Loading...
PC Min 05/22/1990PLANNING COMMISSIONMINUTES CITY OF CAMPBRLI., CALIFORNIA 7:30 p.m. CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY MAY 22, 1990 ROT~.C3~-T$.: Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Staff Present: chairperson Perrine Commissioner Christ Commissioner Fox Commissioner Meyer Commissioner I. (Bud) Alne Commissioner Bruce Olszewski Commissioner Wilkinson Steve Piasecki, Director of Planning Bill Helms, city Engineer Phil Stafford, Principal Planner Randy Tsuda, Senior Planner William Seligmann, city Attorney Pat Masters Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of April 28, 1990, approved as amended (Perrine absent). Minutes of May 8, 1990, approved as submitted. MOTION: Commissioner Olszewski moved to approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 28, 1990, as amended and Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 8, 1990, approved as submitted. SECOND: VOTE Commissioner Christ Passed, 5-0-1-1, Commissioner Wilkinson absent. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION None. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. GP 90-02 ZC 90-04 Public hearing to consider City initiated amendments to the Land Use Element and Circulation Element of the General Plan, as well as city initiated zone changes in the area bordered by East Campbell Avenue, Harrison Avenue, Hamilton Avenue, and Highway 17 (~orth ~f ~ampbell Avenue Study Area). Chairperson Perrine read the application into the record. Staff Presentation: Mr. Phil Stafford, Principal Planner, reviewed the application focusing on the Land Use, circulation and Zoning issues and if the General Plan Amendment was adopted, how it would bring greater flexibility and added accessibility to the downtown area. Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1990 Page 2 Public Hearing GP 90-02 (Con't.) Commissioner Christ suggested the following: · Developing policies that would not mislead community; · Amending land use text to encourage parcel development; · Incorporating design guidelines for entrance to downtown. Both Mr. Stafford and Director Piasecki commented that relating to architectural design changing text was not considered, rather that intensity and consistency of development was being addressed. Commissioner Fox and Commissioner Alne expressed the following concerns: · Hamilton School Site - compatibility in development; · Disposition of Foote Avenue property if abandoned; · Negative aspects of the proposal, i.e., cost; · Salmar strip that connects to Harrison. Staff commented: Hamilton site being discussed by School District and should development take place, would have to come before this Commission; Foote Avenue would revert back to original owner; cost impact to City regarding acquisition of property, Salmar strip would remain a connection up to the new Salmar, due east. Commissioner Olszewski's concerns: · What structure(s) would be required to be demolished in the realignment of Salmar Avenue? · Traffic on Salmar - capacity rate? · Plans to keep traffic out of Page/Hawthorne/E1 Patio area; · Disposition of the Foote Avenue parcel that would be abandoned; · Impact of downtown traffic flow with Campbell Avenue; · What "tools" available for consolidation of parcels? · Poplar Avenue - designation for open space, would it be affected should the General Plan be changed? · Was there an economic analysis done? Staff commented as follows: Older buildings would need to be replaced, traffic on Salmar is still under review, no access to the Page Street, Hawthorne Avenue, or E1 Patio Drive neighborhood would be available, lot size on Foote Avenue would be of a developable size, new intersection configuration would support downtown traffic flow. Consolidating parcels into a larger development would offer incentive for master planning in terms of design, landscaping and would not be as readily available to the smaller parcel owners. Poplar Avenue would not be affected by the GP amendment, and an economic analysis was done for the Redevelopment Agency. Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1990 Page 3 Public Hearing GP 90-02 (Con't.) The Public Hearing was then opened. The following persons spoke in opposition of the application: Mr. Don Peter, Harrison Avenue, Campbell - traffic concern; Mr. and Mrs. Robert Amaral, 601 E1 Patio Drive , Campbell - traffic concern Mr. Howard Hubbard, 1824 Dry Creek Road, San Jose Mr. Hubbard is owner of property on Salmar Avenue objected due to cost of replacing buildings which are currently producing a good income. Mr. Ensel Pike, 535 A Salmar Avenue, Campbell His building would have to be moved. The following spoke in support of the applications: Carrie Williams, 600 Maple, Campbell Female Resident, 157 N. Harrison, Campbell Mr. Brian McMann, 149 N. Harrison, Campbell Mrs. Berera, 607 Maple, Campbell Mrs. Erica Goss, 420 Harrison Avenue There were no other speakers. The Commission asked that the Planning Department address the following issues: If Salmar Avenue is to be aligned as proposed by the staff, what types of signalization or other traffic controls are contemplated? Salmar Avenue should be used to facilitate access to the downtown area and should not be permitted to become a means for people to get "through town" as is the case with the loop streets. What, if anything, is planned to attract people to the downtown area and make them want to stop and get out of their cars? Information is needed on the exact size and capacity of the realigned Salmar Avenue. What will be the impact on Railway Avenue if traffic from Salmar Avenue is permitted to travel across Campbell Avenue and south on Railway Avenue? Information is needed to define the types of improvements that will be provided for "streetscape design" of the realigned Salmar Avenue, as well as details of the staff's recommendations for the design of any proposed cul-de-sacs on Harrison Avenue and that section of existing Salmar Avenue that will no longer be used for through traffic. Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1990 Page 4 Public Hearing GP 90-02 (Con't.) Se What will be the affect on traffic at the intersection of Hamilton and Salmar Avenues if the area develops in accord with the proposed amendments to the general Plan? Se If Foot Avenue is to be abandoned, what will be the size of the parcel that will become available for development? What "tools" are available to the City to effectuate the consolidation of parcels as proposed by the staff, and what is the time frame envisioned by the staff for development to occur that is in conformance with the proposed amendments? Compare the economic impacts on the City in terms of costs incurred by the City and tax revenues generated if the area where to develop in conformance with the existing general plan, as opposed to the amendments to the general plan proposed by the staff. Define the "interface" where the improvements being considered as part of the Downtown Redevelopment and the proposed redevelopment of the Salmar Avenue area come together. MOTION SECOND: VOTE: Comm. Olszewski moved to continue the Public Hearing to the next regularly held Planning Commission meeting of June 12, 1990. Comm. Fox. Passed. GP 90-03 ZC 90-03 Public Hearing to consider the following City initiated applications for the former Winchester Drive-in site: (a) General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Industrial to Commercial, and (b) Zone Change to change the zoning designation from M-i-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned Development). (Tentative City Council Meeting of Thursday, 6/21/90). Staff Presentation: Director Piasecki presented overview of application, followed by Senior Planner, Randy Tsuda, giving the particulars and specifics of the application. Commissioners Christ and Alne's concerns: · Traffic access to Cristich · Signalization Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1990 Page 5 Public Hearings (Con't.) Staff comments: Possibility of making Cristich Lane a public street and the widening McGlincey Lane; traffic mitigation analysis would take place for this project by the Public Works Department; Commissioner Olszewski asked: · What the interest of Cambrian Community Council is to this application; · Does the EIR include - traffic access, landscaping, etc. · Would a EIR be required, and if so why since there is no mixed use? Mr. Tsuda informed the Commission that the Cambrian Community Council is a group of concerned citizens who advise and support the interests of homeowners in the Cambrian area and that their position is not clear. Discussion continued between Commissioner Olszewski and Chairperson Perrine relating to: Building coverage and maximum height Entrances to buildings City Engineer Helms explains: · Judgment would be reserved until after a proposal is submitted. · Cristich Lane - City standards would provide obtaining it as public street The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Bob Dotch - opposed the proposal for parking reasons. Mr. Lopas, President of Paseo de Palomas, Inc., 295 Union Avenue, Campbell, supports application with following conditions: · Noise - provide buffer between properties. · Proper setbacks. · Landscaping. · Air pollution controls. · Adequate lighting to provide safety. · Provision of safety measures and maintenance during and after construction. · Continued communication to residents on all phases of construction. · No access/impact on entrance to mobile home property. · Loading dock/dumpster areas to be kept away from property line of mobile home park. · Proposed buildings should be one-story. Mr. Steve Ullan, 2640 Curtner Glen Court, Campbell. member of the Cambrian Community Council, requested a continuance to allow the Cambrian Community council adequate time to study the Traffic Report submitted by the Public Works Department. Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1990 Page 6 Public Hearings - GP 90-03 -(Con't.) Mr. John LaRue, Western Federal Savings and Loan, Marina del Rey, California, representing the property owner, requests a continuance and presented consultants who offered the following comments: · Deborah Kir, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., San Francisco, noted that the purpose of their assignment was to: - establish feasible development alternatives. - establish site value. - assess City fiscal impacts. - assess the nature and cost of off-site improvements. Noted findings were: · The site would support any of the following: - 300 townhomes - 620 apartments - 155 townhomes and 1 warehouse retail store - 325 apartments and 1 warehouse retail store - 2 warehouse retailers and ancillary shop space; or - 115 single family homes. - Survey of box retailers showed that of the 8 interviewed, 5 would be interested. - Fiscal Impact Findings illustrated that box retailers have the highest income, with townhomes-apartment retail following; that the land use alternatives generating the least amount of revenue would be high density apartments. Mr. Carl Springer of Nolte & Associates, 60 S. Market, San Francisco, addressed the Commission and discussed his company's assignment which was to conduct a traffic study; lower grade service levels; and, access to site. The following findings were noted: · Box retail would have the highest impact (12.5K vehicles per day), followed by townhome/apartment (6.5K vehicles per day) · Cost of acquiring and improving Cristich Lane is approximately $500K, and additional off-site improvements to McGlincey Lane would cost approximately $250K. Commissioners Alne, Fox and Christ had the following concerns: - Accuracy of report. - McGlincey/Curtner 2-3way stop - stacking of traffic. - Was report generated during peak hours? - Easement along Highway 17 - possible access? - AM peak hours would not have too much of impact on area, but PM definitely would. - Requested more qualifications regarding peak hours. Mr. Springer reported that City Staff had prepared the report and Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1990 Page 7 Public Hearings - GP 90-03 -(Con't.) assumed that the error rate would be small; that no one had asked the question regarding McGlincey/Curtner; and, that the report was based upon peak hours. Director Piasecki commented Cal Trans has reviewed the easement question; however, no action is forthcoming at the present time. Mr. Larue asked the Commission for a minimum continuance of five weeks in order that they may better review the information received at this meeting. Mr. Ken Pearsall, 945 Norin Court, Campbell, President of Cambrian Village Homeowners' Association, requested more information relating to traffic since congestion is a problem especially freeway traffic. Mr. Tom Tanner, 2871 Benjamin Avenue, San Jose, requested a continuance to provide necessary time for the Cambrian Community Council to review the issue. MOTION SECOND. ' VOTE: Commissioner Fox moved to continue the Public Hearing on GP 90-03 to the regular scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission of June 26, 1990. Commissioner Meyer Unanimously approved SUBCOMMITTEE RRPORTS There are no Subcommittee reports. RRPORTOFTHEPLANNING DIRECTOR The Report of the Planning Director was accepted. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, May 22, 1990, adjourned at 11:15 p.m., to the next regular Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Tuesday, June 12, 1990, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. APPROVED: Jay R. Perrine Chairperson ATTEST: Steve Piasecki Secretary RECORDED: Pat Masters Recording Secretary