PC Min 01/24/1989PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA
7:30 P.M. MINUTES JANUARY 24, 1989
The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular
session in the City Hall Council Chambers, 70 N. First St., Campbell,
California.
ROLL CALL
Present Commissioners: George Kasolas, Ron Christ,
Robert Stanton, James Walker, DuWayne
Dickson, and Bruce Olszewski; Principal
Planner Phil Stafford, Planner II Tim Haley,
Planning Director Steve Piasecki, Engineering
Manager Bill Helms, City Attorney Bill
Seligmann, and Recording Secretary Linda
Dennis.
Absent
Commissioner Perrine.
Chairman Olszewski noted that Commissioner Perrine's absence is excused as
r "paternity leave". The Commission congratulated Commissioner and Mrs. Perrine
on the birth of their daughter, Danielle Therese. -
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Walker, Dickson - That the minutes of the Planning Commission
meeting of January 10, 1989 be approved with
the following corrections. Motion carried
unanimously (6-0-1).
COMMUNICATIONS
Corrections: Pg. 6, Vote on Motion - should
read "AYES: Kasolas, Perrine, Walker,
Olszewski, Dickson. NOES: Christ,
Stanton." Pg. 6, Para. 3 should read
"...relates to more of a retail situation
than what is present..." Pg. 7, Para. 9
should read "Commissioner Dickson asked that
Staff review the reasons for the requirements
of the use permit..."
Principal Planner Stafford noted that communications received pertain to
specific items on the agenda.
Chairman Olszewski noted that he received a letter from Mrs. Dorothy Shattuck,
391 California St., Campbell.
The letter (attached hereto) was read into the record by the Recording
Secretary.
-2-
Commissioner Kasolas stated that the issue now brought to light is that of the
role of the Planning Commission in the development of the downtown area. It is
clear that there has been some concern expressed throughout the community of
the necessity of the public input in the process in order to give direction how
our community is going to develop. It appears that the Planning Commission may
want to take note of this concern and work toward the Commission having input
in the planning process in the redevelopment area. Commissioner Kasolas
continued that at this point it would appear that planning decisions are being
made in the redevelopment area without the benefit of public input; and,
Commissioner Kasolas could not recall when public input has not been involved
in any process in the 25 years he has lived in Campbell. Planning Commission
should be a vehicle from which the public can have better access to its
government and be involved in the decision-making process.
Commissioner Dickson agreed "whole-heartedly", noting that he had expressed
concern when the issue first surfaced of plans going to the Redevelopment
Agency before the Commission.
Chairman Olszewski noted that this issue had been brought up under Discussion
at the last meeting; and, that he would meet with the Planning Director to see
if this matter can be agendized as soon as possible.
Commissioner Christ felt that the issue would be more appropriate for
discussion at a study session. The matter has been discussed several times
before, and even expressed to the Council in a memorandum. It would seem that
progress would not be made by discussing the matter amongst the Commission.
Commissioner Kasolas noted that expecting to get policy or direction from an
informal meeting is appropriate; and that it is proper to agendize the item
through Staff and get a report back from the Chairman.
~ * ~
ORAL REQUESTS
Chairman Olszewski invited anyone in the audience to address the Commission on
issues not agendized. There being no one, the Chairman proceeded with the set
agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
There were no items for the Consent Calendar at this time.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
M 88-20 Continued public hearing to consider the
Bonnett, R. application of Mr. Robert Bonnett for
approval of a modification to a previously
approved Planned Development Permit to allow __.
a revised parking plan on property known as
145 Dillon Ave. in a PD (Planned
Development/Industrial) Zoning District.
-3-
Planner II Haley reviewed the Staff Report of January 24, 1989, noting that
Staff is recommending that the applicant's request be denied and that the
applicant comply with his agreement dated January 27, 1988; however, if the
Commission wishes to recommend approval, Staff would suggest a period of two
years subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Report.
Chairman Olszewski noted a letter (attached hereto) from Mr. Jim Eller,
Attorney for the applicant.
Commissioner Stanton reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. Given the fact that a parking district is
unlikely, it is the Committee's recommendation that the applicant comply with
the agreement signed in January 1988.
Chairman Olszewski opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on
this item,
Mr. Jim Eller, Attorney, discussed on-site parking, noting that at 9:00 a.m.
this morning there were 7 cars on the subject site, 31 vehicles on the Southern
Pacific Railroad property; and, 45 cars on the rest of Dillon Ave. in that
particular block. A check at 4:30 p.m. indicated 6 cars on the subject site;
26 on the railroad's property; and 37 vehicles still on Dillon Ave. Mr. Eller
felt that these numbers were significant is pointing out that this property is
not the only one with a parking problem. Mr. Eller asked that this project be
approved for a two year period to allow time to see what happens in the
redevelopment area and on Dillon Ave., and to allow the owner to participate in
possible solutions.
M/S: Walker, Stanton - That the public hearing on M 88-20 be
closed. Motion carried 5-1-1 (Commissioner
Christ voting "no").
Commissioner Christ believed that it was important to get the street
improvements installed. One of ways to accomplish this was to see that the
applicant did what was shown on the presented plans, and then be given a period
of time to comply with Ordinance $1098. Commissioner Christ continued that he
cannot support the second alternative presented by Staff because it is not
giving the applicant time to comply with the approved plan, and asked for Staff
comment in light of the additional recommendation and conditions 20, 21 & 22.
He expressed concern that if there are additional approvals on the site, then
nothing else will happen on the property. Commissioner Christ stated that he
is talking about compliance with the original plans - not the modified plans
presented this evening.
City Attorney Seligmann clarified that there is a current agreement for the
construction of the street improvements imposed as a condition of the original
approval. The City Council has authority to require compliance with the
agreement at any time; the Council has not required compliance thus far in the
interest of putting together a LID in the area (referring to condition 18).
-4-
Chairman Olszewski indicated that the issue is a request to modify a previously
approved plan, and that there has been a building added to the site without
approval, and that the available parking is not adequate for the existing
structures.
Principal Planner Stafford indicated that this was correct. The applicant is
now requesting some additional time to explore solutions to parking problems.
Mr. Seligmann stated that as the conditions are written it would require
conformance with the original plans and Ordinance 4E 1098 within two years. In
the meantime, the applicant would have~to comply with the modified plans
presented this evening.
M/S: Stanton, Walker - That the Planning Commission recommend that
the City Council accept the Negative
Declaration which has been prepared for this
applicant; and, that the Commission adopt a
Resolution recommending that .the City Council
deny M 88-20 and that the applicant comply
with his agreement dated January 27, 1988.
Discussion on motion _
Commissioner Christ opposed the motion, indicating that it was not in the best
interest of the City to proceed on this application.
Commissioner Dickson opposed the motion, noting that Condition 22 protects the
City; and, in light of previous discussion on redevelopment issues.
Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would also be voting no.
Commissioner Stanton noted that the situation has been going on since 1977;
and, that a precedent would be set for Dillon Ave. if a decision was made on
this problem.
Chairman Olszewski echoed Commissioner Stanton's feelings, noting that the
problem has been before the Commission for a long time; no decisions have been
made; there is nothing concrete pertaining to a parking district in the area;
and, although the applicant has contacted various jurisdictions in the area to
find additional parking, a solution has not been forthcoming.
Commissioner Christ noted that this applicant has not been the owner of the
property for the entire time the issue has been before the Commission; that the
applicant bought the property in the nonconforming state; and, its really only
been before the Commission for 2-1/2 years (not 10). A lot of that time has
been delays on the part of the applicant, and on the part of the Planning
Commission and Site & Architectural Review Committee giving the applicant time
to pursue the parking issue. Commissioner Christ felt that the applicant has
been acting in good faith to come up with alternatives; however, those
alternatives appear to be exhausted. a.t this point. There is one obvious
problem with the site -- parking. Commissioner Christ concluded that giving
the applicant time to comply would be in the best interests of the City, from a
standpoint of gaining street improvements, etc.
-5-
Commissioner Walker indicated that the agreement with the applicant came from
negotiations with the City Council, and perhaps the matter should go back to
the Council.
Commissioner Kasolas noted that Condition 18 has always been present, however
it's been the City's option not to call the bond because they City wants to
form an LID for the area. If the parking is really problem, have you not
temporarily solved the problem when the street is improved, the applicant will
have difficulty leasing the property because of lack of parking in the area due
to the elimination of "nose-in" parking.
Chairman Olszewski asked if Staff recognizes the 7 parking spaces on the
presented plans as workable?
Mr. Stafford stated that Staff did recognize the spaces workable as presented.
Vote on motion
AYES: Commissioners: Stanton, Walker, Olszewski
NOES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Christ, Dickson
ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine
Motion for denial fails.
M/S: Kasolas, Walker - That the public hearing on M 88-20 be
re-opened. Motion carried 5-1-1, with
Commissioner Stanton voting no, and
Commissioner Perrine being absent.
M/S: Kasolas, Dickson - That the public hearing on M 88-ZO be
continued to the Planning Commission meeting
of February 14, 1989, with the concurrence of
the applicant, in order that a full
Commission be present. Motion carried 5-1-1,
with Commission Stanton voting no, and
Commissioner Perrine being absent.
Commissioner Christ asked that Condition 20 be deleted if acceptable, and that
that Staff consider the impacts of such a deletion.
~ ~ ~
UP 89-01 Public hearing to consider the application of
Pruneyard Inn Mr. Peter Evenhuis for approval of a
Conditional Use Permit to allow an on-sale
general liquor license on property known as
1995 S. Bascom Ave. (The Pruneyard Inn) in a
C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District.
Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of January 24, 1989,
noting that Staff is recommending approval of the applicant's request.
Discussion ensued regarding the requirement for full kitchen services; the
definition of a full service bar and of a portable bar; and, the criteria used
by the Police Department in making recommendations on liquor licenses.
-6-
Chairman Olszewski opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on
this item. ---
Mr. Peter Evenhuis, applicant, explained that a full service bar refers to
permanent fixtures; and, noted that the hotel would like to have the option of
eventually having a fixed bar facility (not a night club) for its clientele.
M/S: Kasolas, Walker - That the public hearing on UP $9-01 be
closed. Motion carried 5-1-1-.
M/S: Kasolas, Walker - That the Planning Commission adopt the
attached findings and Resolution No. 2576
approving UP 89-01, subject to the following
conditions: (1) Mini-bars permitted in
guestrooms; and, (2) Portable service bars be
permitted for use in serving guests at
hotel-related functions, such as social
hours, meetings, receptions and cocktail
parties. Motion carried 6-0-1, with
Commissioner Perrine absent.
* * ~
GP 89-02 Public hearing to consider the application of
Murdock, R. Mr. Ray Murdock for a General Plan Amendment
from "Professional Office" to "Commercial" _
for a portion of property known as 1580 S.
Winchester Blvd. and 44 E. Rosemary Lane.
Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of January 24, 1989,
noting that the applicant is proposing to bring all the property under the
owner's control to the same zoning designation. At this time, the existing
medical building is bi-sected by different zoning designations.
Commissioner Kasolas asked the width of Rosemary Lane; if the Commission has
ever put a commercial zoning this distance down a residential street before;
and, if a house has ever been zoned commercial before. He noted that if Lot 49
is zoned Commercial is could become a fast-food restaurant.
Mr. Stafford responded that Rosemary Lane is 60' from curb to curb; Council
policy is to orient commercial land use to main streets; for the Commission's
information, the applicants intention is to file a parcel map to join all
parcels which would then orient the entire property towards Winchester Blvd.;
and, there would not be a new use on this property. Staff is supportive of
this proposal only because they have seen the maps to combine the lots.
Chairman Olszewski opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on
this item.
Mr. Ray Murdock, 14532 Woodside Dr., Saratoga, clarified that the intention for
Lot 49 would be for parking for the combined Lots 47 & 49; Lot 29 across the _..
street is also being used for parking; the intention is to get a better matrix
and parking situation; Lot 49 is currently a rental unit which does not provide
the best living conditions; and, approval of this request might result in the
abandonment of Lot 29 as parking.
-7-
Commissioner Christ noted that the zoning on Lot 49 does not have to be changed
to commercial in order to be used for parking.
Commissioner Walker asked about development plans for the subject property.
Mr. Murdock indicated that there are plans to develop retail on the front
section on Hamilton Ave., but the medical building will remain. .
M/S: Stanton, Christ - That the public hearing on GP 89-02 be
closed. Motion carried 6-0-1, with
Commissioner Perrine absent.
Commissioner Christ agreed that it makes sense to designate Lot 47 commercial;
however, he expressed concern about designating Lot 49 for commercial, noting
that commercial uses penetrating into the residential area usually creates
parking problems for the residential area. In that the applicant can proceed
with using Lot 49 for parking, he felt it appropriate to designated Lot 47
commercial but to leave Lot 49 as professional office.
M/S: Christ, Walker - That the Planning Commission, adopt
Resolution No. 2577, incorporating the
attached findings, recommending that the City
Council approve GP 89-02 for a General Plan
Amendment from Professional Office to
Commercial for Lot 47 only, and that Lot 49
remain Professional Office.
Discussion on motion
Commissioner Walker expressed concern about Lot 28 across the street, noting he
did not have a problem if Lot 28 were also Professional Office. He wished the
neighbors were here to be heard from.
Amendment to motion
Commissioner Kasolas asked that the motion be amended to provide for changing
Lot 49 and property adjacent to it to remain Professional Office; and the
remainder of Lot 47 facing Hamilton Ave. be changed to Commercial.
Commissioner Christ indicated that Lot 28 and 29, across the street, were
already commercial and provided a logical line. The suggested amendment would
result in the existing building still being two different zonings. He agreed
with the principal involved, but not the amendment and did not consider the
amendment friendly.
M/S: Kasolas, Dickson -
Discussion on amendment
That the motion be amended to provide for the
area to the south being changed to
Commercial, and the property fronting
Rosemary Lane remaining Professional Office.
Chairman Olszewski opposed the amendment and the motion, noting that it would
not provide for the highest and best use.
-8-
Vote on amendment
AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Dickson
NOES: Commissioners: Christ, Stanton, Walker, Olszewski
ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine.
Motion to amend fails.
Vote on motion -
AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Christ, Walker, Dickson
NOES: Commissioners: Stanton, Olszewski
ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine.
* ~ ~
ZC 89-02 Public hearing to consider the application of
Murdock, R. Mr. Ray Murdock for a Zone Change from P-0
(Professional Office) to C-1-S (Neighborhood
Commercial) for a portion of properties known
as 1590 S. Winchester Blvd. and 44 E.
Rosemary Lane. _
Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of January 24, 1989,
noting that Staff, in light of the Commission's recommendation on GP 89-02,
is recommending that the zoning on Lot 47 be changed from P-0 (Professional _
Office) to C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial), and that Lot 49 remain P-0
(Professional Office).
Chairman Olszewski opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on
this item.
M/S: Walker, Stanton - That the public hearing on ZC 89-02 be
closed. Motion carried 6-0-1, with
Commissioner Perrine being absent.
M/S: Walker, Kasolas - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2578 recommending that the City Council
approve a Zone Change on Lot 47 from P-0
(Professional Office) to C-1-S (Neighborhood
Commercial) only; and, that Lot 49 remain
zoned P-0 (Professional Office). Motion
carried with the following roll call vote:
.~ - C-YU ~L'J
AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Christ, Stanton, Walker,
~,~rFC~-lor-~ NOES: Commissioners: Olszewski
ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine.
Chairman Olszewski stated that his opposition was because he felt the property
was not being used for the highest and best interest of the City.
The Commission recessed at 9:25 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:35 p.m.
Commissioner Kasolas left the meeting at this time.
~ ~ ~
-9-
GP 89-03 Public hearing to consider the application of
Mayland Builders Mayland Builders, Inc., for approval of a
General Plan Amendment from Low Density
Residential (less than 4.5 units per gross
acre) to Low Density Residential (less than 6
units per gross acre) for property known as
1075 Hacienda Ave.
Planner II Haley reviewed the Staff Report of January 24, 1989,-noting that
Staff is of the opinion that the requested General Plan change would provide a
transition of residential density from the Low-Medium Density Residential to
the south and east of this site to the Low Density Single Family Residential
area to the north and west of the site.
Chairman Olszewski opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on
this item.
Mr. Leo Boyd, 945 Torero Plaza, indicated that the requested change appears
unnecessary.
Ms. Dawn Ollaly, 1016 Hacienda Ave., expressed opposition townhomes and spoke
in favor of single family homes. _
Mr. William R. Fry, 1160 Sonuca Ave., spoke in favor of the development.
M/S: Walker, Stanton - That the public hearing on GP 89-03 be
closed. Motion carried 5-0-2, with
Commissioners Kasolas and Perrine being
absent.
M/S: Stanton, Walker - That the Planning Commission recommend that
the City Council accept the Negative
Declaration which has been prepared for this
request; and, that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution No. 2579, incorporating the
attached findings, recommending that the City
Council amend the Land Use Element of the
General Plan as requested under GP 89-03.
Motion carried with the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Christ, Stanton, Walker, Dickson, Olszewski
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine.
~ ~ ~
ZC 89-03 Public hearing to consider the application of
PD 89-01 Mayland Builders for approval of a Zone
Mayland Builders Change from R-1-8 (Single Family Residential,
minimum lot size 8,000 sq.ft.) to PD (Planned
Development); and approval of a Planned
Development Permit, plans, elevations, and
development schedule to allow construction of
4 single family homes on property known as
1075 Hacienda Ave.
-10-
Planner II Haley reviewed the Stff Report of January 24, 1989, noting that
Staff is recommending approval of this item.
Commissioner Christ asked about the width of the street, the sidewalks, and how
far the fence would be from the sidewalks on Hacienda Ave.
Chairman Olszewski asked about the turning radius on the cul-de-sac.
Engineering Manager Helms commented that the intent of the Publ-ic Works
requirement was that, if the Commission directed this to be a public street, it
would have to be a wider street with a minimum 43 foot radius for the
cul-de-sac. The presented plan does not meet that radius, therefore it has to
be a private street. With the geometries shown on the drawings, Staff is of
the opinion that parking should not be allowed in the cul-de-sac. There would
be a planting strip between the curb and the sidewalk for sight visibility.
Discussion ensued regarding the usual lack of maintenance with parking strip
planting areas. It was noted that pavement treatment or irrigation system might
be one solution to maintenance problem, as well as low maintenance plant
materials.
~_ Commissioner Stanton reported that this item was considered by the Site and _
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval.
Commissioner Christ expressed interest in the type of fencing and fencing
elevations along Hacienda Ave. and that the landscaping plans address the
maintenance of landscaping along the street.
Mr. Haley indicated that the proposed fencing is stucco posts with wood slats,
staggered, and set back 3-4 feet to provide landscaping between the sidewalk
and fence. Additionally, the conditions of approval require the fence plan to
be approved by Staff.
Chairman Olszewski opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak.
Mr. Mike Abdullahi, Mayland Builders, stated that he is willing to meet all the
conditions of approval and address the landscaping concerns of the Commission.
Commissioner Christ asked what the impacts would be if the cul-de-sac were
developed to City standards.
Mr. Haley responded that the developer would not be able to achieve the 6,000
sq.ft. lots. Without the cul-de-sac proposal, there could be 3 single family
lots facing the street with a flag lot to the rear.
M/S: Walker, Stanton - That the public hearing on ZC 89-03/PD 89-01
be closed. Motion carried 5-0-2, with
Commissioners Kasolas and Perrine being
absent.
-11-
M/S: Stanton, Christ - That the Planning Commission recommend that
the City Council accept the Negative
Declaration which has been prepared for this
project; and, that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution Nos. 2580 & 2581,
incorporating the attached findings,
recommending that the City Council approve ZC
89-03 and PD 89-01, subject to`conditions as
indicated in the Staff Report of January 24,
1989, with conditions 2 & 3 coming back to
the Planning Commission for approval.
Discussion on motion
Commissioner Dickson stated that he was pleased with the R-1 proposal for this
corner, although he was not especially pleased with the design of the project.
Chairman Olszewski opposed the motion stating that he did not necessarily think
that the proposed development was good. He was not satisfied that the
configuration of the cul-de-sac was workable and, that it could create a
negative situation with cars backing out of the cul-de-sac onto the street.
Chairman Olszewski continued that he saw nothing wrong with flag lots or _
reducing the number of units; and, he did not like the fencing proposal.
Vote on motion
AYES: Commissioners: Christ, Stanton, Walker, Dickson
NOES: Commissioners: Olszewski
ABSENT: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine.
Commissioner Christ requested that if Staff sees an instance where there is a
long street frontage, that the Commission get site drawings showing the
buildings and the fence.
~ ~ ~
S 89-02 Public hearing to consider the application
Tersigni, J. of Mr. Joseph Tersigni for approval of plans
and elevations to allow the construction of a
single family homes on property known as 1295
Harriet Ave. in an R-1-9 (Single Family
Residential) Zoning District.
Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of January 24, 1989,
noting that Staff is recommending approval.
Commissioner Stanton reported that this item was discussed by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval.
Chairman Olszewski asked about the size of the house, and how_it fits in with
the neighborhood.
-12-
Planner II Haley responded that the proposed home is a little large for the
neighborhood; however, there have been new homes constructed in the area of the
same size. Additionally, there are a variety of architectural styles in this
area.
Chairman Olszewski opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on
this item.
M/S: Walker, Stanton - That the public hearing on S ~9-02 be
closed. Motion carried 5-0-2, with
Commissioners Kasolas and Perrine being
absent.
M/S: Walker, Stanton - That the Planning Commission adopt the
attached findings and approve S 89-02,
subject to conditions indicated in the Staff
Report of January 24,.1989. Motion carried
with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Christ, Stanton, Walker, Dickson, Olszewski
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine. _
S 89-03 Public hearing to consider the application of
Kirkorian Development Ira Kirkorian Developments for approval of
plans and elevations to allow the
construction of a retail and professional
office building on property known as 1650 W.
Campbell Ave. in a C-1-S (General Commercial)
Zoning District.
Planner II Haley reviewed the Staff Report of January 24, 1989. The
Architectural Advisor has suggested painting and providing the existing
shopping center with treatments to blend the proposed structure with existing
buildings. Staff noted that the parking for the entire shopping center is
somewhat deficient if all the uses are added together; however, this proposal
does improve the situation by restriping the lot, thereby adding 50 spaces.
Commissioner Christ asked if the parking area in the rear of the center would
be striped; if spaces are being lost in the front of the center and gained in
the rear; and, if customer parking is being lost and employee parking gained
because customers would not normally use the rear area. He expressed concern
about the potential loss of customer spaces, and suggested some type of access
or walkway to the rear spaces..
Mr. Haley indicated that the rear area would be striped; and, the availability
of spaces is being shifted from the front to the rear.
Commissioner Stanton reported that this item was discussed by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval and
feels that the project has a potential of making a real impact on that area of
the community.
-13-
Chairman Olszewski questioned in the ingress/egress, the landscape areas, and
the viability of the parking spaces.
- Staff indicated that there is approximately 12 feet of landscaping along the
front of the parcel, and additional landscaping in the triangle area in front
of the building. Additionally, Public Works Staff is of the opinion that the
presented layout is fairly common in this type of center and should be
workable. __
Chairman Olszewski opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on
this item.
Mrs. Catherine Beedle, 1832 Villarita Dr., spoke against the development for
reasons for increased noise, traffic, and parking problems for the residents
across Campbell Ave. Mrs. Beedle presented letters of opposition from John and
Margaret Murray and Vicki L. Strickland (attached hereto). Mrs. Beedle noted
that people using the center are parking on Ensenada Dr.; and, she suggested
that a solid median be installed to prevent left turns to reduce the accident
rate in the area.
Mr. Kent Kirkorian, 106 Longmeadow Dr., Los Gatos, indicated that the proposed
building will be retail on the ground floor and that he will have his offices
on the second level. The proposed situation should create less of an impact on
the community that the existing delicatessen with 80 seats.
Discussion ensued regarding traffic in the area; traffic generated from this
center; the number of ingress/egress points from this property and the
possibility of limiting those driveways; and, the possibility of installing a
median island in the area.
Engineering Manager Helms noted that traffic studies are on-going in the City,
and it is Staff's opinion that this proposal will not impact the existing
situation in this area.
Commissioner Christ noted that it might be helpful to know when the last study
was done and when the next one is scheduled.
Chairman Olszewski asked if it would be a problem to create a report and send
it to Mrs. Beedle.
Mr. Jim Haus, 1821 W. Campbell Ave., stated that he would like to see more
traffic control along Campbell Ave.
M/S: Walker, Stanton - That the public hearing on S 89-03 be
closed. Motion carried 5-0-2, with
Commissioners Kasolas and Perrine being
absent.
M/S: Stanton, Christ - That the Planning Commission accept the
Negative Declaration which has been prepared
for this project; and, that the Planning
Commission adopt the attached findings and
approve S 89-03 as red-lined and subject to
conditions indicated in the Staff Report of
January 24, 1989, with an added condition
-14-
Commissioner Dickson requested that Staff do a study of parking requirements
for shopping centers.
AYES: Commissioners: Christ, Stanton, Walker, Dickson, Olszewski
NOES: Commissioners: None '
ABSENT: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine. -
* * ~
MISCELLANEOUS
SA 88-51
Plaza Car Wash
addressing the incorporation of colors and
elements to blend existing structures with
proposed building for approval of the Site &
Architectural Review Committee. Motion
carried with the following roll call vote:
Signing request - Plaza Car Wash - 1667 S.
Bascom Ave. - C-2-S (General Commercial)
Zoning District. _
Commissioner Stanton reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending continuance.
M/S: Dickson, Stanton - That SA 88-51 be continued to the Planning
Commission meeting of February 28, 1989, in
order that Staff can meet with the applicant
to discuss the sign proposal. Motion carried
5-0-2, with Commissioners Kasolas and Perrine
being absent.
~ ~
REPORTS OF STAFF ACTIVITIES
There were no Staff Activity Reports at this time.
INFORMAL DISCUSSION
Chairman Olszewski asked that the Study Session topics discussed at the last
meeting be circulated to the Commission and that the Commissioners prioritize
the items. It was suggested that some of the issues might be scheduled for
discussion when the regular agenda is light.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
Chairman Olszewski assigned Commissioners Stanton and Walker to the Site and
Architectural Review Procedure Subcommittee.
There were no other reports at this time.
~ ~ ~
-15-
nn TnTro~na~~Tm
There being no further business, the meeting
was adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
APPROVED: Bruce Olszewski
Chairman
ATTEST: Philip J. Stafford
Principal Planner/Acting Secretary
RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis
Recording Secretary
i
LAW OFFICffi OF
FERRARI, ALVAREZ, OLSEN BG OTTOBONI
EDWARD M. ALVAREZ A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
KATHERINEI.ANDERSON PAV L W. HOLMEF---
JOHN 1! ANTONAKOS P.O. SOX 16037 KATHRYN KAKI
MICHAEL J. ABKENAZER
333 WEST 6AN"I'A CLARA BTREE'Y: SUITE 700
TERENCE M. KAKI
RICHARD a HEHH
SA
N JOSE
CALIFORNLA 95115-0037 ANI'liONY J. KEILEI
MICHAEL D. HRAYTON .
, LOREN J. LEMOT.
WILLIAM H. HRYANT
(406) 280-0636
EMMA PE7PA MADRID
DAVID B. CAPLAN TELECOPIER (408) 280.OISI OEOROE P. MULCAIRE
SCOTT N.CARTER KENT E.OLBEN
FRANK E. CLOHAN JOHN M. OTTOHONI
MICHAEL W. COOPET - PALO ALTO OFFICE JUDITH M. OTT
ROHERi C. DANNEBKiOLD
660 HAMILTON AVENUE ROBERT L. QUAIL
DONALD G. DOUGHER'I'Y
PALO ALTO. CALIFORNIA 41301 CHARLES H. BAHEB
JAMES J. ELLER
(416) 3K1-3D33 MARK K.6MALLHOUBE
ANNE L. ENEA
- STEVEN W. STRAIN
CLARENCE J. FERRARL JR.
JOHN P. THCiRAU
PJUL K. HOOAN MELVA M. VOLLERBEN
. ROBERT O. WHYTE
January 19, 1989
Planning Department
City of Campbell
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
Attention: Timothy J. Haley
Re: M 88-20, 145 _Di l-l nn A ~ n~.~
Dear Mr. Haley:
As part of the ongoing review of the parking situation at
145 Dillon Avenue, I would like to provide some additional
information concerning the uses and parking needs of the current
tenants on the Dillon Avenue property. This information should
also be considered in conjunction with the plan and development
application submitted by Mr. .Robert Bonnett.
The following is a breakdown
their space occupancy and a brief
relates to the parking situation:
of the tenants on the property,
description of their use as it
1. Medivac Ambulance. They occupy approximately 760
square feet in the large building ("Building 1"), and there is
rarely more than two to three people in the premises at any time.
In addition, the occupants of this space are out on call during a
substantial portion of any given day.
2. Bonnett Construction Companv. They occupy
approximately 620 square feet in Building 1 and have only Mr.
Bonnett and his secretary working in the office. They generally
operate five days a week and are open during normal business
hours. However, Mr. Bonnett is in the office only about half of
the time.
LAW OFFICE6 OF
FERRARI, ALVdRF.Z, OLSEN 8! OTTOSOIITI
Planning Department
January 19, 1989
Page 2
3. CamAbell Firefighters. This is only one person who
occupies approximately 90 square feet in Building 1 and is
usually there only at night. Given his hours of operation, he
would not effect the daytime parking situation at all.
4. Magic Maid. This also is one person who occupies
approximately 125 square feet in Building 1 and is usually there
5 days a week. during normal business hours.
5. Cantonese Landscaping Service. They occupy
approximately 180 square feet in the smaller building (~~Building
2 ) There is usually only one or two persons using this space at
any given time. In addition, since the tenant is usually out
doing landscaping work, he is only in the office a few hours a
week very early in the morning or late in the afternoon.
6. N. Shades Accounting. This tenant occupies
_ approximately 300 square feet in Building 2 and has three people
in the office. They are usually there in the morning but are
often gone in the afternoon.
_ 7. A~.1 Cal Paint. This tenant occupies approximately 410
square feet in Building 2 and the owner and bookkeeper are the
only people in the office. The bookkeeper is only there in the
mornings, and the owner is usually out of the office at his job
sites.
8. Vacant Space. There is approximately 235 square feet
of vacant space in Building 2.
As you can see from the above information, the approximately
2,720 square feet of total leaseable space is used predominantly
by part time users. The time of-use also varies. The property
is subject to very low density types of users. Given the
proximity of this property to the downtown redevelopment area and
the low density use, it would seem that a parking area ratio of 1
car per 355 square feet of leaseable space would be justified and
within acceptable limits. In addition, I understand that the
City is considering increasing the parking area ratio for the
redevelopment area from 355 square feet per parking space to 385
square feet per space. From a cursory review of the occupants in
the redevelopment area, it appears that the property now being
reviewed is subject to less intense use then many of the
properties in the redevelopment area.
i.~w orricrs or
FERRARE, AI.vARF.Z, OLSEN EC Oz-rO$ONI
Planning Department
January 19, 1989
Page 3
If we are able to use a parking area ratio of 355 square
feet per parking space, it appears the plan which has been
proposed by Mr. Bonnett, which includes converting the existing
vacant building into parking use, could provide an adequate
solution to the parking situation for this property.
As you know, we have consistently argued that the parking
naeds of the Carpbell Station property should he allowed to be
supplemented by use of offsite parking. I have spoken with Bill
Helms in Public Works and he has advised me that the Public Works
Department is not necessarily adverse to the concept of offsite
parking. However, he is concerned that no immediate offsite
parking is available. While this is true for the moment, it
would appear that offsite parking may become available at some -
time in the future. Overtures have been made to acquire the ~_
Southern Pacific Railroad property which is very near the
_ Campbell Station property. As we all know, dealings with
Southern Pacific tend to be very protracted. Significant plans
are currently being studied for the redevelopment of the downtown
core area. Offsite parking will be a significant piece of the
redevelopment plan. As you are aware, the Campbell Station
property is not within the current redevelopment area but is very
Close thereto. I have spoken with Marty Woodworth regarding the
Redevelopment Agency's plan with respect to the Dillon Avenue
area. Currently, no long term plans exist for the handling of
the parking problem which exists throughout the Dillon Avenue
area. Mr. Woodworth advised me that he anticipates studies will
be done in the area in the future, but probably no earlier than
the spring of this year. I believe that everyone agrees that a
parking problem exists up and down Dillon Avenue. It seems
` improbable that any redevelopment plan to the area will not
address the significant ~.arking problem existing oi~ Dillon
Avenue. Given the potential for significant changes to occur
with respect to the development status of Dillon Avenue and the
redevelopment area over the next couple of years, it would be
shame and unfair for the Campbell Station property to be
irretrievably mutilated at this time only to find that two years
from now solutions for Campbell Stations' current problems would
be available. There has been no neighbor complaints with respect
to the parking status of the Campbell Station property nor has
the Campbell Station property been linked to or accused of
causing any vehicle accidents in the area.
LAW OFFICffi OF
FERRARI, ALVAREZ, OLSEN ~c OTTOBONI
Planning Department
January 19, 1989
Page 4
Campbell Station is a unique property which adds character
to the area. It would be unfair to single out the Campbell
Station property for a problem which exists throughout the area.
An area wide solution will have'to be found for the problem at
sometime in the future. Campbell Station should be allowed to
participate in that solution in the future.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. If.you
would like any additional information concerni~tg the current
tenants or their use of the property, please let me know.
_ JJE:GPM:mmc
GPM240m
cc: Robert Bonnett
s
I~ r~„ .•.
JAN 2 p 1989
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS: S 89-02
SITE ADDRESS: 1295 HARRIET AVENUE
P.C. MTG.: JANUARY 24, 1989 _.
1. The proposed project is an appropriate scale in relationship to the
adjacent developed uses.
2. The building design is considered acceptable and interesting by the
Architectural Advisor.
3. The parking provided exceeds the code requirements.
r
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FILE ~l S 89-02
SITE ADDRESS: 1295 HARRIET AVENUE
APPLICANT: JOSEPH TERSIGNI
P.C. MTG. DATE: JANUARY 24, 1989
__- The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this .application, that he/she
is required to meet the following conditions in accordance with the
Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the Laws of the State of
California. Additionally, the applicant is hereby notified that he/she is
required to comply with all applicable Codes or Ordinances of the_City of
Campbell and the State of California which pertain to this development and
are not herein specified.
1. Property to be fenced and landscaped as indicated and/or added in red
on the plans. Landscaping and fencing shall be maintained in
accordance with the approved plans.
2. Fencing plan indicating location and design details of fencing to be
submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Planning
Director prior to issuance of a building permit.
3. All parking and driveway areas to be developed in compliance with
C,~apter 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code. All parking spaces to
r be provided with appropriate concrete curbs of bumper guards.
4. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.36.150
of the Campbell Municipal code.
i 5. Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall
~ indicate clearly the location of all connections for underground
- utilities including water, sewer, electric, telephone and television
cables, etc.
6. Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell Municipal Code stipulates that any
contract for the collection and disposal of refuse, garbage, wet
garbage and rubbish produced within .the limits of the City of Campbell
shall be made with Green Valley Disposal Company. This requirement
applies to all single-family dwellings, multiple apartment units, to
all commercial, business, industrial, manufacturing, and construction
establishments.
7. Noise levels for the interior of residential units shall comply with
minimum State (Title 25) and local standards as indicated in the Noise
Element of the Campbell General Plan.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
8. Retaining walls at property lines are limited to a height of 15 inches
if constructed of wood.
9. Structural calculations required for construction plans.
10. Soils report is required with construction plans.
11. Title 24 Certification to be signed and registration number shown on
construction plans.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FILE 41 S 89-02
SITE ADDRESS: 1295 HARRIET AVENUE
APPLICANT: JOSEPH TERSIGNI
P.C. MTG. DATE: JANUARY 24, 1989
PAGE 2.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
12. Obtain an encroachment permit, pay fees and post surety to remove
driveway on Hacienda frontage and install driveway on Harriet Avenue
frontage.
~~F.: 1~1~i iii i-~~-I-~~ I ~~-~
l T (~ m (~~ rn Q,
.1 F--~----I ~ _ t"-t"-~~F---t'!-(u 1--7-1 ~ fTl fI
~ o c
~ • i
~ • •
s. ~ O e
j-~. F
... ~. ~
l
,,, ,
~I
I
l_ I_~ I I - 1J' ~/
~ Vot~rle
K~iIA Dr.
c~ ,..,
~~
i
P
J~
w•
I S 89-02
1295 HARRIET AVE.
j7.~
` e
o •
.. ~,~
i
~ ,. <
o,.
4 ~
1
V 0
0
- I
~.
~~
E1~~
• ~ ~ t
,,s.
V
J i ., o
o I ~ 9 !.1 ~
a.
6 + Q
C •, •.
' v ~t~ 48s4
-C JI
{,~
w. / 3/J'/ S g'~-D ~ -- - .~ .
~~_ ~ ~~ J
r, fi.- " err O /''~ L, ~ ~ ~ ~
_a ~ _
`. -~
~i~LCL~I ~y
'/ ~ w / (c .5~ ~~ ~: t.~.~9~ LC 14.x, ~.~.~
Q
~-~~. .
~~ ~ ~~ ~~
,,,Z`i~ ~?~~-r ~ ~- ~- ~~Lc_ ti..e ,~.,~..C_- -ten -~a~ i~ e~
~.L~-tilvtl.~+ ~ ,~t~` ~~-tt,~-- ~~`-C C~'"N~-~-- i~'Y'~-f1Lk- Gl~~-
~-
~ ~L dot-~ri- ,~-t~-~ ~G~'n-~~ ,~yy~-'e-- ~,=- ~~. /
~/"-'
.. n ~ l1'.. ~ :~C
.®
~;~ ~
~/ v - G ..,,r.
`. .®
~_ -
,M', ,,/
~~
~{{ ~ ~
~4~- ~ 9 d
,~ ~-~~.
D •'`'f-d;~ mac.-p-u.~~C .~t--+~.~.,
~~,
~C~-C-~, ~ tic-yti../c~:_ ~-~ ~'.~
i ~~
~- ~
,/fit !i:-n~s~ ~ l.~-u/1~ .~lL~ ~l%C'~ ~t' ~-~-~ '_
~~ ~ ..
,. / '
~ ~~ ,~~~~
~ ~~
t ~. :;
~ln ( ~' ;
w ~K~~~
;' #~~.
i ~.~ ~'~~
. ,~_, ,
_~
,~. ~ . ~
(/ '`~ ,
~~U _
1r ,
~'~
'q
~~-
~r~~~
~~ ~ ,
i.~n ~
`~`"
r~ ;~:.
1 ~/
~, ~,.
~. _®
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FILE 4~S 89-03
SITE ADDRESS: 1650 W. CAMPBELL AVENUE
APPLICANT: KIRKORIAN DEVELOPMENTS
PC MTG DATE: 1-24-89
The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this application, that he/she
is required to meet the following conditions in accordance with the
Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the Laws of the State of
California. Additionally, the applicant is hereby notified that he/she is
required to comply with all applicable Codes or Ordinances of the City of
Campbell and the State of California which pertain to this development and
are not herein specified.
1. Property to be fenced and landscaped as indicated and/or added in red
on the plans. Landscaping and fencing shall be maintained in
accordance with the approved plans.
2. Landscaping plan indicating type and size of plant material, and
location of irrigation system to be submitted to the Planning
Department and approved by the Site and Architectural Review Committee
and/or Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit.
3. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount
of 7 000 to insure landscaping, fencing, and striping of parking
areas within 3 months of completion of construction; or (2) file
written agreement to complete landscaping, fencing, and striping of
parking areas. Bond or agreement to be filed with the Planning
Department prior to application for a building permit.
4. Applicant to submit a plan to the Planning Department, prior to
installation of PG&E utility (transformer) boxes, indicating the
location of the boxes and screening (if boxes are above ground) for
approval of the Planning Director.
5. All mechanical equipment on roofs and all utility meters to be
screened as approved by the Planning Director.
6. All parking and driveway areas to be developed in compliance with
Chapter 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code. All parking spaces to
be provided with appropriate concrete curbs or bumper guards.
7. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.36.150
of the Campbell Municipal Code.
8. Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall
indicate clearly the location of all connections for underground
utilities including water, sewer, electric, telephone and television
cables, etc.
9. Sign application to be submitted in accordance with provisions of the
Sign Ordinance for all signs. No sign to be installed until
application is approved and permit issued by Planning and Building
Departments (Section 21.53 of the Campbell Municipal Code).
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FILE ~~S 89-03
SITE ADDRESS: 1650 W. CAMPBELL AVENUE
APPLICANT: KIRKORIAN DEVELOPMENTS
PAGE 2
10. Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell Municipal Code stipulates that any
contract for the collection and disposal of refuse, garbage, wet
garbage and rubbish produced within the limits of the City of Campbell
shall be made with Green Valley Disposal Company. This requirement
applies to all single-family dwellings, multiple apartment units, to
all commercial, business, industrial, manufacturing, and construction
establishments.
11. Trash container(s) of a size and quantity necessary to serve the
development shall be located in area(s) approved by the Fire
Department. Unless otherwise noted, enclosure(s) shall consist of a
concrete floor surrounded by a solid wall or fence and have
self-closing doors of a size specified by the Fire Department. All
enclosures to be constructed at grade level and have a level area
adjacent to the trash enclosure area to service these containers.
12. Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City
requirements for the handicapped.
r _
13. The applicant is hereby notified that the property is to be maintained
free of any combustible trash, debris and weeds, until the time that
actual construction commences. All existing structures shall be
secured by having windows boarded up and doors sealed shut, or be
demolished or removed from the property. Sect. 11.201 & 11.414, 1979
Ed. Uniform Fire Code.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
14. Retaining walls at property line are limited to a height of 15" if
constructed of wood.
15. Bathrooms on second floor to be handicapped accessible.
16. Glass in corridor areas to be approved for on-hour fire rating.
17. Plan does not show openable doors onto second floor deck.
18. Doors into exit corridors to swing in path of travel from second
floor. Plans are incomplete.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
19. An approved fire sprinkler system complying with NFPA Standard 413
shall be provided for the entire structure, U.F.C. 10.308(a), if
proposed amendments to fire code are adopted.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
No comments at this time.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FILE ~~S 89-03
SITE ADDRESS: 1650 W. CAMPBELL AVENUE
APPLICANT: KIRKORIAN DEVELOPMENTS
PAGE 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
20. Fencing plan to be submitted for Planning Director's approval prior to
issuance of building permit.
21. Applicant to submit proposal to repaint existing shopping center
buildings to incorporate building color elements of the new building
for approval of the Site and Architectural Review Committee prior to
final occupancy of new building.
RECOMP4ENDED FINDINGS: S 89-03
SITE ADDRESS: 1650 W. CAMPBELL AVENUE
APPLICANT: Kent Kirkorian
P.C. MTG: 1/24/89
1. The proposed project is an appropriate scale in relationship to
the adjacent developed uses.
2. The project is well designed and architecturally blends into the
neighborhood.
3. The building design is considered acceptable and interesting by the
Architectural Advisor.
4. The parking provided is considered adequate due to the shared
parking facilities of adjacent parcels.
5. Substantial landscaping has been provided which adds to the aesthetics
of the project.
***
~ ~ o~
\/ •
S
1650 ~:. CAMPBELL AVE.
-- -1 a CAMB L
°- a t l l l l l l l k ~ ~.
a -
~ - r
`,r,~ _.
Oi _ _
~ - - i
~ ; ~
- _ .__.~-~-T,~,..,_,~,~Q. J Q -
i
1-1.1
,~ -
Aleo-NOn• ~ p,__
f '~ o
~ _o
- ~ --
_ _ ~ _.
0
`~ i ~ o
I ~ i ~ a s
U ` C p
- s ~ u
- -
r ^~.-
• : ~
,~o _ ~ ~ c -
c ~
< ~ W; e
O= pntorlo^ _
Ln
~ l 6 3 ° E p a,
0
u O f S~ c V N
a
'sue o
s
y Colloon
.
u
Q
~ 9 • O ~
_ - ~
e ,
3
i~ N
o -
s ~ '~
.~~b
..,;,~ ,
pro,
0
= s.~ ~ °--
o - _
Kltn Ct __ o _- e - --
'AB5 _ - --
• _ ~ y
1 ~~. ~..
!. O r ( J
/r I,
-; V _ __~
h
f N
~ - _
~ - _~__ •
i' ~ - -
~ , ~' • _. _
Ylol wo ° _ _ _
_ - ~ - `e _
b ~- ~T I __ ~ ..
.~Y
RMeon
- r ~ _ -
~'~ - AeeP~leo _
a ° ~ ~ o
e ~ _ l
~ I ~H 1
lowo~o ~~:: Y
~ . ,. ~
~~ 1