Loading...
PC Min 05/09/1989 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 7:30 P.M. MINUTES MAY 9, 1989 The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular session in the City Hall Council Chamber, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California. ROLL CALL Present Commissioners: George Kasolas, Jay Perrine, Ronald Christ, James Walker, Bruce Olszewski; Planning Director Steve Piasecki, Principal Planner Phil Stafford, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, City Attorney William Seligmann, and Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent Commissioners Stanton and Dickson. (Commissioners absence excused by Chairman Olszewski - business and family related.) APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/S: Walker, Christ - That the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 25, 1989 be approved as submitted. Motion carried 5-0-2 (Commissioners Stanton and Dickson absent). COMMUNICATIONS Communications received pertained to specific agenda items, as well as an invitation to a meeting regarding the Ainsley House siting. ORAL REQUESTS There were no Oral Requests. CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar items. PUBLIC HEARINGS UP 89-05 New Jerusalem Church Public hearing to consider the application of Reverend C. Newlandi for a Conditional Use Permit to allow establishment of a community religious center to be located on property known as 555 W. Campbell Avenue in an existing office building P-F (Public Facilities/Public, Semi-Public) Zoning District. Principal Planner Phil Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of May 9, 1989, noting that Staff is recommending approval of this Use Permit. -2- Discussion ensued regarding the condition of the site; ingress/egress; number of church members; parking; and hours of operation. The public hearing on UP 89-05 was opened. Mr. William Moore, representing San Jose Water Co., property owner, stated that the water company owns the residential property immediately adjacent to the subject site. This should provide any buffer necessary for the church operation. Rev. Cherie Newlandi reported that the church now has 8 members, and will perhaps expand to 50 members in two years. M/S: Kasolas, Walker - That the public hearing on UP 89-05 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2589, incorporating the attached findings, approving UP 89-05 subject to the conditions indicated in the Staff Report of May 9, 1989, with the elimination of Condition 3 "Hours of Operation". Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Co~nissioners: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Walker, Olszewski None Stanton, Dickson. 89-01 Ainsley Development Continued public hearing to consider the application of Mr. Bruce Bowen, on behalf of Ainsley Development, Inc., for approval of a variance from the required 60 foot minimum lot width to allow one lot to be 57 feet wide in conjunction with a 9 lot subdivision of single family homes on properties known as 953, 971, & 983 S. San Tomas Aquino Rd. in an R-l-6 (Single Family Residential/Low Density, less than 6 units per gross acre) Zoning District. TS 89-02 Ainsley Development Continued public hearing to consider the application of Ainsley Development Co. for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to create 9 single family lots on properties known as 953, 971 & 983 S. San Tomas Aquino Rd. in an R-l-6 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size 6,000 sq.ft.). Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would be abstaining from discussion and voting on this item due to a possible conflict of interest, and left the Chambers at 7:52 p.m. -3- Planning Director Steve Piasecki reviewed the Staff Report of May 9, 1989; reviewed possible lot configurations and development for some of the lots surrounding the subject property; and, discussed the presented plan to combine some of the driveways thereby increasing on-street parking for the proposed cul-de-sac. Discussion ensued regarding the presented plans relative to discussion at the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting; conceptual plans vs. actual plans; and, project intensity relative to the rest of the area. Commissioner Walker report that this item was discussed by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is not making a recommendation, in that the applicant failed to address concerns on parking issues and excessive concrete at the end of the corridor during the Committee meeting. Commissioner Christ noted that the plans before the Commission were not available for the Site Committee's review. Additionally, the Architectural Advisor is favorably recommending the cul-de-sac. The public hearing on ¥ 89-01/TS 89-02 was opened. Mr. Bruce Bowen, applicant, discussed the proposed cul-de-sac configurations; the amount of parking provided off-site and on-site; the possible use of turf stone to lessen the impact of concrete; the shared driveway concept; project landscaping; and, setbacks of the homes. Engineering Manager Bill Helms responded to questions from the Commission regarding standard cul-de-sac dimensions, noting that the dimensions are standard but there is a higher than usual number of lots on the "bulb" (normally there are 4 or 5). This results in the bulb being tight with driveways, thereby reducing the availability of on-street parking. The presented plan for shared driveways has been used successfully in other developments, and it does increased the on-street parking. Chairman Olszewski expressed his concern with the lot sizes relative to the surrounding neighborhood; and, the number of lots on the "bulb". Commissioner Christ expressed concern with the number of lots being requested; and, the number of lots on the bulb being out of character with the area. He stated that the lot sizes were not inadequate; however, the shape of this lot is not conducive to the number of lots being put on it. He did not have a problem with the slight variance being requested, but did have a concern with the density being maximized relative to the large number of lots on the bulb. Commissioner Christ felt that this plan was unique to the City and he was concerned about the impacts. Chairman Olszewski discussed the possibilities of the applicant applying for a Planned Development Permit on the site to provide for creative solutions, and asked the applicant if he had given some thought to this approach. Chairman Olszewski noted that it is clear that the applicant wishes to keep the 9 lots, and it is also clear that the Commission feels that 9 lots is too many. Mr. Bowen responded that he had thought of many alternatives, keeping in mind that the Commission has not been favorable to private streets in the past. He was not aware that the number of lots on the bulb would become an issue. -4- Commissioner Perrine noted that he has sensed from the Commission that there is a concern about this neighborhood improving; and, this development proposes to stay within the R-1 zoning, the developer is reputable, and this development fit into this mixed neighborhood very well. Commissioner Christ indicated that his concern was solely with lot configurations - lots with very small frontages coming on to the bulb of a cul-de-sac, and the narrowness of the lots. He did not have a problem with lot sizes or with density. Commissioner Walker agreed with that the narrowness is there, however shared driveways improves the situation. One less lot does not seem to be an option that the developer can accommodate; and, the Commission has already heard from the neighborhood that they would welcome development like this. Discussion ensued regarding the possibility of a continuance. Mr. Bowen asked what exactly the Commission felt was wrong with the proposed subdivision map. He noted that various options had been thought out and he was not aware that the number of lots on the cul-de-sac bulb would become an issue. He asked that a decision be made on the item this evening. Chairman Olszewski noted that other lots in the area are much larger and will not be able to be developed further. So, whatever is created with this proposal is essentially going to be it for this section of San Tomas Aquino Rd. It should not be something too dense or crowded. Ms. Charlotte Day stated that she is not concerned with the cul-de-sac, and the appearance of this development will eventually impact the type of neighborhood this turns into and what will be done with other property in the area. She asked that any decisions may to upgrade the neighborhood result in the area remaining upgraded. Mr. Jeff Wyatt, Ainsley Development Co., assured the Commission that this subdivision will be very up-graded and something for the City to be proud of. It will be similar to the development on Hazel Avenue - only with a public street. He noted that the Hazel Ave. project had six homes on the bulb. Mr. Jerry Smith, 998 Crockett Avenue, stated that the City has made very little effort to help clean up the area. This developer is presenting a nice project that will clean up the neighborhood and raise property values. Mr. Joe Elek, owner of shopping center at San Tomas Aquino Rd. and Elam Avenue, talked about the poor condition of the area and the need for development to up-grade the neighborhood. M/S: Perrine, Walker That the public hearing on ¥ 89-01/TS 89-02 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 23, 1989. Discussion on motion Chairman Olszewski stated that he did not like receiving information so late in the game. The presentation of plans this evening did not allow Staff adequate review time. -5- Mr. Bowen noted that it was not his intent to circumvent the process, but to address the issues expressed by the Site Review Committee. The only change has been the combining of two driveways, thereby allowing more street parking. ComMissioner Walker stated that he would like to see if standard length vehicles would fit into the provided parking on the sites. He noted that he would support an approval if the plans went back to the Site and Architectural Review Committee for approval. The motion for continuance was withdrawn by Commissioners Walker and Perrine. M/S: Perrine, Walker - That the public hearing on V 89-01/TS 89-02 be closed. Motion carried 4-0-2-1 (Commissioners Stanton and Dickson being absent, and Commissioner Kasolas abstaining). M/S: Perrine, Walker - That the Planning Commission accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project. Motion carried 4-0-2-1 (Commissioners Stanton and Dickson being absent, and Commissioner Kasolas abstaining). Motion on Tentative Subdivision Map M/S: Perrine, Walker - That the Planning Commission approve TS 89-02, including the attached findings, subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Report of May 9, 1989, with the added condition that the plans go back to the Site and Architectural Review Committee and include 12 on-street parking spaces in accord with the conceptual plans presented at the May 9, 1989 meeting. Discussion on motion Commissioner Christ opposed the motion. He felt that the proposal did not create a reasonable subdivision, and it was not in accord with other subdivisions in the City. Chairman Olszewski supported the motion because of the additional condition. Commissioner Walker supported the motion, indicating however, that he was not happy with the tightness at the end of the cul-de-sac. Vote on motion for approval Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Perrine, Walker, Olszewski Christ Stanton, Dickson Kasolas. -6- Motion for Variance M/S: Perrine, Walker - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2590, including the attached findings, approving V 89-01. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Perrine, Walker, Olszewski Christ Stanton, Dickson Kasolas. The Commission recessed at 9:15 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:25 p.m. Commissioner Kasolas re-entered the Chambers at 9:25 p.m. TA 89-01 City-initiated Continued Public hearing to consider a City-initiated text amendment to address skateboard ramps in Chapter 21.02 (Definitions) and Chapter 21.61 (Provisions Applying to Special Uses) in the Zoning Ordinance. Principal Planner Phil Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of May 9, 1989. Planning Director Steve Piasecki, responding to questions from the Commission, explained that Staff is recommending a height limitation of 18 inches in an effort to address the height and noise concerns; however, the Commission indicated at it's last meeting that 48 inches would be more appropriate. Therefore, the recommended text for this amendment has been changed to 48 inches. Commissioner Christ stated that 18 inches was too restrictive; however, he could support a height of 36 inches with anything over that being subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. He noted that the noise from a basketball game in someone's driveway is just as annoying as the noise from a skateboard ramp. Discussed continued regarding the use of the Nuisance Ordinance relative to noise problems with skateboard ramps; the total permitted height of ramps - measured from below grade or at grade; the use of swimming pools for skateboarding; the height of the structure relative to it's portability; and, possible wording to address the issue of height measurement from grade or below grade. The public hearing on TA 89-01 was opened. No one wished to speak at this time. M/S: Walker, Perrine - That the public hearing on TA 89-01 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2, with Commissioners Stanton and Dickson being absent). -7- M/S: Perrine Christ - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2591, incorporating the attached findings, recommending that the City Council approve TA 89-01 with a height limitation of 36 inches, and additional wording in the text to address point of height measurement to read "Skateboard ramps which are higher than 36 inches above finished grade or are depressed more than 36 inches below finished grade...". Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Walker, Christ Olszewski Stanton, Dickson. Chairman Olszewski noted that he opposed the motion because of the amendment to 36 inches and the additional wording to address height measurements. MISCELLANEOUS Neighborhood Study Session Continued Neighborhood Study Session - Crockett Avenue, San Tomas Aquino Road, Westmont Avenue, and Elam Avenue. Principal Planner Phil Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of May 9, 1989. Commissioner Christ stated that there are some low cost, short term solutions, that could be included in the Draft Staff Report to the Council (ie. trimming the trees in the area to allow more lighting through; and having an engineer look at the drainage situation). Commissioner Kasolas noted that the Planning Commission was desireous of being pro-active - not reactive - in working with small neighborhood groups to show them what is available and at the same time assuring them that the City is not forcing anything upon them. He thought that the message should be given to the residents that they are not being threatened in any way. The Commission is only asking if they would like to have an opportunity to direct their lifestyles and changes. Commissioner Kasolas explained the public hearing/noticing process relative to any changes that might take place in the area. Mr. Joe Elek, owner of commercial center on San Tomas Aquino & Elam Ave., stated that this subject has been on the agenda for more than a year and it has been talked to death; however, the problems still exist. He noted that run down areas usually do not have sidewalks, and he asked that the Commission consider what it would take to put sidewalks in the area. Ms. Charlotte Day did not want to put in sidewalks. Mr. Jerry Smith, 998 Crockett Ave., would like sidewalks because of the problems with dirt/dust. He noted that there is a 10 foot easement that no one wants to maintain, and that just a curb and gutter might help. -8- Ms. Julie Smith, 998 Crockett Ave., asked for solution to the drainage problems but to maintain the rural look. She indicated that curbs & gutters may help define properties and clean up the area. Engineering Manager Bill Helms explained how someone could being the Local Improvement District process; some of the problems associated with putting in just curbs & gutters - usually need street improvements at same time because of grade variations; the basic engineering processes involved in putting in improvements; the approximate costs for improvements; the legalities of LID's; and possible funding and repayment issues. Ms. Lucy Allen, corner of Crockett and Westmont Avenues, spoke about the problems caused by traffic cutting the corner and going off the paved area. Commissioner Christ noted that the City needs to find out what needs to be done to improve the area and give the information to the residents so they can make the decisions. He mentioned the use of alternative street improvements as provided under the San Tomas Policy. Discussion ensued regarding drainage problems in the area; and, the process for starting a Local Improvement District. M/S: Christ, Perrine - That the report on the Neighborhood Study Session include wording to provide for an outreach approach by the City to provide information for the property owners/residents. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2, with Commissioners Stanton and Dickson being absent). M 88-23 Prometheus Development Continued revised site plan and landscape plan - 900 E. Hamilton Ave. Prometheus Development. Principal Planner Phil Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of May 9, 1989, noting that Staff is recommending approval. Commissioner Perrine asked if the need for the underground tunnel went away. Engineering Manager Bill Helms stated that the tunnel presented a security problem; therefore, the developer requested that the issue be decided upon when plans for the hotel are submitted. It was the decision of the City Council that a tunnel is not needed at this time. Chairman Olszewski strongly disagreed, noting that there is a substantial amount of parking that will be on the other side of a busy street, and pedestrian safety was an issue that was discussed at length by the Commission. Chairman 01szewski continued that the only reasons he supported the off-site parking was the underground tunnel that provided safe access for pedestrians to cross the street. Commissioner Kasolas asked if the plans presented this evening are consistent with the Commission's action taken on November 22, 1989. He asked what the development agreement said. -9- Mr. Stafford responded that the conditions of the development agreement go back to the original plan approval. Original conditions, in Staff's opinion, have not been changed. Commissioner Kasolas asked if the matter before the Commission was proper relative to process. The Planning Commission approved plans with pedestrian tunnel, and when the matter moved on to the Council - should that issue of the elimination of the tunnel (process-wise) have been sent back to the Planning Commission from the Council? Mr. Stafford indicated that the decision rests with the Council and that has been approved without the tunnel at this time. Before the Planning Commission, at this time, is a request for approval of a revised parking layout - this was a requirement of approval. Commissioner Christ agreed that the vote would not have been the same without the tunnel; asked if the Commission could recommend to the Council that the tunnel is needed to provide safe access to the parking lot across the street; noted that he is looking at this as off-site parking, and approval could be creating a safety problem. Commissioner Christ added that his vote would have been different on November 22, 1988, had the tunnel not have been there; that there is a need to address how that many parking spaces can be connected to the final destination of those people - the engineering could be in place and the tunnel not be built yet; and, if Staff is concerned with security in tunnel, then maybe there is a need to look at other pedestrian crossings which are safe. Discussion ensued of instances where the Commission had said "no" to off-site parking. Mr. Helms recalled that Staff had supported the tunnel to be used for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Staff would recommend a signal at the north end for a protected crossing, with another crossing at the creek. The crossing at the creek is acceptable from a security standpoint because is it partly open and can be seen. He explained the reasoning for recommending certain pedestrian crossings, noting that Staff will be watching the situation and will be prepared to recommend additional actions. Commissioner Walker reported that this item was discussed at Site and Architectural Review Committee. The applicant agreed to provide directional signage regarding crosswalk locations. Additionally, the vinyl black fence covering is done in better development, and won't attract attention when the landscaping matures. The Committee did discuss the sensitivity of pedestrian access. Commissioner Christ added that the Architectural Advisor spoke very favorably of the fencing. Chairman Olszewski asked about the grade levels of the parking and landscaping areas. He noted that the fencing around the parking area at the County Office looks terrible, and anticipated that this fencing will result in the same situation. He noted that he would rather see berming than fencing. Chairman Olszewski noted that he did not see any quality in this proposal, and it appeared to be a step backward. Mr. Stafford indicated that the grade levels are essentially the same. -10- Mr. Jim Black, Prometheus Development, indicated that berming was present, with fencing on top. Commissioner Christ expressed concern that time frames for alternatives or added pedestrian movements were not presented. Commissioner Kasolas noted that the Commission would like to exercise control for benefit of safety for the community, and would like to make it clear that the Commission would like consistency in things that appear before them. He continued that he would like to think that the developer is responsible, and will address the practical sides of the. issue. At this time the Commission should move to say that the presented plan is consistent with what the Council approved on January 17, 1989; however, concerns have been. Commissioner Christ felt that a better vehicle is needed than the minutes to let the Council know that some of the Commissioners would not have voted for this project without the pedestrian tunnel and that we have a concern about pedestrian safety. He thought that the concerns should be expressed in a separate communication, noting that it would bother him to a great extent if it took an accident to prove that better pedestrian safety is needed. Commissioner Walker noted that he would anticipate the development's tenant requiring additional measures, should the need arise; and, hopefully the new street will not be as busy as Bascom Ave. Commissioner Walker also felt that the Commission should communicate it's disappointment with the change to the City Council. Commissioner Olszewski discussed pedestrian safety issues, noting that it should be addressed with this development at this point - not later. M/S: Kasolas, Christ - That the Planning Commission approve the presented revised plans as being consistent with Council Action of January 17, 1989. (No vote. Motion later withdrawn.) Commissioner Kasolas stated that the Commission could send a separate communication to the Council indicating that the Planning Commission is gravely concerned about public safety, especially in those instances where there is off-site parking. Off-site parking is defined as that parking which is not contiguous with the applicant's site - especially in those instances where a public street has to be traversed from the parking to the applicant's site of business. In it's action of November 22, 1988, the Planning Commission considered the public safety issue and in it's decision determined that it was satisfied in the face that a representative was made for an underground vehicular and pedestrian tunnel. The Planning Commission decision may have been different if the plan had not included a pedestrian tunnel. Commissioner Christ asked that the communication be signed, or vote upon, by all of the Commission. It was the unanimous consensus of the Planning Commissioners present (Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Walker, Olszewski) that the communication indicating the Commission's concerns be sent to Council. -11- M/S: Kasolas, Christ - That the Planning Commission approve the revised parking and landscaping plans as submitted, and find them consistent with the City Council action of January 17, 1989. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Walker Olszewski Stanton, Dickson. Commissioner Kasolas left the Chambers at 11:45 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS TA Bg-02 City-initiated Public hearing to consider a City-initiated text amendment to Chapter 21.42 (Site and Architectural) of the Zoning Ordinance. City Attorney William Seligmann reviewed the Staff Report of May 9, 1989. The public hearing on TA 89-02 was opened. No one wished to speak at this time. M/S: Perrine, Christ - That the public hearing on TA 89-02 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Walker, Christ - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2592, including the attached findings, recommending approval of TA 89-02. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Perrine, Christ, Walker, Olszewski None Kasolas, Stanton, Dickson. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS There were no Subcommittee Report at this time. REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR The Report of the Planning Director was noted and filed, following a brief discussion of the Downtown Neighborhood Review issue and the Tree Committee. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:50 p.m. APPROVED: Bruce J. Olszewski Chairman ATTEST: Steve Piasecki Secretary RECORDED: Linda Dennis Recording Secretary