Loading...
PC Min 12/12/19897:30 P.M. CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY DECEMBER 12, 1989 The Planning Connission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular session in the City Hall Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California, and the following proceedings were had to wit: ROLL Commissioners Present: Chairperson Bruce Olszewski Commissioner Ronald Christ Commissioner David Fox Commissioner Jane Meyer Commissioner Mark Wilkinson Commissioner I. (Bud) Alne Commissioner Jay Perrine Commissioners Absent: None. Staff Present: Director of the Planning Department, Steve Piasecki Tim 3. Haley, Planner II Bill Helms, City Engineer City Attorney William Seligmann Karon Shaban, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF THE MI~: M/S: Alne, Meyer Notion to approvu the Planning Co~ission minutes for the mseting of Novesber 28, 1989, as su~aitted unanimously carried vith a vote of ?-0-0-0, Coamissioner Wilkinson abstaining dub to his absence at the November 28, 1989, meting. Planning Director Piasecki informed the Commission that communications were included in the Commission packets and pertain to items listed on the agenda noted the following co~ulications distributed at the Commissioner's stations, as follows: 1. Additional infor~mtion pertaining to Item No. 1 2. Additional information pertaining to Item No. 3 3. Two letters relative to the proposal from Pathway Society, Inc., recently denied by the City Council. There were no Oral Requests. Planning Commissi Minutes - 2 - December 12, 1989 P~BLIC ~ Knoernschild, H. Public Hearing to consider the application of Dr. Harvey Knoernschild, on behalf of the Recovery Inn of Campbell, for approval of a modification to a previously approved Use Permit, to allow minor architectural changes and an additional 525 square foot of building area to a 20-bed post operative care facility, on property known as 3751 - 3777 South Bascom Avenue, in a R-3-S (Multiple-Family Residential) Zoning District. Chairperson Olszewski read the Application into the record. Mr. Tim Haley, Planner II, reviewed the Application and discussed the Staff Report dated December 12, 1989. He states that Staff is recommending approval of the proposal modifications with the exception of the substitution of the painted accent band for the ceramic tile accent band. An aerial map and architectural renderings were displayed. Con~nissioner Perrine reported on the Site and Architectural Review Committee's discussion and noted that the Committee is recommending approval. The Public Hearing on M 89-20 was opened. Dr. Knoernschild addressed the Commission requesting approval of the proposed modification. Commissioner Christ noted that the original approval did not indicated on-site surgery and he asked what impacts this will have on the use of the site, particularly parking. In response to the question, Dr. Knoernschild informed the Commission that the State approved the pilot program over the year and a half ago, and that it has become apparent that the facility is in need of a surgery and recovery program. Further, he noted that the current parking available provides five spaces above minimum parking requirements; that only four additional staff members will be required for this use; and, that visiting hours are in the evening when traffic and parking are minimal. M/S: Meyer, Fox Motion to close the Public ll~aring o~ I 89-20 unanimously carried vitha vote of ?-0-0. M/S: Perrime, 6%fist ~otion to approve then 89-20, subject to the ~onditions of Approval, incorporating the attached findings, as redlinedunanimously carried on the folloeing roll call vote: Coumflssioners: Comnissioners: Co~snissioners: ~hrist, Yoz, ~eyer, Perrine, line, Wilkinson, Olszevski None. None. ..... lanning Commission ~genda - 3 - December 12, 1989 2. S 89-0S Neal, J. & Litle, G. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. James Neal and Gene Litle for approval of a Site and Architectural application to allow the construction of a single-story retail building, on property known as 2205 South Winchester Boulevard, in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Chairperson Olszewski read the application into the record. Planning Director Piasecki presented the Staff Report dated December 12, 1989, noting the surrounding areas, location, current zoning and size of the proposed project. Mr. Piasecki reported that the Applicant has submitted revised plans indicating a greater setback, reduced driveways and enhanced window treatment, to the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Architectural Advisor has reviewed the revisions and is receptive to the revisions. Further, Mr. Piasecki stated that Staff is recommending approval with the appropriate conditions Original and revised architectural renderings were displayed. Commissioner Perrine reported relative to concerns of the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting noting that the Committee is recommending approval with conditions addressing details as outlined by Staff. Chairperson Olszewski asked about the percentage of landscaping required by code and requested clarification regarding the revised elevations. In response, Mr. Piasecki stated that the landscaping required for this project is ten percent, and that the Architectural Advisor was concerned about the fascade extenuating the height of the building which would not be compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Haley indicates surrounding areas as illustrated on the architectural displays. The Chairperson noted that although he is generally supportive of the concept, he expressed concern that illustrations are not available indicating the adjacent building that will share a common entrance, and, that landscaping between the buildings is not indicated. Mr. Piasecki informed the Commission of an eight foot landscaping strip that would be provided along the western portion of the parking stalls. Chairperson Olszewski stated that this type of landscaping is not adequate. The Public Hearing on S 89-05 was opened. Mr. Eddy Shen, the Architect, in response to a request from Commissioner Alne, addressed the concerns expressed by the Chairperson, stating that the provision of the shared driveway increases the landscaping area by 12 feet and makes the buildings appear as one shopping center. Planning Commission nutes - 4 - December 12, 1989 The Chairperson noted that the response provided did address his concerns, however, he affirms his concern relating to not being provided with adequate illustrations indicating the relationship between the two shopping centers and the proper distribution of landscaped areas. Further, he stated that he would like to have Staff review these issues. Commissioner Christ concurred with the continuation and noted his concerns relate to elevations on the southern portion of the building. In response to the a question from Commissioner Meyer, regarding retention of existing Cypress trees along Winchester Avenue, Mr. Piasecki stated that the current proposal indicates removal of the trees, but, that Staff will investigate the possibility of retaining them. Commissioner Meyer requested that that be done. M/S: Alue, Meyer: Motion to continue $ 89-05 to the regularly scheduled Planning Cmsmission mting of January 9, 1990, carried on a roll call vote of 7-0-0. 3. R 89-03 Paisley, M. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Marty Paisley, for reinstatement of previously approved plans and elevations to allow t he construction of an industrial building on property known as 786 McGlincey Lane, in a M-i-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Chairperson Olszewski read Application No. R 89-03 into the record. Mr. Tim Haley presented the Staff Report, dated December 12, 1989, noting the following concerns: - Building design - Front setback - Relocation of parking spaces - Relocation of trash enclosures Mr. Haley stated that the Staff is recommending a continuance to provide the applicant with sufficient time to address these concerns, and that there have been delays due to various conditions from the Building and Public Works Departments. Commissioner Perrine presented comments relative to the Site and Architectural Review Committee, noting that the Applicant expressed concern that the City is responsible for the long delay in the project, and that the time lapsed for renewal of the application due to delays imposed by other departments within the City. Concerns expressed by the Site and Architectural Review Committee related to building alignment and the alignment of the striping details. Further, Commissioner Perrine noted that the Committee was amenable to approving the application since it was felt that the concerns are not substantial. Planning Commissio~ ,inures - 5 - December 12, 1989 Questions were raised relative to the requested setbacks and Mr. Haley explained that the encroachment would occur in the previously approved rear setbacks. Commissioner Wilkinson indicated that he would support the project as submitted since the request to align the building arose from the Planning Staff, that it is not necessary to have all buildings on a street aligned. Commissioner Alne concurred with comments made by Commissioner Wilkinson noting that since the application was previously approved by the Commission it was inappropriate for the Staff to make revisions at this time. Chairperson Olszewski opened the Public Hearing on R 89-03. No one wished to speak regarding this issue. M/S: Alne, Perrine Notion to close the Public Hearing unanimously carried 7-0-0. M/S: Meyer, Perrine ~otion to approve the request for reinstatement of the previously approved plans and elevations to allow the construction of an industrial building on property known as 786 NcClincey Lane, with revised plans returning to the Planning Department to be approved by the Planning Director upon rec~endation of the Architectural Advisor, carried vith the following roll call vote: AYES: Co~nissioners: NOES: Co~missioners: ABSENT: Comissioners: Christ, Fox, Meyer, Perrine, Alne, Wilkinson, Olszewski None. None. 4. M 89-21 Bowen, B. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Bruce Bowen for modification to a previously approved Planned Development Permit to allow a 20 foot adjustment to the northerly boundary of the project, on properties known as 32-56 Foote Avenue, 507-515 East Campbell Avenue and 31 and 39 Page Street, in a PD (Planned Development/Commercial) Zoning District. Chairperson Olszewski read Application M 89-21 into the record. Mr. Tim Haley, Planner II, presented the Staff Report, dated December 12, 1989, noting that the Staff is recommending approval since the adjustment would provide better site circulation and greater streetyard setbacks. He noted the location, surrounding uses, and square footage of the proposal. Commissioner Perrine reported on the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting of December 12, 1989, stating that the Committee is recommending approval. Planning Commission nutes - 6 - December 12, 1989 Commissioner Christ reiterates concerns he had at the onset of this application, that ingress only should be allowed along Campbell Avenue due to safety reasons and increased traffic in the area. Chairperson Olszewski asked where the 20 feet would come from and Mr. Haley responded that the requested 20 feet would come from a 50 foot wide parcel. Further, he indicated that the General Plan allows for this variation in boundary. Chairperson Olszewski asked if the Fire Department had reviewed the proposal, and Mr. Haley informed him that the Fire Department had been notified and that they offered no negative response. Commissioner Alne summarized that the 20 foot would be taken from a 50 foot lot and that the remaining 30 foot would go into the proposed residential development. Chairperson Olszewski opened the Public Hearing on M 89-21. Bruce Bowen, the Applicant, addressed the Commission requesting approval of the project. There were no others wishing to address the Commission on this item. M/S: Perrine, Alne Motion to close the Pablic Hearing on M 89-21 carried 7-0-0. M/S: Meyer, ~hrist Motion to adopt Resolution No. 2646 rec~ending that the City ~omcil accept the Negative Declaration, incorporating the attached findings, and approve the modification request, unanimously carried by the following roll call vote: Co--~issioners: 61rist, Fox, Meyer, Perrine, Alne, Wilkinson, Olszewski Co~issioners: None. Commissioners: None. 5. PD 89-17 Bowen, B. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Bruce Bowen, for approval of a Planned Development Permit to allow the construction of 32 townhomes, on properties known as 63-535 Page Street and 56-70 Foote Avenue, in a PD (Planned Development/Low- Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. Chairperson Olszewski read Application No. PD 89-17 into the record. Planning Director Steve Piasecki presented the Staff Report, dated December 12, 1989, displaying renderings, plans and elevations of the proposed project. Mr. Piasecki noted General Plan and Zoning consistency and indicated that the parking needs revision. He stated that the Applicant was amenable to altering the parking plan. Further, the Director indicated Staff's original recommendation was to continue the item to address the parking questions, however, the Site and Architectural Review Committee was Planning Commission k .utes - 7 ecember 12, 1989 recommending approval of the plan. Additionally, Director Piasecki noted a request from the Public Works Department that no access be provided along Foote Avenue. Commissioner Christ requested that Public Works respond to their request regarding access along Foote Avenue. Mr. Bill Helms, City Engineer, informed the Commission that the proposal is not dependent on Foote Avenue access, that access onto Page Street is more than adequate, that Campbell Avenue traffic has had traffic problems for a number of years, that Salmar Avenue may be realigned in the future, and that access onto Foote Avenue would encourage through traffic. Discussion ensued between Mr. Helms and Commissioners relative to the Foote Avenue access and the traffic study conducted by DKS. Mr. Helms concluded that traffic problems associated with this area can be mitigated. Commissioner Perrine reported on the Site and Architectural Review Committee's meeting of December 12, 1989. He noted that the proposal was acceptable to the Committee, that driveway and tandem parking spaces in question could be workable if the project boundaries were adjusted, and, that the Committee recommended approval subject to conditions imposed by the Staff and Architectural Advisor. Chairperson Olszewski expressed the following concerns: - Massiveness of the project. - Adequate open space. - Maintenance of planter boxes. Adjacent properties and owners of such. - Relationship between the adjacent family home and the proposed project does not conform. - Right-of-way to E1 Patio Drive. Director Piasecki noted that the Applicant owns all but one of the parcels adjacent to the proposal, and noted that the unowned parcel is a single-family residence. Commissioner Perrine stated that he felt the request for an adjustment would be an improvement to the site circulation and the overall design of the original proposal. Commissioner Fox explained that the Site Committee discussed three ways to mitigate the parking concerns, and that one of the issues was placement of the parking lot over the roots of an existing mature oak tree. City Engineer Helms informed the Commission that the area north of the site, the right-of-way to E1 Patio Drive terminates and that Public Works would like the unimproved street to become a cul-de-sac, unattached to the project. Commissioner Alne queried relative to where the requested 20 feet would come from. Staff informed the Commission that the 20 feet was taken from the backyard areas of the townhouse project and that the backyards are approximately between 9 and 15 feet in depth. Planning Commission utes - 8 - December 12, 1989 Discussion ensued between Staff and Commissioners Christ and Alne regarding back up space, yard depths, consistency along Page Street and the General Plan. Chairperson Olszewski opened the Public Hearing on PD 89-17. Mr. Bill Waters, 105 E1 Patio Drive, expressed concern relative to ingress/egress to the retail center, traffic patterns, use of the unimproved street along Southern Pacific Railroad access, sufficient room for vehicles to pass each other, and what will happen when the project is fully implemented. City Engineer Helms explained how the street pattern will run if Salmar Avenue is relocated. Further, Mr. Helms explained that there is no public access across Railway Avenue and suggested that Southern Pacific Railroad would take issue if vehicles violate their easement and right-of-way. Further, he stated that Page Street will be widened providing for better street circulation. Mr. Waters queried whether the City could widen the street without taking the empty lot and requested knowledge of the size and the price of the proposed townhomes. Chairperson Olszewski informed the speaker that the Commission does not receive that information. Commissioner Christ discussed how the Public Works Department will attempt to widen the street. Mr. Helms stated that Staff feels that there is sufficient space to widen the street for two-way traffic on Page Avenue. Ms. Morene Waters, E1 Patio Drive, requested information relating to the two parcels that were not acquired for this project, how the properties will interact with each other once the project is complete, and what will become of the mature avocado trees on the property. Chairperson Olszewski noted that Mr. Bowen, the Applicant, will provide that information to the Planning Commission in the future. Commissioner Perrine informed the Commission of the tree inventory provided to the Site Committee indicating 30 different types of tree species. Chairperson Olszewski directed Staff to provide information to Ms. Waters relative to the owner of the unacquired property and the avocado trees, upon request to the Planning Department. Jeanie Sherry, 603 E1 Patio Drive, discussed the current traffic patterns and possible impacts in traffic circulation this project will create, and expressed concern relating to the proposed open space. Further, she requested placement of a traffic signal at Page Street and Campbell Avenue. Mr. Helms noted that approval from the Public Works Department is based upon placement of a traffic signal near the Page Street and Campbell Avenue intersection. Planning Commission ~ .... utes - 9 - December 12, 1989 Commissioner Alne asked why the applicant was not permitted to have access to Foote Avenue and Campbell Avenue and if it is possible to get to E1 Patio Drive via the Southern Pacific right-of-way easement. Mr. Helms responded that the traffic report prepared by the Applicant describing the impact of street traffic concludes that access from Page Street is adequate for this development. Additionally, he cited that the approval of traffic report is based upon placement of the signal light, that Public Works Department feels that Foote Avenue access would encourage through traffic, and that there is a possibility of realignment of Salmar Avenue. Relative to the Southern Pacific Railroad easement, Mr. Helms reaffirms that there are no access rights to the public. Randy Presume, 103 E1 Patio Court, queried relative to the proposed Light Rail System and the proposed installation of a 20 foot sound wall. Mr. Helms stated that the Santa Clara County Transit District has commissioned an evaluation of the Campbell Avenue area for consideration for a Light Rail Facility, however, no decisions have been made. Additionally, he noted that the Applicant would be responsible for street improvements on their side of the street. Commissioner Perrine attempted to clarify questions by referring to the 31 Conditions of Approval imposed by Staff, noting that the Public Works Department's request for dedication of additional land for the widening of Page Street is covered under Condition No. 25. Bruce Bowen, the Applicant, addressed the Commission and the Public regarding the right-of-way, and compatibility to neighborhood homes and the traffic signal. Mr. Bowen noted that the property he was unable to purchase is owned by Mr. Finberg. Responding to the size and cost of the units, Mr. Bowen stated that the units were 1650 and 1850 square feet and will cost approximately $300,000. Further, Mr. Bowen noted the numerous revision to the project and informed the Commission of the carrying costs that he approximated at $15,000 monthly. Mr. Bowen requested that the Commission take action tonight to approve or deny the project and not to continue the application. Commissioner Alne pointed out that even though the APplicant has requested action, that Commission has authority to continue, deny or approve the application at its own discretion. Discussion ensued between Staff and Commissioners relative to what would be required for approval of the application. Commissioner Christ noted that he would like to have the final plans before taking action on the project and noted the following concerns: - Narrowness of units - Unit 10 is behind the other units - Parking - Depth of the backyards Commissioner Alne calculated the amount of money being lost monthly by the applicant and stated that he would support the project incorporating the 31 Conditions of Approval. Planning Commission ~utes - 10 - December 12, 1989 Commissioners Wilkinson, Meyer and Fox expressed support for the proposal. Chairperson Olszewski cautioned the Commission regarding the incompleteness of the proposal and indicated that the City Council may redirect the application to the Planning Commission, costing the Applicant more time. He noted the following concerns: - No information has been provided regarding the relations of the site layout with the railroad. - Parking around the oak tree is inappropriate use of open space. - Ingress and egress - Hidden areas within the project - The carrying costs are inappropriate to consider since the Applicant could have started his project earlier and did not. Commissioner Christ pointed out that the current proposal is two parking spaces short of what the code requires, that it has been proposed that the spaces will be provided by use of the open space under the mature oak tree, that there is no site plan to approve, that it is not the duty of Staff to approve a site plan, that if the Commission approves the application without reviewing the site plan there is danger that the plan the Commission intended to approve would not be the final plan approved. Commissioner Fox stated that Staff redlines plans all the time and that the Commission is not apprised of the changes, that the Staff is directed by the Commission to make certain changes and that is Staff's job. Chairperson Olszewski noted that he is interested in a better Campbell, a more harmonious neighborhood, and he is supportive of the overall project, but not without being provided details. Commissioner Alne, moved to continue the application and the motion fails due to lack of second. Commissioner Perrine noted his support for the proposal since the traffic study was done, Conditions of Approval were established based upon the traffic study, and Staff is satisfied with the project. Further, Commissioner Perrine suggested that this item should be continued for a special site review on Thursday, December 14, 1989, since the second Planning Commission meeting of this month was cancelled due to Christmas. Commissioner Christ cautions the Commission relative to calling special meetings for any reason since it would require that we do the same for all applicants, and suggested that the item be held to the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting of January 9, 1990. City Attorney Seligmann noted that it could be appropriate to hold a special Site Review for this applicant since it was the Commission that cancelled the next available Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Christ and Chairperson Olszewski indicated their opposition to holding a special site review. The Applicant stated that after numerous revisions and working and reworking the project with Staff, he feels that an agreement cannot be reached at Staff Planning Commission , .lutes - 11 December 12, 1989 level and, further, that it is not likely that he could have brought this to the Commission any earlier due to the number of revisions. Furthermore, he noted that after leaving the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting this morning, he felt that an agreement had been reached and now it seems that an agreement has not been reached. Jim Voyer, 106 E1 Patio Court, addressed the Commission stating that he owns one of the two homes built by Ainsley Development, that he has experienced the · consequence of poor finish work on his home, and cautioned the Commission regarding the importance investigating small details. N/S: ~hrist, Wiltinson: Notion to close the Public Hearing on ND 89-17 carried 7-0-0. Commissioner Christ made a motion to deny the application. Commissioner Alne stated that denying the application would be futile since it is apparent that Mr. Bowen would not abandon the project and most likely the City Council would send the item back to the Commission for reconsideration. Motion failed for lack of second. Commissioner Alne made a motion to reopen the Public Hearing in order to continue the item to the Planning Commission meeting of January 9, 1990; the motion dies for lack of second. N/S: Perrine, Wilkinson: Notion to adopt Resolution No. 2647 reco~nding that the City ~ouncil approve the llegative Declaration, adopting the attached Conditions of Approval, incorporating the attached findings; that the applicant present revised plans and detailed drawings to ~eet the City Standards for parking and that these revisions return to Site and Architectural Review Co~dttee which will ~eet within a week; and that the Architectural Advisor be consulted regarding the revisions. Discussion on Motion: Commissioner Christ noted his concern regarding limiting backyard area to make room for more parking and limiting open space. Director Piasecki suggested that part of the motion might include that the Applicant not be allowed to reduce backyard space more than 11 feet and that the minimum driveway depth be set a 20 feet. Chairperson Olszewski stated that as a Commissioner he will not support the motion, and as the Chairperson, he requested that findings and conditions be added to the motion. Discussion regarding the day and time of the Site meeting ensued and it was decided that the meeting will be held on Friday, December 15, 1989, at 9:00 a.m., in the Planning Conference Room. Planning Commission ' lutes - 12 - December 12, 1989 Chairperson Olszewski appointed himself, Commission Alne and Commissioner Fox to sit on the Site Committee for the review of this item. Roll Call Vote on Motion: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Cosaissioners: Commissioners: I/ilki--~on, Fox, Meyer, and Perrine Christ, Alne, and Olsze~ski None. The Planning Commission recessed at 10:55 p.m. and reconvened at 11:05 p.m., with all Commissioners present. MlSC~.~ANEOUS 6. commission Nomination and election of the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson of the Planning Commission for the year 1990. Perrine, Wilkinson M/S: Alne, Perrine M/S: Christ, Fox Motion to nominate Jane Meyer for Vice Chairperson of the Planning Co~sission for the year 1990, was unanimously approved. Motion to close the no~inations for Vice Chairperson of the Planning Cc~dssion for the year 1990, vas unanimously approved. Motion to nosdnate Jay Perrine for Chairperson of the Pl~--ins C~mission for the year 1990, was unanimously approved. Upon request of Chairperson, there heinE no objections, it is ordered that the nominations be accepted by acc]~tion of the Planning Co~aission. Chairperson Olszewski noted that the gavel would be transferred to Commissioner Perrine at the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission on January 9, 1990. S~ REPORTS There were no Subcommittee Reports. R~:ORTOF ~ P~DIRECTOR Planning Director presented the written report and addressed the following issues: - Council actions regarding the the applications of Mr. Steve Saray - The cancellation of the League of California Cities Conference which will not be rescheduled for this year - Reminded the Commission of the upcoming Advisory Boards and Commissions workshop Planning Commission i. .utes 13 - - Clarified suggested items to be forwarded to the City Council regarding the proposed Study Session - Mentioned the upcoming North of Campbell Avenue Study Session scheduled for January 17, 1990 - Addition of a Senior Planner to the Planning Department - Update on San Jose City Council action regarding the E1 Paseo de Saratoga Shopping Center ADJO~ The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 11:30 p.m., to the Planning Commission meeting of January 9, 1990, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. APPROVED: Bruce J. Olszewski Chairperson ATTEST: Steve Piasecki Secretary RECORDED: Karon Shaban Recording Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 2646 PLANNING COMMISSION BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, PLANS, TO ALLOW MODIFICATION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ALLOWING A 20 FOOT ADJUSTMENT TO THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF TItE PROJECT, ON PROPERTY KNOWN AS 32-56 FOOTE AVENUE, 507-515 EAST CAMPBELL AVENUE AND 31 AND 39 PAGE STREET, IN A PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT/COMMERCIAL) ZONING DISTRICT. APPLICATION OF MR. BRUCE BOWEN, M 89-21 (PD 89-07) After notification and Public Hearing as specified by law on the application of Mr. Bruce Bowen, for approval of a Modification to a previously approved Planned Development Permit, to allow a 20 foot adjustment to the northerly boundary of the project, on property known as 32-56 Foote Avenue, 507-515 East Campbell Avenue and 32-56 Foote Avenue; and, after presentation by the Planning Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed. After due consideration of all evidence presented, the Planning Commission did find as follows: The presented site plan provides improved site circulation and greater setbacks than those proposed under PD 89-07. e The project intensity and design concept are consistent with the site layout and building design previously approved by the City Council. Based upon the above findings, the Planning Commission recommends approval of the plans, elevations, development schedule, and conditions of approval as presented; and, further recommends that the City Council approve a Planned Development Permit and enact the attached Ordinance adopting said plans, elevations, development schedule, and conditions of approval for that portion of the above-referenced Planned Development Zoning District. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12 day of December 1989,, by the following roll call vote: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Christ, Fox, Meyer, Perrine, Alne, Wilkinson, Olszewski None. None. APPROVED: Bruce J. Olszewski Chairperson ATTEST: Steve Piasecki Secretary