Loading...
PC Min - 11/14/2006 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY NOVEMBER 14, 2006 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of November 14, 2006, was called to order at 7:32 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Alderete and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioners Absent: Commissioner: Staff Present: Community Development Director: Senior Planner: Associate Planner: Planner II: Planner I: Planning Intern: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: APPROVAL OF MINUTES Bob Alderete Michael Rocha Mark Ebner Tom Francois Elizabeth Gibbons Bob Roseberry George Doorley Sharon Fierro Jackie C. Young Lind Tim J. Haley Kimberly Brosseau Steve Prosser Noah Downing William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Gibbons, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of October 24, 2006, were approved. (6-0-1; Commissioner Doorley was absent) Motion: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 2 COMMUNICATIONS There were the following Communications Items: 1. Nine letters regarding Agenda Item No.1. 2. Two letters regarding Agenda Item NO.2. Ms. Jackie C. Young Lind, Senior Planner, introduced Kimberly Brosseau, Planner II, and Noah Downing, Planning Intern. She then invited Daniel Vanwie, Planning Intern to join her at the podium for a presentation. Chair Alderete read from the Resolution for Daniel Vanwie, listing his projects and accomplishments during his tenure between August and November 2006. Mr. Daniel Vanwie thanked the Commission and staff and said that it has been an honor to work with the Planning Division. The experience was more than he had imagined it would be. It was both fun and a great work experience and he was treated with great respect. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda Modifications or Postponements. ORAL REQUESTS There were no Oral Requests. *** PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Alderete read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows: 1. PLN2006-109 Firsty, W. Continued Public Hearing (from the Planning Commission meeting of October 24, 2006) to consider the application of Mr. Wayne Firsty for a Variance (PLN2006-109) to a required garage setback to allow a single-family addition on property owned by Wayne and Julie Firsty located at 1124 Bent Drive in an R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that this item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting held on October 24, 2006, so that staff could verify the specific dimensions of the existing garage. . Said that considerable discussion was held at the October 24, hearing. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 3 . Described the existing garage as 18'6" by 20'6" with an encroachment into the garage by a 2 x 7 closet from an attached den/bedroom. . Described the original garage proposed at 25' wide by 18'3" deep. The revised proposed was reduced to 23'6 deep by 25' wide. . Stated that staff is recommending a smaller garage with the minimum required 20 foot depth and 25 foot width. . Said that staff first recommendation is denial of the applicant's request. However, if the Commission elects to approve the Variance, staff is recommending the reduction to 23-foot depth versus 25 feet. . Reported that a number of correspondence items were received from the surrounding neighbors. Commissioner Gibbons asked for the original garage proposal. Planner Tim J. Haley replied 25 x 25. Commissioner Gibbons asked for clarification of the Variance requested being 6 feet, 9 inches. Planner Tim J. Haley replied that the proposed resulting setback was at 18 feet, three inches instead of the required 25 feet. Commissioner Gibbons asked if the revised proposal results in a 20 foot setback instead of the required 25 foot. Chair Alderete asked the difference between the 6 foot, 9 inch Variance request from last time compared to now. Planner Tim J. Haley replied that it depends on which option is selected. The applicant is requesting a 6 foot, 9 inch addition to his garage. This setback could be reduced to five feet by reducing the deficit setback by 1 foot, nine inches. He said that staff is recommending a 20 foot depth. Chair Alderete opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 Mr. Wayne Firsty, Applicant and Property Owner, · Thanked the Commission for allowing him to present his request. · Said that he listened closely to the issues raised at the last meeting. · Stated that he is not proposing a Variance for five feet. · Provided an exhibit that listed the car widths of many vehicles and reported that sedans on average are 16 feet long. Mini vans are just under 17 feet long. · Added that with a reasonable family size vehicle there is just three feet left in the 20-foot deep garage. With the wall and garage door clearance that is reduced to just two feet. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 4 · Pointed out the problems with that little space in emptying out a truck or removing a child from the car. · Said that his request actual results in a 25-foot setback from the public right- of-way. · Suggested that his request is not actually setting precedent as he located 14 houses within a few blocks that have reduced garage setbacks. · Said that he doubts this garage extension would damage neighbors' views, as the impact is almost non-existent. · Added that he is willing to install a nine-foot landscape area to screen for his neighbors. · Reiterated that they don't want to change the character of their neighborhood but rather want to keep it alive. · Said that the Planning Commission should approve his request per his neighbor, Larry Goldberg's letter. Larry is an original owner in this neighborhood who is supportive. · Reminded that this garage would not stick out any more than the house. · Said that they had heard the concerns raised and made changes to address this. · Said that they would be further beautifying the neighborhood by removing some of the concrete in the front yard. · Assured that their remodel would increase values of surrounding houses. · Stated that this meets their needs while retaining the character of the community. Commissioner Ebner said that this request is just about two feet less than the original request. He asked if the Firstys had considered the removal of the projection into the garage, which is a closet in the adjacent den. Mr. Wayne Firsty said that this was not a practical option. Commissioner Ebner said that if they lose that closet they would have a straight wall in the garage. The wall leading into the family room could be reconfigured into a replacement closet for that den. Mr. Wayne Firsty said that there is piping and water there. Chair Alderete said that he recalls from the previous meeting that the Commission might be more inclined to be supportive if the Variance was for two to three feet but it appears to be approximately five feet. He said that the issue has been exhausted. If there is not a way to get to that point, there remains a problem. Mr. Wayne Firsty said that he remembers a four to five foot limit. Chair Alderete said that they could agree to disagree on that point. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 5 Mr. Robert J. Williams, Resident on Bent Drive: . Said that he lives next door to the east and has lived there since 1963. . Said that he likes the neighborhood as it is. . Reported that he had delivered a letter to the Commission that was received by the Commission tonight and summarized its contents as follows. The Commission is the finder of facts. It is required to make five findings and his letter outlines two required findings (3 and 4) that cannot be supported. Finding 3 requires the existence of exceptional or extraordinary conditions that do not exist in this case. . Stated that he and his wife have resided in their home for 43 years. They raised their four children in this house. . Said that this request is a frontal attack on the spaciousness of the street and the relation between residences with the neighborhood. . Said that the Planning Commission is the jurisdiction to apply Zoning Ordinances. . Reported that there are CC&Rs in this neighborhood that was built under County jurisdiction that states that any setback is limited to 25 feet. That is the contractual setback. . Reiterated that this is not just a two to three foot Variance but rather a whole frontal assault on the appearance of this neighborhood. . Reminded that the staff recommendation is to limit the Variance to two feet and he could probably live with that. . Expressed confusion that there are findings that have been provided by staff that are the same for both approval and denial of this Variance request and questioned the appropriateness of that. Ms. Carole Williams, Resident on Bent Drive: . Thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak. . Said that she has lived on Bent Drive since 1963. . Said that at the last meeting the Commission commented on the charm of this neighborhood. . Stated that the neighborhood has gracious setbacks, individuality and charm. . Reported that one neighbor who had signed a letter of support in August didn't see the plan of what was proposed and is no longer supportive. . Said that the proposal for a 27 -foot wide garage creates considerable mass. . Said that if a Variance is granted, a precedent is set and others may ask for the same thing and the charm of the neighborhood would be deteriorated with a loss in property values. . Asked that the Commission not allow this Variance, as there are other options with less of an impact on the neighborhood. . Added that if the decision is to allow this Variance, the applicant should be required to install stakes and tape that gives an accurate depiction of the proposed width and height of this garage. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 6 Commissioner Gibbons cautioned that one of the other options would be to go to a two-story addition, which might have an even greater impact. Ms. Carole Williams said not necessarily as there is space in the rear yard. She said she hoped that there would not be a two-story as there are no two-story homes on this block. Chair Alderete closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Commissioner Rocha provided the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this request on October 10, 2006, and was not supportive. Commissioner Francois pointed out that a Variance was approved for a house on Cameo with a similar issue although he does not recall how many feet that Variance was for. He said before he says anything further he would like to hear with the other Commissioners have to say. Commissioner Roseberry: . Said that there are the same issues tonight as there were at the last hearing on this request. . Pointed out that he has a 20-foot deep garage and is able to park a Ford F250 truck in that garage. . Said that the Williams have brought good points to the table and that he appreciates their input. . Said that one issue is that a two-story could be an alternative and could be worse. . Said that he cannot bring himself to make the required findings to support this Variance, as this is a similar lot to the others in the neighborhood. . Said that there are some solutions available and that he was looking for a good faith effort on the behalf of the applicant but does not get the sense that this has been done. . Added that reducing the size by one foot, nine inches is not a big deal. . Said that a two-foot Variance that would allow a 23-foot setback instead of the required 25-foot setback is something he could probably support. . Said that he can agree with the issue of massing. . Concluded by saying he would not be supportive. Commissioner Gibbons: . Said that solid points were made and she agrees with Commissioner Roseberry. . Said that the five findings are required to support a Variance. . Reminded that on appeal the Council overturned the decision for denial by the Planning Commission for the Variance on Cameo. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 7 . Said that she has a similar issue in her neighborhood that has 30-foot setbacks. Owners have gone to two-story for additions. . Said that on the face of it, she cannot support this request. Commissioner Rocha: . Stated that SARC wrestled with this request. . Added that the five required findings have not been met and he cannot support this Variance. . Said that the character of this neighborhood would be impaired. Chair Alderete said that he is not supportive as it stands. Upon motion of Commissioner Roseberry, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3770 denying a Variance (PLN2006-109) to a required garage setback to allow a single-family addition on property owned by Wayne and Julie Firsty located at 1124 Bent Drive, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Francois, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None Doorley None Motion: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: *** Commissioner Rocha advised that he would have to recuse himself from consideration of the next item as he resides with 500 feet of the project site. He left the dais and chambers for the duration of the item. Chair Alderete read Agenda Item No.2 into the record as follows: 2. PLN2006-64 (GP) PLN2006-65 (ZC) PLN2006-66 (TS) PLN2006-67 (PD) Gera, N. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Nick Gera, on behalf of DBI Construction, for a General Plan Amendment (PLN2006-64) from Central Commercial and Low Density Residential to Low- Medium Density Residential; a Zone Change (PLN2006-65) from R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development); a Planned Development Permit (PLN2006-67) to allow the construction of 15 new small-lot single family residences and a Tentative Subdivision Map to allow the creation of 15 residential lots and one common lot on property owned by Mr. Nick Gera located at 154 & 160 S. First Street in a P-D (Planned Development) and R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 8 A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: January 2, 2007. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner Mr. Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval for the development of two parcels, a smaller residential parcel fronting on First Street and a larger triangular parcel that is behind and accessed via a driveway. . Described the surrounding uses as being single family to the west and south, VT A to the east and the First Street parking garage to the north. . Said that the General Plan Land Use designation is Central Commercial for the large lot and Low-Density Residential for the small lot. A General Plan Amendment is proposed to change the designations of both parcels to Low- Medium Density Residential. . Said that the smaller parcel is zoned R-1-6 and is proposed to be changed to P-D (Planned Development). The rear parcel is already zoned P-D. . Explained that under the current General Plan density of 27 units per gross acre, the maximum density for the larger rear parcel is 34 units. The Low- Density Residential density for the front lot allows less than six units per gross acre. . Informed that the proposed Low-Medium Density Residential General Plan Land Use designation allows between six and 13 units per gross acre. The applicant's project represents a proposed density of six units per gross acre. . Reported that early in the processing of this project, Council considered the proposed General Plan Amendment and was supportive and provided authorization to proceed. Council determined that the rear parcel was not viable as a commercial designation. . Said that the applicant is seeking approval of a Planned Development Permit to allow the development of the project that consists of 15 homes with a driveway along the northern boundary to serve as a common drive through the project. . Described the project as consisting of 32 percent building coverage, 33 percent paving and 35 percent landscaping. Each unit will have a rear yard area with a minimum size of 10 feet by 12 feet. Some units will have larger yards. . Stated that the homes are two-story single-family residences with two car garages and parking for two guests in front of each garage. This results in four spaces per unit. The development requirement is 3.5 spaces per unit. The applicant is exceeding that requirement. . Reported that a deed restriction in the CC&Rs will required that the garages be left available for parking two cars. . Said that the architectural design is varied and carries the style of the surrounding neighborhood with a traditional residential style and Craftsman style. There is a variety of material and floor plans. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 9 . Recommended the adoption of a number of Resolutions including one for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, one recommending approval of a General Plan Amendment, one recommending approval of a Zone Change for the small residential parcel to Planned Development; one recommending approval of a Planned Development Permit to allow the construction of 15 detached residential units; and one recommending approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to allow the creation of 15 residential and one common lot. . Stated that the Initial Study provided supports the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Noise, Acoustical and Vibration Analysis was prepared and mitigations have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Gibbons: . Referred to the traffic impacts from the Initial Study that established a daily trip generation at 144 per day. She asked if this is simply from a table in a manual. Planner Tim J. Haley replied that it is from the ITE Manual and results in approximately 10 trips per day out of each unit. Commissioner Gibbons asked for clarification that this is a formula figure. Planner Tim J. Haley replied correct. He added that the City's Traffic Engineer reviewed the project and did not recommend traffic control. Commissioner Gibbons explained that she goes by this area three out of every five days and commented that the traffic is fast. Commissioner Ebner said that there is no way to tell if people from this development will go down Alice, Rincon or Sunnyside to get to Winchester. Planner Tim J. Haley said either would likely go toward Winchester or to Orchard City Drive. Chair Alderete asked about the sound wall. The condition of approval and Noise Study both call for an eight-foot sound wall and the plans depict 10 feet. Planner Tim J. Haley reported that the applicant has plans for a 10-foot high wall although the Noise and Acoustical analysis only recommended eight foot. Perhaps the applicant can best respond to their reasons for a 10-foot wall. Chair Alderete: . Suggested that the condition on page 4 (17A) be changed to reach 10 feet. Since the project runs right along the Light Rail tracks an eight-foot wall would not be as good as a 10-foot wall. . Pointed out that the noise study was done on March 29 and 30, 2006. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 10 . Suggested that the Union Pacific Railway train must not have passed by on those days. . Asked if that omission would change anything. Director Sharon Fierro said that the Commission could require an Acoustical Study that would evaluate what is specifically needed for this location. Chair Alderete: . Cautioned that these trains are real loud. . Questioned the conditions that require that second floor windows within 100 feet of the tracks must be closed at all times. . Asked if that requirement should not be added to the CC&Rs to prevent changes in the future to those windows. . Asked about the parking prohibition and whether it includes trailers, boats and recreational vehicles. Planner Tim J. Haley said the prohibition was to prevent the uncovered parking to be used for such storage. Director Sharon Fierro clarified that the parking is for cars that represent transportation vehicles. Chair Alderete asked what about a canoe. Director Sharon Fierro replied not if it takes up a parking spot. Chair Alderete pointed out that there is a tree service on Railway across from the development. There is noise from wood chippers and large stacks of wood. Is this not a possible fire hazard for this development? Senior Planner Jackie C. Young Lind clarified that per page 5 of the acoustical report the windows must be closed to maintain noise attenuation and added ventilation must be provided so those windows could be kept closed. It does not mean that the windows cannot be opened if desired by the homeowner. Director Sharon Fierro pointed out that if a room is a bedroom it must have operable windows as a means of emergency exiting. Commissioner Gibbons said that in order to be able to keep the windows closed to have the noise attenuation impact there must also be additional ventilation. Commissioner Roseberry provided the Site and Architectural Review Committee Report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on October 24,2006. . Advised that SARC had some minor recommendations including decorative paving, color and/or stamped concrete and landscaping to screen the adjacent public parking structure. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 11 Chair Alderete opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.2. Mr. Geoff Bradley, Project Representative, Metropolitan Planning Group: . Advised that he is representing project applicant Nick Gera. . Introduced his associate, Judie GiIIi, project architect Daryl Fazekas. . Stated that they have worked closely with the city staff and the City's architectural consultant. . Informed that they had conducted a Neighborhood Meeting on October 5, 2006, to reach out to neighbors. . Assured that they will work with the neighbors and the City on issues including fencing, privacy landscaping and interface with the parking garage. . Added that they would work on a landscape plan with shrubs and trees to block and serve as a buffer against headlights from the garage. . Said that they have reviewed the report and agree with its analysis and conditions. . Expressed his hope that the Planning Commission would approve this project. . Said that the project team is available for questions. Mr. Ed Sengstack, Resident on First Street: . Reported that he has lived his entire life in this area and graduated from Los Gatos High School in 1970. . Said that there are lots of positive things in Campbell particularly the downtown. . Said he is not fundamentally opposed. . Said that there is too much emphasis on high-density housing. . Pointed out that there was only one neighborhood meeting and that this development only directly affects a few properties. . Questioned the fact that the Initial Study was only completed on October 11 th and the less than significant and/or no impact ranking for traffic. . Said that no consideration of cumulative effects is taken with the numerous new housing units recently or currently under construction in the immediate area. There are 49 new residential units within a few blocks. . Said that the First Street parking garage is being treated as the cure-all for parking. . Declared that there is too much traffic on South First Street and the speed is fast. . Said that there has been no consideration of having stop signs at Rincon and First Street and Alice and First Street. . Questioned when and how the property lines would be confirmed. . Reported that they have ivy on their back fence that has been growing for 10 years. . Expressed disapproval at being labeled the nearest sensitive receptors in the analysis. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 12 . Inquired about dust control during construction. . Asked the Commission to deny this project until issues are resolved to greater community satisfaction. Ms. Kereli Jones, Resident on First Street: . Thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak. . Said that she grew up in the area and attended Los Gatos High School. . Stated that she loves living here due to the Farmers Market, etc. . Said that she wants a neighborhood feel. . Said she would like to see just one home on the front parcel and fewer than the 15 proposed on the rear parcel. . Suggested that approval of this project means that this neighborhood is not viewed as important to the City. . Said that the project is too dense for this desirable upscale neighborhood. It will result in less privacy and heavier traffic. . Expressed disappointment that the neighbors were not included in the process initially and that she feels that this is already a done deal. She said that she would have liked a little more notice, as they were unable to attend the October 5th community meeting. Ms. Julie Cordova, Resident on Alice Avenue: . Said that she grew up in the area. . Said that impacts on the neighborhood and the number of developments nearby are of concern. There is a significant impact on the character and traffic. . Explained that she has two young children and is concerned for their safety due to the cut through traffic on Alice Avenue. . Stated that the quality of life is being impacted. Ms. Jackie Costanzo, Resident on Alice Avenue: . Said that she lives in the Hyde House that is located at the corner of Alice Avenue and First Street. . Said that she loves Campbell where she grew up and went to high school. . Stated that this is a safe, pedestrian-friendly city where she walks every night with her dog. . Said that vehicles fly by and that visibility is poor at Rincon, which is a real problem. . Said that four parking spots is inadequate that that people don't usually park two cars in garages these days. . Expressed concern that some people may elect to park on Rincon instead. . Reported that she attended the October 5th neighborhood meeting and was one of only three people who did. . Said that she has lived in her house for 23 years. . Stated that this development will impact how her neighborhood looks. . Said that it is short sighted and that she was not part of the process. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 13 Mr. Eric Reinhard, Resident on First Street: . Stated that he appreciates the opportunity to work with the developer and the Planning Commission. . Said that a number of pieces are on the right track such as constructing single-family residences instead of commercial buildings. . Said that he submitted a letter and that he was out of town and missed the October 5th neighborhood meeting. . Stated that everything seems so rushed and it is important in ensure that this project fits in density into the area. . Said he would like to see fewer houses using R-1-6 density instead of a Low- Medium Density. . Said that privacy impacts are of concern and that he would like more than a 12-foot setback. . Suggested that this project would appear like another enclave in the downtown similar to the DeMattei development on Sunnyside. It is a private gated community with columns and doesn't fit with the flow of the street frontage. . Reiterated that this project seems rushed. Ms. Kathleen Meyer, Resident on First Street: . Advised that she missed the October 5th neighborhood meeting. . Said she is concerned about density and traffic. . Informed that she has lived in the neighborhood since 1988. . Reported that she spent a lot of time in this chamber between the years of 1988 and 1990 when development was underway on Rincon. . Said she hates to see higher density development on this property when they worked so hard before to bring the density down. Chair Alderete closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.2. Chair Alderete suggested that staff might want to provide additional information about issues raised including density, traffic, noticing and site drainage. Planner Tim J. Haley asked for a more specific question. Commissioner Roseberry asked Planner Tim J. Haley to address the zone change and the fact that the current Central Commercial Land Use allows commercial uses and between 21 and 27 residential units per gross acre. Planner Tim J. Haley said that this is correct. There are two parcels in this project. The larger parcel is currently designated as Central Commercial in the General Plan, which allows commercial uses on the ground floor with residential uses on the upper floors with a density of 21-27 units per gross acre. The Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 14 maximum height in the Central Commercial District allows a maximum of three- stories and a height of up to 45 feet. Chair Alderete said that most people might be surprised that the rear lot is Central Commercial with a density of 21-27 units per gross acre consisting of residential units above business uses. Planner Tim J. Haley: . Said that the Zoning for the rear parcel is PD and the General Plan is Central Commercial. Council identified the site for higher density because it is near the downtown, Light Rail and the parking structure. . Reminded that a Study Session with Council is held any time a General Plan Amendment is anticipation to obtain their authorization to proceed. . Advised that Council recommended that Central Commercial is not the best land use so close to residential uses. Commissioner Roseberry said he is surprised that the estimated trip generation of 144 is so high at 10 trips per unit per day. Director Sharon Fierro said that each house generates not just the residents' trips but also added trips from the postman, etc. It is the use of land for residential use that brings other services such as pizza delivery. Commissioner Gibbons: . Said that out equals one trip and in equals one trip. . Stated that this is an interesting project that she thought was well done and that the developer did not do too bad a job backing this project up to smaller residential lots. . Pointed out three-foot setbacks between structures between lots 8 and 7 and between lots 7 and 6. Planner Tim J. Haley said that there are 10 feet between structures by it may be less if at an angle. Commissioner Gibbons asked if there have been other developments like that. Planner Tim J. Haley said that there is typically a minimum of six feet for projects such as Ainsley Square. Commissioner Gibbons: . Reminded that one speaker mentioned that the proposed columns make this development look like an enclave and said that she finds this to be a valid consideration. . Added that her biggest concern is the proximity of the driveway to East Rincon Avenue and asked whether anyone had looked at placing the driveway to the other side. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14,2006 Page 15 Planner Tim J. Haley advised that there is a 20-foot building easement on that side with a no-build requirement. Commissioner Gibbons asked about the potential for a shared access drive. Planner Tim J. Haley said that was not a consideration. Commissioner Gibbons asked about site drainage. Planner Tim J. Haley said that a drainage plan has been submitted and that Public Works had no issue with it. The water will be directed to the center of the drive and out to the storm drain. Commissioner Gibbons said that grading could build up a site against the adjacent property. Planner Tim J. Haley advised that the site is relatively flat and there is no indication of the need for retaining walls. Mr. Daryl Fazakus, Project Architect, said that there is no fill against adjacent properties and that the lot drains to the street in general. Chair Alderete asked about the property line confirmation. Planner Tim J. Haley said that a survey and staking is part of the Tentative Subdivision Map process. There might be some issues with some fencing that is not at the property line. Chair Alderete asked staff to explain the public noticing done. Planner Tim J. Haley said that noticing was sent as part of the Initial Study/CEQA process. Additionally, 300-foot notices were mailed out 10 days prior to this meeting via first class mail. The developer held a neighborhood meeting on October 5th to present the plans to the neighbors and approximately four to five people attended. Director Sharon Fierro said that noticing was the same used for all other projects and added that no comments were received that people could not attend. Planner Tim J. Haley added that this is the first public body to review this proposal. It will be forwarded on to Council, which is the final decision body on January 2, 2007. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 16 Commissioner Francois said that there is a line of sight issue at Rincon and that the downtown is more pedestrian friendly these days. Can this issue be addressed? Planner Tim J. Haley said that the Ainsley Square project was required to install a stop sign at the project driveway. This neighborhood has approached the City regarding traffic exclusive of this project and the City's Traffic Engineer has looked into the concerns raised. Commissioner Francois said that he would like to see preventive mechanisms put into place to deal with new traffic. Chair Alderete pointed out that he has seen people blow through the light at First and Campbell Avenue. Commissioner Gibbons: . Said that there are a lot of nice things about this project including the sensitivity to height and scale. There is good parking. . Said that the main question remains the access road. . Asked if the road width is 20 feet. . Pointed out that there are no sidewalks in the development. . Agreed that the development gives an enclave feeling and that gates should not be included. . Suggested a condition of approval for additional traffic study, curb realignment and a stop sign(s). . Added that this project is good in so many ways. Chair Alderete re-opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.2. Mr. Ed Sengstack, Resident on First Street: . Asked who does the property line verification. . Said that he wants assurances on that step. . Said he appreciated the clarification on the Zoning but still feels 15 houses is too many. . Said that another stop sign should also be on South First Street. Mr. Geoff Bradley: . Clarified that the sound wall would be constructed at a 10-foot height to provide sound attenuation and a visual buffer. . Said that the developer is willing to eliminate the columns completely or make them much smaller. . Informed that the property line will be established through a boundary survey conducted by a civil engineer. . Assured that they would be willing to work with the adjacent property owners on fence issues. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 17 Chair Alderete re-closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.2. Commissioner Francois: . Said that he feels strongly about the need for a stop sign and suggested including that requirement in the conditions of approval. It is important to mitigate impacts. . Stated that this is a good project although traffic is bothersome. High density makes sense in a transit corridor. Chair Alderete asked staff how to handle the recommendation for adding stop signs. Director Sharon Fierro said that could be conditioned and asked for clarification on how many are proposed. Commissioner Francois suggested one at Rincon and northbound and southbound First Street for a total of three to four. Planner Tim J. Haley reminded that a stop sign is not called out specifically in the driveway and said that the Commission could recommend one. Director Sharon Fierro added that these conditions are advisory to Council. Commissioner Roseberry: . Said he didn't mind the pillars in front and did not find them to represent an enclave but rather pride in a neighborhood located close to the heart of the city. . Said that his original concern was traffic within the development and agreed that a 20-foot driveway is narrow for two-way traffic. . Cautioned that there can be adverse impacts from stop signs too from the sounds of cars breaking to people ignoring them. . Suggested that perhaps a pedestrian walkway should be striped. . Reminded that under the current land use 35 units could have been proposed and that he saw this development as an improvement to that possibility. . Stated that he is generally supportive of this project. Commissioner Gibbons: . Said that she was a little surprised by the boundary lines depicted on sheet 1 and suggested that as a condition of approval the Community Development Director and Public Works Department review placement of lot lines a little more carefully. . Asked about the possibility of a rolled curb. Commissioner Ebner: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 18 . Stated that this is a better alternative to the possibility of a three-story project allowable under the current land use designation. . Opined that there is a serious problem with traffic in this area. . Pointed out that despite public noticing he wished there was better attendance by the neighbors. . Suggested that the narrow driveway is a potential problem down the road. . Said that stop Signs will help. . Stated that this could be a lot worse. Director Sharon Fierro: . Cautioned that the ITE is the source that once again would be used for a more in-depth traffic study. Actual data is not available since the development is not yet constructed so averages are used. . Asked for clarification as to what Commissioner Gibbons wants staff to verify in regards to the property lines. Commissioner Gibbons said that she is not comfortable with the property lines that appear to be approximately three feet. Director Sharon Fierro asked if Commissioner Gibbons means to continue this project. Commissioner Gibbons replied no she just would like staff to look again to make sure they are comfortable with the boundaries. Director Sharon Fierro reminded that Building Code requires a minimum of three feet. Commissioner Gibbons said that she also wants to recommend the use of rolled curbs. Commissioner Roseberry asked about fencing. Chair Alderete asked if there is potential for access somehow to the Light Rail station perhaps through the parking garage. Planner Tim J. Haley explained that there is no connection at the rear of the garage to the Light Rail Station and there is no easement to accommodate such access. Commissioner Ebner asked if there is permitted parking in this immediate neighborhood. Director Sharon Fierro replied that there are signs posted but they are not enforced by the Police Department. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 19 Commissioner Ebner suggested starting enforcement. Director Sharon Fierro cautioned that this is a staffing and/or budgetary issue that would have to be evaluated. Chair Alderete re-opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Ms. Julie W, Resident on North First Street: . Pointed out that since she is not within 300-foot noticing distance she was not notified of this project. . Said that traffic in the area concerns her too. Mr. Daryl Fazakus: . Said that the porches were enlarged to six-feet, which reduced the setback. They could go back if necessary. . Added that no curbs are required. Ms. Kereli Jones said that she got the 10-day notification of this hearing. She also received notice of the October 5th meeting but had conflicting plans and couldn't attend. She asked what CEQA is. Mr. Ed Sengstack reminded that there is a cumulative effect from all development and that there has to be a traffic impact with added units. Chair Alderete re-closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.2. Commissioner Gibbons asked about the porches that are six feet with the overhang. Planner Tim J. Haley reported that the City's Architectural Advisor had recommended a six-foot depth for the porch to function better. Chair Alderete: . Pointed out that this lot behind these houses has been empty for a long time and has been nice. It was inevitable that this property would get developed one day. . Stated that the change of density is better. . Said that safety measures relative to traffic can be used. . Agreed that there is a cumulative effect of traffic and said that stop signs while helpful are not always obeyed. . Described the noticing that occurs including the ad in the Campbell Express for each public hearing, the Development Quarterly Report located on the website as well as the minutes and agendas that are also available on the website. . Said that emailed questions can be sent to the Planning Division. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 20 . Assured that staff is committed to keeping people informed but that it also takes work on the part of residents to keep informed on what is happening. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Francois, the Planning Commission took the following actions: . Adopted Resolution No. 3771 recommending adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration; . Adopted Resolution No. 3772 recommending approval of a General Plan Amendment (PLN2006-64) from Central Commercial (rear parcel) and Low Density Residential (front parcel) to Low-Medium Density Residential; . Adopted Resolution No. 3773 recommending approval of a Zone Change (PLN2006-65) from R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development) for the front parcel; . Adopted Resolution No. 3774 recommending approval of a Planned Development Permit (PLN2006-67) to allow the construction of 15 new small-lot single family residences with the requirements that: o That the inclusion of rolled curbs be evaluated; o That further analysis be done to consider installing stop signs at the development and Rincon and on northbound and southbound First Street as well as the inclusion of pedestrian crosswalks; o That the columns at the entry be reduced to one and made smaller to contain the range of addresses; and o That the wall be constructed at a 10-foot height along the Light Rail side; and . Adopted Resolution No. 3775 recommending approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to allow the creation of 15 residential lots and one common lot on property owned by Mr. Nick Gera located at 154 & 160 S. First Street, with the added condition that the Public Works Department and Community Development Director clarify that the setback between the structures and the property lines are a minimum of three feet, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Francois, Gibbons and Roseberry None Doorley Rocha NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: *** Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 21 Chair Alderete called for a brief recess at 9:55 p.m. Chair Alderete resumed the meeting at 10:02 p.m. Commissioner Rocha returned to the chambers and dais for the rest of the agenda. *** Chair Alderete read Agenda Item NO.3 into the record as follows: 3. PLN2006-101 Nelson, s. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Steve Nelson, on behalf of Cala Properties, for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2006-101) to allow the construction of a new two-story single family residence on property owned by Cala Properties located at 1561 Van Dusen Lane in an R-1-9 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Steve Prosser, Planner I Mr. Steve Prosser, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of a new two-story single-family residence with attached garage. . Informed that this parcel was original approved in 2004 and a lot line adjustment was finalized on October 24, 2006. . Described the parcel as being located on the south side of Van Dusen Lane at Harriet. . Said that the site is surrounded by single-family residences to the north and west, a vacant lot that is also proposed for development with a single-family residence this evening, to the east and Pollard Road to the south. . Stated that the General Plan Land Use designation is Low Density Residential and the Zoning is R-1-9. The property falls under the requirements of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. . Said that the parcel has a net lot area of half an acre. The proposed FAR is .44 where .45 is the maximum allowed. The site coverage is .29 where .45 is allowed. The maximum height is 28 feet. The home will have an attached two-car garage and a private rear yard. . Described the home as consisting of simple rectangular forms, hip and gable roof lines and a composition roof. It has divided light windows and a porch. The garage is located perpendicular to Van Dusen Lane. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 22 . Said that SARC reviewed the project at its meeting of October 24,2006, and the changes recommended are reflected in the current plans. . Stated that this project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA. . Recommended adoption of a resolution approving this Site and Architectural Review Permit. Commissioner Roseberry provided the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on October 24,2006. . Stated that SARC was supportive with one change to revise the front garage setback to 25 feet. . Said that this change is now reflected in the project plans. Chair Alderete opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.3. Ms. Paula McCarthy, Resident on Van Dusen Lane: . Stated that she resides next door to this project site and has for two years. . Said that she has been to Planning Commission meetings four times now. . Advised that she is not against this project. . Reported that she would have liked to have seen the project plans prior to this meeting but that her calls to the City were not returned. . Said that she is fine with the project and likes the fact that the large oak tree has been saved. . Asked who officially confirms a property line. . Said that it would look funny if the fences were not matched up. . Stated that she loves all the trees proposed. . Explained that she has a large pepper tree located near the fence and that she does not want other trees planted close enough to hamper the growth of her tree. . Asked if the sidewalk would be fixed. . Stated that the overhead wires are ugly and asked who is responsible to underground utilities and how much that might cost. . Said that overall she is for this project. . Cautioned that the site has been used as a cut through for kids and asked about construction site security. . Asked if James Kennedy is related to Mayor Jane Kennedy. Chair Alderete closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.3. Commissioner Ebner asked about whether the utilities would be placed underground. Planner Steve Prosser said that the lines from the pole to the house would be placed underground. Only developments with five or more units are required to put all overhead lines underground. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 23 Commissioner Gibbons asked about the trees and whether the type and placement could be coordinated with this adjacent property owner as well as the issue of the fence. Planner Steve Prosser replied yes. Commissioner Roseberry asked if the curb cut would be changed. Planner Steve Prosser said that this is part of the Public Works conditions of approval. Commissioner Roseberry asked about tree protection during construction. Planner Steve Prosser said that this is a condition of the Building permit. Commissioner Roseberry said that the protective fencing for the trees needs to be around the dripline. He asked if there are specific allowed construction hours. Planner Steve Prosser replied yes. Commissioner Roseberry asked if a California licensed surveyor would verify the property lines. He asked staff is it is not possible for residents to come to the Planning counter to look at full sized plans. Director Sharon Fierro replied yes. She added that she is appalled by the lack of service described by Ms. McCarthy and assured that she would look into that. She explained that the department had been operating short handed for a couple of months. Commissioner Roseberry reported that SARC usually asks applicants if they have attempted outreach to their neighbors. Chair Alderete asked about keeping kids off site during construction. Commissioner Roseberry said that a condition of approval requires construction fencing of the site. He added that while these two proposed homes on Van Dusen are very large, it is the best part of town for such large homes. These are big lots with other big houses located around them. The area backs up onto Pollard. Chair Alderete said that he agrees. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Ebner, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3776 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2006-1 01) to allow the construction of a new two- Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 24 NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: story single family residence on property owned by Cala Properties located at 1561 Van Dusen Lane, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Francois, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None Doorley None Chair Alderete advised that this decision is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Alderete read Agenda Item No.4 into the record as follows: 4. PLN2006- 102 Nelson, S. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Steve Nelson, on behalf of Cala Properties, for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2006-102) to allow the construction of a new two-story single family residence on property owned by Cala Properties located at 1573 Van Dusen Lane in an R-1-9 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Steve Prosser, Planner I Mr. Steve Prosser, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of a new two-story single-family residence with attached garage. . Said that the lot was created in 2004 and that a Lot Line Adjustment was finalized on October 24, 2006. · Said that this is a vacant lot on the south side of Van Dusen Lane at Harriet. . Said that the site is surrounded by single-family residences to the north and west, a vacant lot that is also proposed for development with a single-family residence this evening, to the west and Pollard Road to the south. . Stated that the General Plan Land Use designation is Low Density Residential and the Zoning is R-1-9. The property falls under the requirements of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan. . Said that the parcel has a net lot area of one-third of an acre. The proposed FAR is .43 where .45 is the maximum allowed. The site coverage is .28 where .45 is allowed. Eight new trees will be planted. The home will have an attached three-car garage. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 25 . Described the home as consisting of simple rectangular forms, hip and gable roof lines and shingle siding. It has divided light windows and a porch. The garage is located perpendicular to Van Dusen Lane. . Said that SARC reviewed the project at its meeting of October 24, 2006, and the changes recommended are reflected in the current plans. . Stated that this project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA. . Recommended adoption of a resolution approving this Site and Architectural Review Permit. Commissioner Roseberry provided the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: . SARC reviewed this project on October 24, 2006. . Stated that SARC was supportive with one change to revise the front garage setback to 25 feet. That change is reflected in the current plans. Chair Alderete opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.4. Ms. Paula McCarthy: . Said that she is okay with this project. . Asked if the tree out front on this lot is the original oak tree. . Said that she can only see five new trees on the plan. . Asked if there is any problem having the two driveways side by side. . Said that she has no problems with the house. . Clarified that she likes the fence as proposed. Chair Alderete closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.4. Chair Alderete asked about the number of trees proposed. Planner Steve Prosser said that the trees on the plan are new. The tree in the front yard of this house is a new 24-inch box maple. Commissioner Gibbons asked for clarification that there is no Tree Removal Permit request as part of this application. Planner Steve Prosser replied no. The large oak on the other lot (1561 Van Dusen) will be retained. Commissioner Roseberry said that the oak tree in front of 1561 Van Dusen is huge. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3777 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2006-102) to allow the construction of a new two- Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 26 story single family residence on property owned by Cala Properties located at 1573 Van Dusen Lane, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Francois, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None Doorley None NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair Alderete advised that this decision is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Alderete read Agenda Item No. 5 into the record as follows: 5. PLN2006-132 Harless/Morrissey Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Donna Morrissey and Ms. Elizabeth Harless, on behalf of Lavish Beauty and Well ness, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2006-132) to allow a day spa in an existing commercial building on property owned by Mr. Robert Raffanti located at 236 E. Campbell Avenue in the C-3- S (Central Business District) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Noah P. Downing, Planning Intern Mr. Noah Downing, Planning Intern, presented the staff report as follows: . Advised that the applicants are seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of Lavish Beauty and Wellness. . Described the tenant space as consisting of 2,030 square feet within an existing commercial building. The building consists of four tenant spaces and provides 20 parking spaces . Added that there are no exterior changes proposed. . Stated that the services provided include skin care, body massage, some retail, yoga and future services include Pilate's instruction. . Said that there would be 8 people working from this location and generally no more than 16 to 18 customers and any given time. . Said that the spa would operate Tuesday through Saturday and be closed Sunday and Monday. . Stated that the surrounding uses are commercial. . Advised that the proposed use is consistent with the zoning. . Added that no sign is approved with this application and will be subject to future review. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 27 . Informed that the Police Department had no objection to this use. Any massage therapist operating from this business will be required to obtain a permit through the Police Department. . Recommended the adoption of a resolution approving this Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Francois asked if the customers would have appointments or would walk in clients be permitted. Planner Noah Downing said he would defer this operational question to the applicant. Commissioner Gibbons said that, as there are already lots of spas in the downtown she is surprised to see another one proposed. She said that she thought that the number of massage establishments in the City were limited. City Attorney William Seligmann advised that there used to be a limit in the number of establishments until about one year ago. At that time the City went to the more complex permitting process that requires the verification of the qualifications of massage therapists. Commissioner Rocha asked about the limitation on the number of spas along East Campbell Avenue. Planner Noah Downing said that this space is located 50 feet off of East Campbell Avenue so that restriction does not apply. Chair Alderete suggested the addition of a directional sign from westbound Campbell Avenue might be necessary to lead customers to the parking structure. Director Sharon Fierro said that she would refer this recommendation on to the Redevelopment Agency. Chair Alderete opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.5. Ms. Donna Morrissey, Applicant and Co-Owner, Lavish Beauty and Wellness: . Said that only on the best day of the best year would they have as many as 18 clients at a given time. . Pointed out that the Second Street garage is just across the street diagonally. . Said that there are only two other spas in the downtown. One is Le Spa and the other is La Spa de Belle. Additionally, there are salons some of which have some spa services. There is a new business that offers waxing services. Commissioner Rocha asked about the proposed maximum of eight employees. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 28 Ms. Donna Morrissey clarified that these are all independent contractors rather than employees. Commissioner Rocha asked if Ms. Morrissey would consider asking her employees to park in the garage and suggested that might be considered as a condition of approval. Ms. Donna Morrissey said that she would be happy to do that if it is also a condition imposed on the other businesses in their building. Commissioner Rocha said that the other businesses are not being talked about this evening. Commissioner Francois said that he did not support making that a condition but rather a request that the employees be encouraged to park in the garage so that nearby parking is available as a convenience to their clientele. Chair Alderete closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.5. Motion: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Upon motion of Commissioner Francois, seconded by Commissioner Rocha, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3778 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2006-132) to allow a day spa (Lavish Beauty and Wellness) in an existing commercial building on property owned by Mr. Robert Raffanti located at 236 E. Campbell Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Doorley, Ebner, Francois, Gibbons, Rocha and Roseberry None None None Chair Alderete advised that this decision is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Ms. Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, was accepted as presented with the following additions: . Stated that at its last meeting Council approved the Bucknall Project, approved the Pocket Annexations, sent the appeal of the 1550 Archer project back to the Planning Commission, and approved the Extension of Approval for the Creekside Project. · Advised that preliminary plans for the Creekside Hotel have been submitted and would be brought to the Planning Commission at a later date. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for November 14, 2006 Page 29 · Reported that the Hazel Avenue project reviewed by SARC earlier this evening and scheduled for the next Planning Commission meeting would be continued. · Reminded that the Mandatory Ethics training is set for Thursday, November 16th, at 5 p.m. This training will be provided by City Attorney William Seligmann in Council Chambers. · Encouraged attendance at this training session. · Informed of a free on-line training as an alternative provided by the Institute for Local Self Government. Commissioner Rocha asked if the approval for Creekside was the three-year extension recommended by the Planning Commission. Director Sharon Fierro replied yes. Chair Alderete said that he is not clear why Council has referred 1550 Archer back to the Commission. Director Sharon Fierro said that since the applicant provided new information she had recommended that the updated request be brought back to the Commission. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:46 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of November 28, 2006. SUBMITTED BY: ~ Corinne A. Shinn, Recor; Ing Secretary APPROVED BY: ll~teSh~ ~ ~~~ ..........s on Fierro, Secretary ~ ATTEST: