it was unanimously ordered that
Resolution No. 2760 be adopted, approving R 91-04, subject to
the Conditions of Approval, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
Alne, Higgins, Perrine, Wilkinson,
Dougherty, Fox
None
Meyer-Kennedy
5. UP 91-08
Mallory, C.
Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Chester
Mallory for approval of a Use Permit to allow a second-
story addition to an existing non-conforming single-
family residence, on property located at 1073 Lucot Way,
in an R-l-10 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District.
Vice Chair Fox read the application into the record.
Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki, presented the staff report noting the
following:
· Side-yard setback requirements.
· Architectural treatment of building satisfied Site and Architectural
Review Committee.
Vice Chair Fox presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee
meeting discussion of June 26, 1991, as follows:
· Original plans were rejected by the Site and Architectural Review
Committee.
· An architect was hired to revise the plans.
· The Committee recommended approval of the revised plans.
Vice Chair Fox opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 5 Jul[ 9, 1991
There was no public comment.
Commission Discussion:
There was no commission discussion.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by
Commissioner Higgins, it was unanimously ordered that the
Public Hearing be dosed.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Wilkinson, seconded by
Commissioner Dougherty, it was unanimously ordered that
Resolution No. 2761 be adopted, approving UP 91-08, subject to
Conditions of Approval, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
Alne, Higgins, Perrine, Wilkinson,
Dougherty, Fox
None
Meyer-Kennedy
Mr. Mallory arrived after motion was taken and informed of the
approved action. Mr. Mallory wished to comment on Conditions of
Approval, and Vice Chair Fox indicated that he would have a chance to
speak after Item No. 3.
MISCELLANEOUS
6. PM 91-03 Consider the application of Mr. James Chen for approval
Chen, J. of a Tentative Parcel Map, to allow the creation of 4
townhomes on a common driveway, for property located
at 875 Apricot Avenue, in a PD (Planned Development)
Zoning District.
Vice Chair Fox read the application into the record.
Senior Planner, Randy Tsuda, presented the staff report noting the following:
· Applicant's request for 5 lots, 4 of which would be used for townhomes
and 1 for a common driveway.
· Approval of application would satisfy conditions of approval for the
Planned Development Permit.
· Staff recommended approval.
Commission Discussion
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 6 Jul~ 9, 1991
There was no commission discussion.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Perrine, seconded by
Commissioner Higgins, it was unanimously ordered that
Resolution No. 2762 be adopted, incorporating findings and
attached Conditions of Approval, recommending the City
Council approve the application, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
Alne, Higgins, Perrine, Wilkinson,
Dougherty, Fox
None
Meyer-Kennedy
S 91-07 Continued Public Hearing to consider the application of
(PD 89-02) Mr. Kurt Anderson for approval of a Site and
Anderson, K. Architectural application to allow the construction of 4
single-family homes on property located at 1265-1271
Burrows Road, in an R-l-10 (Single-Family Residential)
Zoning District.
Vice Chair Fox read the application into the record.
* Vice Chair Fox noted the presence of Mr. Marvin Bamburg, and
informed him his item had been approved.
Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki, presented the staff report noting the
following:
· Previous staff report, dated June 25, 1991.
· Current application includes revised plans illustrating 4 single-family
homes instead of 5.
· Location.
· Consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation.
· Applicant's request for Planning Commission action on this date.
· Incompatibility with San Tomas Policy.
· Staff's concerns related to architectural design.
· Desired a review of the submittal with the Architectural Advisor.
· Suggested single-story units.
· Recommended a continuance to the regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting of August 13, 1991.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 7 July, 9, 1991
Commission Discussion
Commissioner Alne asked the applicant about the continuance suggested by
staff, and if he was aware of the request for a continuance.
In response, Director Piasecki stated that the applicant was informed and was
not agreeable to the recommended continuance. Further, Mr. Piasecki
contended that staff would like a chance to review the new designs.
Commissioner Higgins pointed out, relative to staff's comment regarding
compatibility in the area, that the homes surrounding Mr. Anderson's project
are similar in size, are two-story, and asked how the Commission could make
necessary findings requiring the applicant to provide single-story homes.
Mr. Piasecki indicated that staff prefers compatibility with the San Tomas
Policy, and that homes in the surrounding area are not good development
examples.
Mr. Kurt Anderson, Project Architect, expressed the following concerns:
· This application was before the Planning Commission a year ago.
· Previous approval was for 5 homes, and due to staff and neighborhood
concerns, plans were revised for only 4 homes, providing the following:
a. Greater setbacks.
b. Less density.
c. Retention of existing trees.
d. Increased open space.
· Relative to current building trends, there has not been any single-story
homes built in the last three years in Campbell -- two-story homes are
more economical to build.
· Opposition to review by Site and Architectural Review Committee, since
current designs are similar to last year's approval of the project.
· Parcels must exceed minimum lot size requirements.
· Setbacks increased from 17 feet to 28 feet.
· Parcels have 70% landscaping, well above the City's requirements in this
zoning designation.
In response to Commissioner Dougherty's question regarding pursuing the
project with alternative street improvements, Mr. Anderson indicated that he
would be agreeable to alternative street improvements suggested by the Public
Works Department, i.e., curbs and gutters, and stressed the urgency to proceed
with the project.
Vice Chair Fox opened the public hearing.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 8 Jul[ 9,1991
Public Comment:
Mr. Philip Driver, 1359 Juanita Way, commended the project architect with
his efforts that address neighborhood concerns; however, raised questions
regarding the "castles" on the adjacent corner.
Further, Mr. Driver suggested that the second-story roofs be setback to
complement the ranch style homes.
Commissioner Wilkinson pointed out the difficulty in visualization of the
proposed project, and discussed how two-story homes would provide less of
an impact on neighborhood privacy, than a single-story due to setbacks.
Mr. Driver stated that privacy is a main concern.
Commissioner Dougherty initiated discussion of the "castles," asking if they
were developed in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, and if
they are still consistent with the General Plan and zoning designation.
In response, Director Piasecki noted that staff objects to the "castles," relative
to the architectural style and massing, however, that the "castles" were in
conformance with the past and present General Plan and zoning designation.
Discussion ensued between Commissioner Dougherty and Mr. Driver
regarding other projects within the area.
Mr. Chet Mallory, 1073 Lucot Way, commended staff, the Planning
Commission, and the applicant, noting the following improvements to the
original design:
· Decrease in the number of homes.
· Revised plans.
· Architectural design.
· Use of a flag lot.
· Provision of needed housing in Campbell.
Further, he concurred with Mr. Driver's suggestion relating to stepping back
the second-story roof elements.
Vice Chair Fox pointed out that reference to the "castles" is an inappropriate
example to use when referring to the project now before the Commission.
Mrs. Susanne Waher, 1826 Estrellita Way, expressed appreciation for the
following:
· Revised plans provided to her by the architect.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 9 July, 9,1991
Addition of the porch element.
30' setbacks on the corner lot.
Increased landscaping.
Mrs. Waher indicated that she represented surrounding neighbors on her
street, and related the following suggestions regarding the project:
· Decrease tree massing.
· Eliminate 1 of the two-story homes to a single-story home.
· Expressed urgency to complete the project, and the urgency to review
the San Tomas Area Study.
Rich Taborek, 1441 Walnut Drive, concurred with Mrs. Waher regarding
commendation to the Project Architect for the revised plans and suggestions
relating to reducing one of the two-story homes to single-story. To avoid the
"cookie cutter" design, he suggested that the project consist of 2 single-story,
and 2 two-story homes.
Mr. Anderson expressed a willingness to address the above concerns by:
· Changing the building materials.
· Providing a perimeter of "canopy" trees.
He expressed a concern that the project could continue endlessly; he reiterated
his desire to move forward with the project; and, reminded the Commission
of the project's conformance to the following:
· General Plan and zoning designation.
· Setbacks.
· Lot coverage.
· Parking.
· Building height.
Commission Comment
The following concerns were discussed among Commissioners:
· Commissioner Perrine -- Referring the plans to the Site and
Architectural Review Committee, after approval.
· Vice Chair Fox -- Supportive of the project; however, expressed a
concern that a reduction to one-story units would change the
configuration of the lots.
· Commissioner Alne -- Opposed approval of the project; indicated that
the applicant's difficulty was self-imposed; and, was supportive of a
continuance.
· Commissioner Dougherty -- Reluctant to approve the project without
review of the Architectural Advisor, relative to massing, and suggested
holding a special Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting, so
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 10 July, 9, 1991
as not to delay the applicant any longer. The massing could be mitigated
by recessing the second-story element, and indicated support for the two-
story homes due to the size of the lots.
Commissioner Perrine -- Asked if the Site and Architectural Review
Committee could review the revised plans at their next meeting of July
10, 1991.
In response, Mr. Piasecki indicated that it would be possible to review the
plans at tomorrow's Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting,
or a special meeting could be scheduled.
Commissioner Wilkinson -- Expressed concern about the San Tomas
area, and outlined the differences between the "castles" and the proposed
project. He cautioned the Commission against approval without the
benefit of the Site and Architectural Review Committee.
Commissioner Higgins -- Concurred with the Commission and indicated
her appreciation for the 70% landscaping provision, and the addition of
porch elements.
Vice Chair Fox -- Noted his support for the project by relating the
following regarding massing:
a. Project is not overwhelming because of the site plan.
b. Each lot is a standard City block.
c. Adequate house separation.
d. Reducing to single-story would create problems with setbacks
and the house separation.
Commissioner Alne -- Pointed out that the full Commission has not
seen the 4 house plan before tonight's meeting.
Vice Chair Fox -- Suggested a tentative Site and Architectural Review
Committee meeting date of July 16, 1991.
Discussion ensued between the Commissioners, the applicant, and staff
relating to requiring a landscaping bond, and general support for the project
with modifications.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Higgins, seconded by
Commissioner Dougherty, it was unanimously ordered that
the Public Hearing on S 91-07 be continued to the Planning
Commission meeting of July 23,1991.
Vice Chair Fox noted Mr. James Chen in the audience and informed him
that his item had been approved.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 11 July, 9, 1991
ge
PD 90-07
Trammell
Crow
Public Hearing to consider the application of Trammell
Crow Residential South Bay Associates, Inc., for a Planned
Development Permit to construct a 348 unit multiple-
family residential project on a 12.4 acre site, located at 500
Railway Avenue, in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning
District.
Vice Chair Fox read the application into the record.
Senior Planner, Randy Tsuda, presented the staff report noting the following:
· Open space.
· Parking.
· Architectural concept.
· Colors.
· Staff recommends a continuance to the next regularly schedule Planning
Commission meeting of July 23, 1991, and requests assistance with the
following issues:
a. Open space and the relocation of the buildings.
b. Parking ratio.
c. Architectural concept.
d. Colors to be used in the project.
Commissioner Perrine asked about the industrial buildings located in Phase II
of the project.
Mr. Tsuda stated that a 100 foot area would be provided as a buffer, and access
would be provided through an easement.
Commissioner Perrine asked about what would happen should the parking
exceed the expected levels, where the overflow would go, if a condition could
be added to mitigate this concern, and if it would also apply to potential new
owners.
Mr. Tsuda suggested a condition requiring a parking management system.
The study was conducted in a very conservative manner, and staff feels that
the study adequately addresses these concerns. Mr. Tsuda noted that the
parking ratio at many apartment complexes in Campbell is below the parking
study's recommended ratio.
Commissioner Dougherty was concerned with the number of traffic signals
being put in on Winchester Boulevard within such a short distance. He
preferred smoother traffic flow.
Planning Commission Minutes 12 July 9, 1991
Engineering Manager, Mr. Bill Helms, informed the Commission that the
traffic synchronization system will be in effect in that area within a matter of
months.
Mr.
Bay
Joel Spolin, Chief Financial Advisor, Trammell Crow Residential South
Associates, Inc., noted the following:
Appreciation to the Planning Staff, Commission and neighbors for their
assistance in the development of the project.
History of the project.
Architectural benefits to prospective residents.
Financial difficulties in securing a loan for both phases of the project
concurrently, noting that most lenders would like to see the success of
Phase I, prior to providing a loan for Phase 2.
Comparison of the proposed project with others in the area regarding
parking feasibility study.
Renderings on the board, noting the high caliber and quality of living for
Campbell residents for years to come.
Informational meetings conducted with neighbors, received positive
responses.
Further, Mr. Spolin addressed two issues raised by Senior Planner, Randy
Tsuda, regarding:
· Landscaping - Trammell Crow has a strong commitment to provide
adequate open space and attractive landscaping. Also, Trammell Crow
has obtained 32% more than the City requires for open space by
providing a greater distance between buildings, thus creating less of an
impact to the Los Gatos Creek Trail.
· Parking - Trammell Crow has a strong commitment to provide adequate
parking for its residents, and requested approval of the 1.82 parking ratio,
repeated Trammell Crow's desire to use the parking sticker system, and
noted Trammell Crow's successful implementation of the system in
various similar projects.
In addition, Mr. Spolin stated that the project will be completed expeditiously.
Further discussion ensued between the Commission and staff regarding
parking issues.
Commissioner Wilkinson was concerned about parking, and approached the
displays on the board, pointing out potential problems with the distance
residents would have to walk to their units.
In response, Mr. Spolin indicated that guest parking is at a greater distance,
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 13 July 9, 1991
but residents would be provided with parking near their units.
Additionally, Commissioner Wilkinson was concerned with the length of the
drive through the housing project.
Mr. Lewis Bunch, General Partner, Trammell Crow Residential South Bay
Assodates, Inc., noted that that issue could be reviewed.
Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the cost of renting these units, and in
response, Mr. Spolin stated that rent would be $800-$1,075, based upon the
median income of the area.
Commissioner Dougherty expressed his appreciation for the additional open
space, but also his concern regarding the time between construction phases.
Commissioner Alne asked what would happen should after the completion
of Phase I, Phase II fails, due to lack of financing.
Mr. Spolin expressed confidence relative to the completion of Phase I and
Phase II, since successful development of Phase I would opt the lender to
finance the construction of Phase II. It is the intention of Trammell Crow to
complete both phases as soon as possible.
Commissioner Dougherty indicated that he preferred 3-bedroom units be
built in Phase I, and asked about parking during construction.
Mr. Spolin responded that Trammell Crow would try to provide some intern
parking areas during construction.
Discussion ensued between Commissioners, staff and Mr. Spolin regarding
the lender, California Community Investment Corporation. Mr. Spolin
stated that 49% of the units would be 2-bedroom and affordable to low income
families.
Regarding incorporating 3-bedroom units into Phase I, Mr. Spolin said it
would not be economically feasible to do this.
Commissioner Alne provided the following comments for staff:
· Supported the reserve parking concept, noting that if Phase II is not built,
then the reserved lot should be retained indefinitely.
· Preferred lighter building colors on the project.
· Supported open space as submitted.
· Approved of the architectural style of the project.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 14 July, 9, 1991
· Approved of the architectural style of the project.
Vice
Chair Fox made the following suggestions relating to the color scheme:
Use of a lighter color for the buildings.
Use of lively colors to accent the gable elements, railings, and vents.
Trim around the windows could be lighter than the building color -
white or light grey.
Introduction of larger plant sizes to shorten the building height.
Supported the reserve parking system.
Supported staff's recommendation related to the parking ratio.
MOTION:
On motion of Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by
Commissioner Alne, it was unanimously ordered that the
Public Hearing be continued to the next regularly scheduled
Planning Commission meeting of July 23, 1991.
5. UP 91-08
Mallory, C.
Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Chester
Mallory for approval of a Use Permit to allow a second-
story addition to an existing non-conforming single-
family residence, on property located at 1073 Lucot Way,
in an R-l-10 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District.
Mr. Chet Mallory addressed the Commission for clarification regarding street
improvements, dedication of road right-of-way, and the storm drain fee.
Engineering Manager, Mr. Bill Helms, explained the street right-of-way and
are standard City requirements. Further, he discussed the dedication of the
right-of-way and the storm drain fee.
Mr. Mallory thanked Mr. Helms for his clarification, and thanked the
Commission for its previous approval.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR
The report of the Planning Director was accepted.
Plannin~ Commission Minutes 15 Jul~ 9, 1991
ADIOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m., to the next regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting of July 23, 1991, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council
Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California.
APPROVED: David Fox
VICE CHAIR
ATTEST: Steve Piasecki
SECRETARY
Respectfully Submitted by:
Lisa Burrus
Reporting Secretary