Loading...
PC Min 07/23/1991PLANNING COMMISSION City of Campbell, California 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TU~DAY July 23,1991 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: Chairperson Jane Meyer-Kennedy Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Robert Dougherty Jay Perrine I. (Bud) Alne Alana Higgins David Fox Mark Wilkinson Commissioners Absent: None. Staff Present: Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki Senior Planner, Randy Tsuda Planner II, Tim Haley Planner I, Gloria Sciara City Attorney, Bill Seligmann Engineering Manager, Bill Helms Reporting Secretary, Karon Shaban APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES On motion of Commissioner Higgins, seconded by Commissioner Alne, the minutes of July 9, 1991, of the Planning Commission meeting were approved, as submitted, (6-0-1) Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy abstained due to her absence at the July 9,1991, meeting. Planning Commission Minutes 2 July 23, 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. He noted the following that were received in the Planning Commission after the packets were sent: 1. Letter from Larry Pedersen, relating to Item No. 3, 3101 South Winchester Boulevard. 2. Revised Conditions of Approval for Item No. 3. 3. Revised Findings for Approval for Item No. 3 4. Revised Conditions of Approval for Item No. 1. 5. Letter from Mr. Cecil Chan, Senior Associate, Barton-Aschman, regarding Item No. 3. 6. Letter from Robert A. Bryan, Trustee, regarding Item No. 3. ORAL REQUESTS: There were no Oral Requests. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no Modifications or postponements. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PD 90-07/ Continued Public Hearing to consider the application of SA 91-27 Trammell Crow Residential South Bay Associates, Inc., for Trammell a Planned Development Permit to construct a 348 unit Crow multiple-family residential project on a 12.4 acre site, located at 500 Railway Avenue, in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District. Application for an off-site sign to be located at the northeast corner of Winchester Boulevard and Kennedy Avenue. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy read the application into the record. Mr. Randal Tsuda, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, and noted support for the proposal with modifications to the following: · Parking ratio of 1.82 with a Parking Management Plan, and a supplemental parking area which will remain in place until completion of Phase II. · Relocation of the buildings to increase the open space and building setbacks. · Applicant's use of lighter building colors. · A new condition requiring the applicant to realign the loop street on Phase II. Staff's concern relates to reducing potential speed of vehicles. Planning Commission Minutes 3 July 23, 1991 A condition to require the applicant to enhance the side elevations facing the creek trail. A condition to enhance the building entryways, such as addition of a trellis element, archway, or a gable-type entry. A condition requiring the applicant to provide 24 inch box trees in an attempt to screen the structures and mitigate the visual impact of the parking areas. Require the applicant to provide a passive open space in the courtyard. Mr. Tsuda noted that the Commission is requesting approval of the sign plan, and staff is recommending that the final plan go before the Site and Architectural Review Committee for final approval. He pointed out that the site is unusually difficult to identify, the off-site sign proposal is similar to other signs for similar projects, and staff recommends approval. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy noted that she has fully reviewed the record and will be voting on this item. Commissioner Dougherty expressed concern that family housing would only be made available during Phase II of the project; that he preferred incorporating some of the three bedroom units into Phase I; and preferred that a guarantee be provided to ensure that Phase II would be finished. Mr. Tsuda discussed the financial problems associated with requiring the three bedroom units into Phase I of the project, and noted that it would be difficult to try and guarantee what the future market might be. Further, Mr. Tsuda indicated that the Redevelopment Agency may participate in the completion of Phase I, and informed Commissioner Dougherty that if the applicant wanted to modify the approval of this project, it would have to come before the Commission again. Mr. Joel Spolin, Chief Financial Advisor, Trammel Crow South Bay Residential Associates, addressed the Commission noting the scale model of the project provided per request of the Commission. Mr. Spolin discussed the provision of three bedroom units within the Phase I portion of the project and stated that it was economically infeasible. Further, he discussed the imposed Conditions of Approval, noting the following: · Relative to Condition No. 3 (a), regarding building entry enhancements, he stated that he is agreeable to providing these enhancements to the structures that face Railway Avenue, due to increased costs for this requirement. · Relative to Condition No. 6 (b), regarding fencing between the sports Planning Commission Minutes 4 July 23, 1991 court and the Los Gatos Creek Trail. He would like this condition deleted since it would provide more open space. Staff indicated that there would be no problem with deleting the requirement for fencing around the sport court. Relative to Condition No. 18, regarding the requirement for 24 inch box trees: He requested flexibility with that condition allowing a variation in the tree sizes, indicating that a new landscape plan would be submitted. Mr. Tsuda noted that staff's concern was for proper screening of the project. Relative to Condition No. 27 (a) regarding hours of construction. Mr. Spolin requested that the hours for construction be increased in order to expedite the development. Discussion ensued and the City Attorney noted that the request is in conformance with City Ordinance, however, that construction on Saturday, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., could also be allowed. Relative to Condition No. 41 (a), regarding affordable housing: Mr. Spolin noted his concurrence with the condition, however, asked that language be added to the condition to illustrate that the affordable housing would be provided in the Phase ! portion of the project only. Relative to Condition No. 49 (b) regarding the public service easement: Mr. Spolin requested that the public pathway be approved at 6 feet, rather than 12 feet. Mr. Bill Helms, Engineering Manager, stated that the 12 foot pathway requirement was in compliance with the standards set forth by Cal-Trans, relating to two way bike traffic. Discussion between Commissioners and Staff ensued relating to the width of the easement. Mr. Helms affirmed his position to comply with Cal-Trans standards. Mr. Chris Kober, Trammell Crow South Bay Residential Associates, noted the intent of the 12 foot easement recommended by Cal-Trans was to provide truck assess for maintenance of the pathway. He suggested that the applicant would maintain the pathway, which would eliminate the need for 12 feet. Further, he stated that he was not supportive of a 16 foot asphalt strip along that portion of the site; that there is a grade there and that steps may be required. Mr. Helms indicated that he would be amenable to working with the applicant regarding the easement, noting that he would like to comply with Cal-Trans guidelines. Mr. Tsuda noted the two issues being considered: 1) the width of the pathway, and 2) whether or not steps would be needed. He suggested the Planning Commission Minutes 5 July 23, 1991 condition be reworded indicating compliance with Cal-Trans guidelines, and that the applicant will work with the Engineering Department to address the grading concerns. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy opened the previously continued public hearing. Public Comment: Ms. Catherine Patrick, 760 West Valley Drive, spoke in opposition to the density being proposed; and the relocation of the par course exercise equipment. She asked why the public par courses would have to be moved to accommodate the developer. Commission Comment: Commissioner Fox expressed concern about staff's recommendation to require enhanced entryways and 24 inch box trees throughout the development, since these requirements may financially jeopardize the project. He stated that requiring 24 inch box trees throughout the project would provide only a short term solution. Further, that in a period of 5 years these trees would be the same size as the others. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy supported the request by staff for the 24 inch box trees. Commissioner Dougherty suggested varying the tree sizes. Director of Planning Steve Piasecki suggested placing the 24 inch box trees along the creek trail, and along the building where public visibility is possible. Commissioner Wilkinson requested that the fencing request for the sport court be eliminated, that the placement of enhanced entryways along the street frontage only would look too much like a "Hollywood Set," and asked that the easement pathway be built without steps. Commissioner Alne reminded the Commission that it is not the duty of the Commission to consider the economic conditions of a project. Further, he questioned whether or not the cost for enhancement of the entryways is as high as stated by the applicant, however, if staff's request is visionary, then the applicant has the right to be concerned. Senior Planner, Randy Tsuda, suggested that the entryway enhancement be returned to the Site and Architectural Review Committee for final decision, prior to issuance of a building permit. Planning Commission Minutes 6 July 23, 1991 Commissioner Fox indicated that he would like to see the hours for construction extended, and in response, Mr. Tsuda cited the Municipal Code limiting hours of construction, however, pointed out that construction between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays would be possible. Discussion regarding providing affordable housing in Phase I only was discussed. Commissioner Dougherty indicated that he would support that concept if the Redevelopment Agency had no problem with it. Redevelopment Director Robert Kass indicated that he had no problem with the request. Commissioner Fox, reviewing the request by the applicant for a 6 foot pathway, suggested that Cal-Trans intended guidelines be followed and requested that the City Engineer work with the applicant on this issue. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Fox, seconded by Commissioner Dougherty, it was unanimously ordered that the Public Hearing be dosed. (7-0-0) MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Fox, it was unanimously ordered that the Sign Permit be approved, that a recommendation be forwarded to the City Council grant a Mitigated Negative Declaration; that Resolution No. 2763, be adopted, recommending that the City Council approve PD 90-07, incorporating the attached findings, subject to Conditions of Approval amended as follows: Condition No. 3 (a) Enhanced entryways to be provided and given final approval by the Site and Architectural Review Committee; that Condition No. 6 (b) be deleted, that Condition No. 18 (a) be amended to allow variation in tree sizes, requiring 24 inch box trees accept in parking areasi, to be approved by the Site and Architectural Review Committee; that Condition No. 27 (a) add a provision to allow construction on Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.; that Condition No. 41 (a) be reworded to indicate that affordable housing be required in Phase I only; and, that Condition No. 49 (b) reflect the Cal-Trans guideline with approval by the City Engineer, and that the Revised Conditions of Approval be part of the application, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Alne, Higgins, Perrine, Wilkinson, Planning Commission Minutes 7 July 23, 1991 NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Dougherty, Fox, Meyer-Kennedy None None. 2. S 91-07 Anderson, K. Continued Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Kurt Anderson for Site and Architectural approval for construction of 4 single-family homes, on properties located at 1265-1271 Burrows Road in an R-l-10 (Single- Family Residential) Zoning District. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy read the application into the record. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Planner II, presented the staff report noting the following: · History of the application. · Listed concerns of the neighbors, indicating that these concerns have been mitigated. · That the buildings vary in color, that one-story elements are incorporated into the two-story homes, that existing trees have been retained, and that the applicant will provide 24 inch box trees and 15 gallon trees along the street frontage. · Building materials are varied. · Decorative fences have been added. · Staff recommends approval. Commissioner Fox presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting discussion of July 16, 1991, as follows: · The Committee is supportive of the revised plans. · Discussed the above-mentioned changes to the plans. · The Committee recommends approval. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy continued the previously opened the public hearing. Public Comment: Mrs. Susanne Waher, 1826 Estrellita Avenue, supported the revised project. Mr. Kurt Anderson, Andarch and Associates, 380 Industrial Street, requested approval of the project. Commission Discussion: Planning Commission Minutes 8 July 23, 1991 Commissioners Perrine and Higgins compliment the Architect for his successful plans. 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 Higgins, seconded by Commissioner Wilkinson, it was unanimously ordered that a Negative Declaration be granted; and, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2764, approving of the Site and Architectural application to allow construction of four single-family homes, incorporating the attached findings, subject to Conditions of Approval, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Alne, Higgins, Perrine, Wilkinson, Dougherty, Fox, Meyer-Kennedy None None. Commissioner Dougherty encouraged Mr. Anderson to provide alternative street improvements. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy recessed the Planning Commission meeting at 8:35 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:45 p.m. with all Commissioners present. 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). Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy read the application into the record. Planning Commission Minutes 9 July 23, 1991 Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki, provided a brief overview of the application, noting that the City Council referred the application back to the Planning Commission to address environmental concerns, asked the applicant to meet with the neighbors, and to receive input from the Santa · Clara Valley Water District. Ms. Gloria Sciara, Planner I, presented the staff report noting the following: An expanded Environmental Impact Study has been prepared, addressing potential noise and traffic. She stated that potential noise impacts can be mitigated by limiting the hours for the collection of trash and moving the trash containers to the center of the project, that a traffic analysis was prepared by a traffic consultant. · The applicant has met with the neighbors and has agreed to remove the drive-through element of the fast-food restaurant, and will be replacing it with landscaping. Input has been received from the Santa Clara County Valley Water District to require the applicant to ensure replacement of the percolation pond. · Parking ratio. The applicant has provided a trellis element at the rear of the property to address visual impact of the residential units located there. · That there would be no effect on the water table for surrounding neighbors. A Condition of Approval was added to request that the applicant provide a soils report. · The Department of Fish and Game indicated that the landscaping would provide enough vegetation to mitigate concerns about the provision of a natural habitat. · Staff recommends that the Commission forward a recommendation of approval. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy continued the previously opened the public hearing. Public Comment Mr. John Kelly, 466 Hacienda Avenue, spoke in opposition of the development citing safety concerns relating to turns into the driveway, vehicular speed, and children playing near the street. Commissioner Fox asked Mr. Kelly to point out where the driveway into his complex was located. Mr. Larry Pedersen, 900 Dell Avenue, spoke in opposition of the application Planning Commission Minutes 10 July 23, 1991 noting that the Santa Clara County Transportation Agency has identified the area as a potential "park and ride" lot. He asked if the City had a good process for relocation of the establishment, if the Light-Rail park and ride lot is placed there. Mr. Stanley Raider, 462 Hacienda Avenue, spoke in opposition to the project, pointing out that the Engineer's report fails to address the following issues: Elimination of the property for public use. · Impact on the water table. · Traffic impacts. · U-turns that will occur within the private street. · Grid lock along the streets leading into the site, created by the railroad crossing. Further, Mr. Raider expressed the following concerns: · Impact created by the 8 foot soundwall, and the back of the retail center may encourage vandalism and thefts to nearby residents. · There are already too many retail stores in Campbell that are vacant. · A letter written by Sue Tibbits, Santa Clara Valley Water District Engineer, indicates a clay condition of the soil and potential relocation of the pond on Capri Drive. · The original application was for 14,000 square feet and now the application is for 15,000 square feet, and asked why it changed. Mr. Rollins Cushman, 1274 Walnut Drive, spoke in opposition to the project expressing concern that there was no legal transfer of title to the applicant. Further, he stated that the collection of garbage before 7:00 a.m. would make a lot of noise, and asked how this would not impact the residential neighborhood. Ms. Sciara stated that commercial properties have their trash collected in the evening hours, that the Sanitation District will collect trash from the site prior to 7:00 a.m., due to their route and their schedule. Mr. Rollins asked what would happen if the applicant did not comply by the rules, and the City Attorney responded that if the applicant did not comply with the conditions of approval, the City would respond, however, the final settlement of the situation would happen in Civil Court. Further, Mr. Rollins asked that there be no heavy automotive operation on the site. Director of Planning, Steve Piasecki, stated that the use is spelled out in Planning Commission Minutes 11 July 23, 1991 Condition No. 1 of the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Pedersen asked the Commission to consider that if a restaurant is placed in this location, people would be running across the street to get food while waiting for the Light Rail. Mr. Bruce Bowen, Ainsley Development Inc., noted that he has attempted to address all the concerns brought forth by the neighborhood. He pointed out that the restaurant proposal would have to come before the Planning Commission for a Use Permit, and that would provide time for further public review. He expressed concern about the split block wall and requested that he be provided additional time to review alternatives to this type of soundwall in order to mitigate concerns of Mr. Raider relating to vandalism. Discussion ensued relating to what alternative materials would mitigate the noise impacts. It was suggested that soundwall details be referred to the Site and Architectural Review Committee, however, Commissioner Dougherty preferred the details be brought back before the full Commission. Mr. Stan Raider asked why the City is not investigating the issue relating to the illegal transfer of title. Mr. John Kelley noted his concern as well. Mr. Seligmann, City Attorney, indicated that the only issue being considered is whether or not the proposed use is a legal use of the property. Ms. Kathleen McGuido, 454 West Hacienda Avenue, concurred with comments made indicating that there are enough retail centers in Campbell already; that she opposed the soundwall; and suggested that the applicant did meet with the neighbors on two occasions, however, two of the meetings scheduled were canceled without adequate notice. Ms. Deborah Santos, 448 Hacienda Avenue, asked that the application be continued to allow more time for review of the development plans. Mr. Bruce Bowen clarified that there is a legal transfer of the title. He indicated that he would continue to work with neighbors regarding concerns and asked for approval. Mr. Cushman indicated that it is possible to do a legal transfer of the land if there is no public objection, however, he stated that is not the case. Ms. Carol Zimring, 456 Hacienda Avenue, noted that a request was made of Ainsley Development, Inc., that the survey nearby businesses to see if there Planning Commission Minutes 12 July 23, 1991 was any objection to a retail center being place at this location. She stated that it was not done. Commissioner Wilkinson noted that the Commission does not make judgments about the viability of a business venture. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Fox, it was unanimously ordered that the Public Hearing be closed. Commission Discussion: Commissioner Alne indicated support for the project noting that the use is appropriately zoned, the use applied for is an appropriate use for a commercially zoned area, no significant impacts are identified, and that the applicant has made appropriate attempts to satisfy concerns expressed by the residents. Commissioner Perrine concurred, and with regard to the local residents, he noted his understanding of the difficulty in envisioning a development where an open space has existed. Director of Planning Piasecki suggested that if the Commission is supportive of the application that the following conditions or amendments to the conditions be considered. Relative to Condition No. 1, he asked to add 1 (c), that no uses shall be permitted within the normal uses of a C-1 Zoning District without a Use Permit; that a condition be added to prevent any auto repair businesses at the site; that the restuarant approval be considered conceptual and will be required to have a Use Permit; that the soundwall and detailed site plan return to the Site and Architectural Review Committee, prior to obtaining a building permit; and that the applicant provide a detailed geotechnical and a soils report. Commissioner Alne requested that a gate be added to the alleyway to prevent public access. Commissioner Wilkinson asked the mechanism used to prevent public access provide visual access to the Police and Fire Department staff. Commissioner Fox asked that, relative to Condition No. 5 regarding the fendng plan, change the word fence to soundwall. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Planning Commission Minutes 13 July 23, 1991 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Fox, it was unanimously ordered that a recommendation be forwarded to the City Council to grant a Mitigated Negative Declaration; that Resolution No. 2765, be adopted, recommending that City Council approve an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan; that Resolution No. 2766 be adopted, recommending City Council approval of a zone change from PF (Public Facilities) to PD (Planned Development); that Resolution No. 2767 be adopted recommending City Council approval of a Planned Development Permit to allow the development of a retail center, incorporating the revised findings provided at the July 23,1991, Planning Commission meeting, subject to the Conditions of Approval, amended to require the applicant to obtain a Use Permit from the Planning Commission for the restaurant portion of the development; that the fencing plan and building site details return to the Site and Architectural Review Committee for review, prior to obtaining a building permit; adding a requirement for a geotechnical report; requiring the applicant to mitigate impacts relating to subsidence of water to residence along Camden Avenue and Winchester Boulevard, change the word fence to soundwall in Condition No. 5; and limiting access to the rear of the building by placement of a fence; by the following roll call vote: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Alne, Higgins, Perrine, Wilkinson, Dougherty, Fox, Meyer-Kennedy None None. MISCELLANEOUS 4. SA 91-23 Consider the application of Hunter Properties, for Hunter a Sign Permit to allow one wall-mounted sign and a Properties tenant sign on a previously approved free-standing sign located at 1650 South Bascom Avenue, in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy rad the application into the record. Mr. Tim J. Haley, Planner II, presented the staff report noting the following: MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - JULY 23, 1991 Size and location of the proposed sign. The proposed sign is similar in size and position of other signs in the area. Staff recommends approval. Commissioner David Fox presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting discussion of July 10, 1991, noting that the Committee is recommending approval of the application. MOTION: On motion of Commissioner Fox, seconded by Commissioner Perrine, it was unanimously ordered that the request for a wall-mounted sign and tenant sign be approved, subject to the Conditions of Approval, by a vote of (7-0-0). REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR The report of the Planning Director was accepted. Mr. Piasecki suggested the cancellation of the Planning Commission meeting of August 27, 1991, due to the lack of applications. He asked that it be placed on the Agenda for August 13, 1991. The Commission concurred. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Meyer-Kennedy declared the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of August 13, 1991, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. APPROVED: lane P. Meyer-Kennedy CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: Steve Piasecki SECRETARY Respectfully Submitted by: Karon Shaban Reporting Secretary