Loading...
PC Min - 10/14/2008 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY OCTOBER 14, 2008 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of October 14, 2008, was called to order at 7:35 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Roseberry and the following proceedings were had, to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Bob Roseberry Mark Ebner Bob Alderete Gary Gairaud Michael Rocha Commissioners Absent: Commissioner: Elizabeth Gibbons Staff Present: Principal Planner: Assistant Planner: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: Jackie C. Young Daniel Fama William Seligmann Corinne A. Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES - September 23. 2008 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rocha, seconded by Commissioner Gairaud, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of September 23, 2008, were continued to the next meeting as an eligible quorum of the Commission was not available to vote upon this set of minutes. (5-0-1; Commissioner Gibbons was absent) Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 2 Upon further discussion with the City Attorney, it was determined that a quorum was actually available and the Commission took action to cancel the continuance as follows: Motion: Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rocha, seconded by Commissioner Gairaud, the Planning Commission action to continue to the next meeting the consideration of the adoption of the minutes of the meeting of September 23, 2008, was rescinded. (5-0-1 ; Commissioner Gibbons was absent) Upon motion of Commissioner Rocha, seconded by Commissioner Gairaud, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of September 23, 2008, were approved as submitted. (3-0-1-2; Commissioner Gibbons was absent and Commissioners Alderete and Ebner abstained) APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Auaust 23. 2008 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Ebner, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of August 26, 2008, were continued to the next meeting as an eligible quorum of the Commission was not available to vote upon this set of minutes - Commissioners Alderete, Ebner and Rocha will have to abstain from the vote to adopt these minutes of August 26, 2008, as they were not in attendance at that meeting. (5- 0-1; Commissioner Gibbons was absent) COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications items. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Roseberry read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 3 1. PLN2008-133 Maxwell, C. Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Courtney Maxwell (MAX Wellness, LLC), for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2008-133) for a personal training and consultation facility (health/fitness facility) with late-night operations on property owned by Industrial Property Co., LLC, located at 186 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue in the M-1 (Light Industrial) 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: Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report as follows: · Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of a personal training and consultation facility (health/fitness facility) within an existing non-conforming retail space. · Described the project site as being on Sunnyoaks Avenue, between Dell and San Tomas Expressway. The site is surrounded by industrial uses. · Explained that two legal parcels make up eight assessment parcels. · Informed that the property owner has agreed to merge these two lots into one and a condition of approval has been imposed that gives them nine months to comply with that condition (Condition #11 ). · Stated that the zoning is M-1 (Light Industrial) and the General Plan land use designation is Light Industrial. A Conditional Use Permit is required to establish a health and fitness facility in this zoning district. This use offers personal training and consultation on a one to one or one to two ratios with incidental small group training. Training is per appointment only. There will be ancillary sales of merchandise. The business will consist of the owner/applicant, one administrator and four to five personal trainers who act as independent contractors. · Said that the proposed operational hours are from 5 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., Mondays through Fridays and varied hours on Saturdays. · Stated that staff is recommending that the Use Permit allow public business hours between 5 a.m. and 9 p.m. and operational hours between 4 a.m. and 10 p.m. to offer the applicant some additional flexibility. . Reported that there are 50 shared parking spaces and the parking ratio required to serve a health and fitness facility is one space per 150 square foot of tenant space that results in a parking requirement of 20 spaces. This use's pro-rata share of the available parking is 14 spaces. However, staff believes that these 14 spaces are adequate. . Explained that the Use Permit for such a use in an Industrial-zoned property is approved for a five-year period. This limited time frame allows a site to be re- evaluated for parking, site circulation, noise impacts, overconcentration, fit and number of such assembly uses every five years. . Added that staff is recommending a limited five-year term for this Conditional Use Permit. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 4 . Advised that the applicant and property owner are here today. Chair Roseberry read into the record the fact that the building is on two separate lots. Planner Daniel Fama explained that the property's Title Report indicates two property lines, which results in potential zoning/building code issues. Commissioner Alderete reminded that this Commission previously denied an application across Dell Avenue for a gym and cheerleading facility. He asked staff to clarify if the difference between that use and this one is the difference between recreational uses versus health and fitness uses or does it make a difference. Acting Director Jackie C. Young: . Explained that there are two definitions in the Code, one for health and fitness facilities and the other for commercial schools. Health and fitness facilities include fitness facilities, gyms, health clubs, etc. Commercial schools include a variety of businesses including secretarial or vocational schools, art, dance, language, martial arts, music, seminary schools, educational courses, personal trainers with two or more clients, etc. . Pointed out that the one issue with the cheerleading facility within an industrial property was the fact that there were automotive uses on site. Additionally, the use resulted in having children in the parking lot with hazardous materials on site, etc. . Reminded that the issue of allowing such recreational type facilities within an industrially zoned property went to study session. The intent was to limit recreational uses in industrial areas to those for adults as it was determined that children might not mix well in industrial areas. Criteria to evaluate such uses were developed. Commissioner Alderete thanked Acting Director Jackie C. Young for her in depth answer. He added that another question raised at that time was public assembly type uses in industrial zones. It was thought that some industrial zones might be more compatible than others might be to such uses. He asked staff if any specific recommendations were made. Acting Director Jackie C. Young: . Replied that at the study session the idea of identifying specific areas as being more appropriate than others was discussed but none were chosen or identified as such. . Added that one desired trait discussed as far as compatibility was proximity to the Los Gatos Creek Trail. . Advised that a list of additional findings was developed rather than restricting such uses to one or two particular areas. Chair Roseberry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.1. Mr. Stephen Finn, Property Owner of project site: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 5 . Said that as a former member of the Planning Commission and Council and a former Mayor of Los Altos Hills, he understands what this Planning Commission goes through. . Reported that he acquired this particular property about three years ago with a group of investors. . Admitted that the property was pretty ugly when purchased and they took steps to improve it including repaving the lot, repainting the buildings, installing new HV AC units to replace unsightly window units and new signs to name a few improvements. . Advised that they have approximately $500,000 invested in the site to date. . Stated that re-tenanting the site is the most difficult thing. . Described this specific tenant space as representing an unusual situation in that it is a retail storefront in an industrial park. . Admitted that there is a problem with the two lots' configuration. The meets and bounds included on the Title Report cannot be figured out. . Explained that he has different investors on two different parcels. . Stated that it would be difficult to merge the two parcels but he was sure he could have the property surveyed and do lot line adjustments and/or easements to resolve the existing problems. Commissioner Rocha asked staff if they are satisfied with the condition of approval that requires the lot line adjustment within 90 days of this approval. Does the condition of approval need adjustment? Acting Director Jackie C. Young: . . Reported that the issue is clarity. . Pointed to Attachment 6, which is the Assessor's Parcel map and reminded that this map is not necessarily the legal description of a parcel and is stamped with the text, "for tax purposes only." . Added that boundaries shown on the attachment are approximate. . Informed that the provision of a Title Report is a part of the application packet requirement. This project site's Title Report includes a very confusing meets and bounds description. Two legal parcels make up this project site. . Stated that Attachment 7 approximates the site. However, without a survey, there is a potential problem as it is not clear if the property line runs through the buildings on site. If the property line does run through, that creates UBC (Uniform Building Code) problems including the types of openings allowed. . Cautioned that this problem is not easily handled through a lot line adjustment. . Said that she is unsure why the status of the parcels was not cleared up or merged at the time that these current LLC's were formed. It appears that the LLC's were formed according to Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 on the APN map. . Added that some construction on this site appears to cross property lines. . Advised that staff cannot turn a blind eye to such a potential problem once it is discovered. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 6 Chair Roseberry asked staff for the minimum width of lot required in this zoning district and how long it could reasonably take to process the lot line adjustment or lot merger. Planner Daniel Fama advised that the condition of approval allows 90 days to apply to Public Works for the lot line adjustment; 90 days to process said application; and 90 days to process the grant deed to finalize it for a total of 270 days. Chair Roseberry said it appears this property owner believes the lot merger will not "fly" with his partnerships. Mr. Stephen Finn: . Said he did not think the merger would be acceptable to the partners. . Reported that the improvement that crosses the property line represents refrigeration units that were installed to serve the dough making business serving Pizza My Heart restaurants. . Added that they are stuck with that particular tenant lease for one more year. . Assured that when this particular lease is up those refrigerator units would be torn out. . Stated his belief that a lot line adjustment would work out the problems. Chair Roseberry said that it appears that there are setback and adjacency issues. He asked staff if something is currently located too close to property lines. Acting Director Jackie C. Young advised that the two buildings connected with the refrigeration units appear to cross a property line. Chair Roseberry said that they are one building now with that connection. Acting Director Jackie C. Young advised that one cannot have an improvement that crosses the property line. Chair Roseberry said that this situation is more complicated than thought and that until the property line issue is resolved it is difficult to approve this Conditional Use Permit especially if the property owner does not feel that merging these two lots is a viable option. Acting Director Jackie C. Young said that the applicant originally asked for additional time rather than saying that it could not be done. Chair Roseberry: . Said that it appears that the property owner is resisting the merger of these two lots but staff is stating that the problem cannot be fixed simply with a lot line adjustment. . Suggested that further study is necessary including determining how wide each lot needs to be. . Added that it appears one lot would become landlocked with a lot line adjustment so he is not sure what the options are aside from merging. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 7 Commissioner Gairaud said that he thought both lots were owned by Mr. Finn. Mr. Stephen Finn: . Explained that he is the property owner but with different partners for each lot under different LLC (Limited Liability Corporations). . Said that he thought that the lot line adjustment could work. If not, he would work with his investors on the merger. . Stated his preference for a lot line adjustment over a merger, if possible. Commissioner Rocha said that the Planning Commission is not the body to determine the property line issues but rather to concentrate on the Conditional Use Permit. Chair Roseberry agreed but said that the property line issue needs to be cleared up first. Commissioner Alderete said that he has no answer yet but does have an opinion. Mr. Stephen Finn said that if the lot line adjustment is not possible, he gives his word as the manager of the LLC that the lot merger would occur. Mr. Courtney Maxwell, Applicant: . Explained that he relocated from Southern California in 1993. . Said that he wants to come home to Campbell. . Reported that the other tenants on this property have high regard for this landlord/owner as he always does what he says he will do. . Advised that he had an initial staff approval but problems came up when the number of trainers went up. Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Courtney Maxwell for a better feel as to the day to day operations of his business 'including age groups, parking and how people come and go. Mr. Courtney Maxwell: . Stated that he has referrals from chiropractors, doctors, orthopedists and others. . Said that his client list is always changing and clients range in age between 8 and 82, male and female, short term versus years. There are different reasons why they come to him. . Added that there are lots of misconceptions as to what trainers do. . Advised that his operational hours are generally before and after work hours. Today he was working between 4 and 7 a.m.; during lunch between 11 a.m. and 1 pm.; and later between 4 and 7 p.m. Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Courtney Maxwell if he is familiar with the area's morning rush hour. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 8 Mr. Courtney Maxwell said yes. Chair Roseberry asked if the building at 186 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue is big enough for his business. Mr. Courtney Maxwell said that he had two locations and got approved (business license) for 186 E. Sunnyoaks, Units A and B. He said there was later a mix up regarding the proposed number of trainers on site thus requiring this Conditional Use Permit. Chair Roseberry again asked Mr. Courtney Maxwell if this facility will be big enough for his business. Mr. Courtney Maxwell replied yes. Mr. Mike Johnson, Colliers Real Estate, Broker for property: . Stated that this property was invisible to Campbell previously as it was under the same owners for 60 years and had been poorly kept and maintained. . Said that today it is a very visible part of the area with new landscaping, awnings, asphalt, parking and more upgrades. . Said that as the site broker he is hampered by the nature of some of these buildings, some of which were constructed in the 1940's. . Advised that this particular retail space was built in 1958/59 and is non-functional as an industrial building. . Described some of the other uses on site as including a veterinary clinic, deli, photo studio, contractor and publisher. This tenant space (2 units) was previously occupied by a retail window sales tenant. . Stated that this is exactly the type of tenant that is ideal for this space as it is more service type than retail. It is a good choice for Campbell. . Said that Mr. Courtney Maxwell is in a tough spot as he signed his lease in July. It had been thought that just a business license was necessary and not a Conditional Use Permit. However, it was flagged by City staff as requiring a Use Permit. . Explained that the issue of the lot line was raised just three weeks ago. . Said that he hopes this Use Permit will be granted tonight contingent upon the condition of approval to clarify the property line. If approval is delayed, this guy (Mr. Courtney Maxwell) is kind of out of business. . Said that the City has as a "hammer" the condition that requires the clarification of the property line or the Conditional Use Permit/business license approval is lost. . Assured that Mr. Stephen Finn is a man of his word. . Reiterated his hope that this request would be approved with conditions. Chair Roseberry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.1. Commissioner Ebner asked staff how they felt about the allowance of 270 days to complete the lot merger. He asked if there is a concern about allowing this tenant to occupy the site prior to the merging of the two lots. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 9 Acting Director Jackie C. Young: . Said that staff did find this issue with the property lines when reviewing submitted materials required with a Use Permit application. . Added that staff called the broker immediately upon determining a problem. . Assured that staff is trying to create a win-win situation with the lot merger so that there would be no need for cross easements, to chop off parts of buildings, etc. . Said that she is not privy to the owner's partnership agreements and how they work. . Informed that the meets and bounds on the Title Report offer a very odd description. . Said that problems arise if the site is described as Lot 1 and Lot 2 and no one knows where property boundaries are located. Commissioner Ebner said that it appears that the owner needs to make decisions about these lots. He added that he feels bad for the tenant here. Acting Director Jackie C. Young said that, from a Planning perspective, a lot line adjustment is much more complicated than a lot merger. A lot merger is cleaner. Commissioner Alderete: . Said that it appears that staff did a lot of work with the applicant and property owner. . Asked staff to provide a worse case scenario in the event that the lot merger does not work out. . Questioned whether the Planning Commission is at risk by moving forward in attempting to approve this Conditional Use Permit. If the Use Permit must be revoked is there more to it than that? . Stated that it appears the Commission is reviewing something that is not yet ready for approval. City Attorney William Seligmann: . Said that this is difficult. . Added that the Use Permit could be approved. It would not be revoked but rather would not take effect until the conditions are met. . Stated that the options available are to deny or conditionally approve this with some condition to clean up the property line situation. Commissioner Alderete asked about the proposed six-month window. If approved, the applicant could not conduct his business until that six months expires. City Attorney William Seligmann said that he could not lawfully conduct business until the lot line adjustment or lot merger was completed. He said that whether the use was established during this time would become an enforcement level issue. It would be at the discretion of the Code Enforcement staff on whether or not to take action. Chair Roseberry: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 10 . Suggested imposing milestones being met at the 90, 180 and 270-day time frame. . Stated that this tenant is well intentioned and had been led to believe that he could occupy his space. . Said that he is less sympathetic to the broker and/or owner who should have done more due diligence. Commissioner Ebner pointed out that even if approved this applicant could not begin operations for up to 270 days. He asked why this item is even on the agenda as these outstanding property issues are not within the bailiwick of the Planning Commission. He said this should not yet be before this Commission. Chair Roseberry suggested a contingent approval. Commissioner Gairaud said that so much still needs to be clarified. He asked if it is true that this applicant can work here as a single entity with a business license. City Attorney William Seligmann said that a business license does not guarantee the right to occupy a location if zoning problems exist. He said that this use cannot lawfully operate here at this time until the Conditional Use Permit is approved. Commissioner Alderete: . Expressed his agreement that this applicant is well intentioned. . Added that he looks forward to him coming "home" to Campbell. . Said that he senses urgency for a decision. . Stated that it is not for the Commission to determine how soon he can go into operation but rather whether said operation is a good use on this site. . Stressed the importance of being sure the Commission understands the impacts either way it goes. Commissioner Rocha: . Said that the Conditional Use Permit situation is always dicey. . Added that what has been brought forth is a package that is not completely vetted out. . Concluded that the Commission is not yet in a position to make a judgment on this request under current site circumstances. Chair Roseberry: . Said that he tends to agree and that more input is needed from the City Attorney. . Added that if everyone were on board with Condition 11 it would be easier to understand how this would work. . Stated that good faith has been demonstrated by the owner. . Asked about the possibility of revocation if the condition for the lot merger is not met. City Attorney William Seligmann: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 11 . Said that the Conditional Use Permit could be approved with a revocation type of condition. . Advised that violations of the Subdivision Map Act could create problems here. . Agreed that milestones could be imposed via conditions of approval but could result in practical problems as well. . Cautioned that it is very difficult to unwind a situation if conditions are not met. Commissioner Alderete: . Agreed that there was some risk. . Added that what is clear is that granting this Conditional Use Permit is not what is going to put this business into operation on this property as this applicant wants. . Clarified that action is necessary by the property owner to complete either a lot line adjustment or lot merger. . Proposed a continuance of this application to a date uncertain to allow that process to play out. . Reiterated that he did not think that granting this Use Permit will put this applicant in operation right away. Commissioner Gairaud: . Said that as written this Use Permit would be valid for five years. . Asked what happens after that time, does he reapply? . Suggested that one option might be to offer a much shorter term of approval. Commissioner Ebner: . Said that the City Attorney is saying that this could become a can of worms later on. . Advised that he is leaning to supporting a continuance. . Acknowledged the improvements made to the property by the new owner and said they have done a great job. . Expressed hope that this issue can be worked out soon. . Said that he agrees with Commissioner Alderete on his suggestion for a continuance. . Reiterated that having this tenant there under these conditions is not legal. Chair Roseberry said that another alternative is a denial but he did not think that alternative was in everyone's best interest. Commissioner Alderete: . Pointed out page 4 of the staff report where staff advises that a portion of the Campbell Municipal Code adopted earlier this year contains provisions for uses like this in this zone and includes five year limits. . Added that if this use is to be allowed for a short period, he hopes it is a very short period. Chair Roseberry re-opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 12 Mr. Stephen Finn, Property Owner: . Asked staff how long it would take to merge lots. Acting Director Jackie C. Young: . Advised that a lot merger is a lot simpler to process than a lot line adjustment as it describes the exterior boundary of the parcel. . Stated that the submittal time is 90 days and execution time is 90 days for a total of six months. . Suggested that if the Use Permit is made valid for just six months, it would match the six month time frame allowed to secure a final lot merger. . Added that the condition outlining the Use Permit duration can be crafted so that if the parcel merger is completed within the initial six-month time frame, this Use Permit would automatically be extended for another 4.5 years for a full 5 year approval from the date of initial approval without further action being required. Mr. Stephen Finn: . Agreed that the meets and bounds description provided on the Title Report is not very accurate. . Stated his commitment to merging these lots. . Added that if his partners won't agree to this action he would buy them out. . Said that he feels bad for this applicant. . Assured that he would take action immediately. Chair Roseberry re-c1osed the public hearing for Agenda Item No.1. Commissioner Alderete: . Stated that he would love to see this request go forward. . Reminded that the City Attorney has cautioned that once this use is allowed, if things go south, it would be very hard to unwind/undo this action. . Suggested the need to work on Condition 11 to address the issue of merging these lots and forgo language that refers to lot line adjustment. Commissioner Rocha: . Said that he is perplexed as to what is being moving forward. . Reminded that there will still be a violation for this use until the lots are merged. Chair Roseberry reminded that what would be granted is just a six-month Use Permit approval. City Attorney William Seligmann: . Suggested amending Condition 4 to limit the initial approval to six months with an automatic extension to the full five years from the date of approval if all conditions are satisfied within that six-month time frame. Chair Roseberry asked if Condition 11 also requires modification. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 13 City Attorney William Seligmann said he does not see a problem there. Commissioner Gairaud asked if the last two paragraphs of Condition 11 should remain. City Attorney William Seligmann assured that they were okay. Commissioner Alderete said that either lot line adjustment or lot consolidation is mentioned. Should that be changed? City Attorney William Seligmann replied no. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Ebner, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3910 granting a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2008- 133) for a personal training and consultation facility (health/fitness facility) with late-night operations on property owned by Industrial Property Co., LLC, for an initial six-month period to extend to a five- year approval upon satisfaction of Condition 11 requiring the merger of the two lots that comprise this address within that six- month time frame, on property located at 186 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Gairaud, Rocha and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Gibbons ABSTAIN: None Chair Roseberry advised that this action is final in 10 calendar days unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk. *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The written report of Ms. Jackie C. Young, Acting Community Development Director, was accepted as presented with the following additions: . Reported that Council met on October 7 and conducted a Study Session on the pending Housing Element Update. The last Housing Element was adopted in 2001. The next Housing Element will cover 2007/2014 and this update is required per State law. This Study Session reviewed strategies. . Advised that Council took second reading of the changes to Historic Preservation Code. . Announced that there are three items pending for the October 28th Planning Commission meeting including extensions for PD projects at 705 W. Hacienda and 511/555 W. Campbell Avenue and the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan. . Added that a Study Session would be held just prior to the October 28th regular PC meeting to discuss a proposed Downtown Campbell Alcohol Beverage Policy. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for October 14, 2008 Page 14 Commissioner Alderete said that it is a testament to this Planning Commission and to staff that 1.5 hours was spent on this evening's item to make sure that we are doing the right thing. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of October 28, 2008. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: &~ Bob Roseberry, Cha'. ATTEST: