Loading...
PC Min 10/25/1988PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 7:30 P.M. MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1988 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, Robert Stanton, Jay Perrine, Bruce Olszewski, James Walker (7:50 p.m.), J. DuWayne Dickson, and Ronald Christ; Principal Planner Philip Stafford; Planner II Tim Haley; Engineering Manager Bill Helms; City Attorney William. Seligmann; Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/S: Perrine, Dickson - That the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 11, 1988, be approved as submitted. Motion carried 6-0-1, with Commission Walker being absent. COMMUNICATIONS Principal Planner Stafford noted that communications received pertained to specific items on the agenda. ORAL REQUESTS Chairman Christ asked if anyone wished to address the Commission on an issue that was not agendized. There being no one, the Chairman proceeded with the set agenda. ~ * ~ ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS M 88-22 Request of Mr. Franklin Wiseman for approval Wiseman, F. of a modification to a sideyard setback requirement to allow the construction of a second story addition to a single family residence on property known as 577 N. Central Ave. in an R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, noting that Staff is recommending approval of this request. Mr. Stafford also noted communications (attached hereto) from Mr. Toshihiko Kaneko opposing the request, and from Celeste Lausten requesting a continuance on behalf of Dr. Anthony J. Sabatelle. Additionally, there has been another condition added by the City Attorney requiring the approval of the adjacent property owners. -2- Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and j Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval based on the applicant meeting the conditions before the Commission, particularly -~ securing the approval of the adjacent property owners. Discussion ensued regarding the types of setbacks on adjacent homes; the number of stories on adjacent properties; how the requirement for approval of the adjacent property owner came about and whether or not the requirement is arbitrary and capricious; the possibility of re-designing this particular project to meet setback requirements; the possibility of making a finding that approval of the adjacent property owners is not necessary in this case or a finding that the issue meets all the criteria of a variance; and, structural reasons for building straight up .from the bearing wall. Commissioner Kasolas noted that perhaps the Commission should ask the City Council for an ordinance to remove the requirement for approval of the adjacent property owner from the Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this item. Mr. Toshohiko Kaneko, 221 Hardy Ave. (owner of 565 N. Central Ave.), asked that the code be followed for the construction of this second story; and, expressed concern about bedrooms looking over his property; the possible blockage of sun, air, view, etc.; lack of privacy; and, the potential sale of his property. Mrs. Phyllis Wiseman, 577 N. Central Ave., stated that they have lived in the home for 25 years; they need the room because of the size of their family; and, they are asking for the modification to the setbacks for the second story so that the design does not look like a box. Mr. Franklin Wiseman, 577 N. Central Ave., stated that the request is a result of both appearance and bearing walls; that he is willing to eliminate windows and construct afire wall if so directed; and, that the adjacent property owned by Mr. Kaneko is a rental unit. City Attorney Seligmann stated that since the issue appears to be at an impasse, the Commission could ask the Council for an emergency ordinance; or, the applicant can reapply for a variance. Commissioner Kasolas stated that he was dismayed that the Commission was in a position where they cannot make a decision on this issue. He strongly recommended that the matter be continued and that the Commission ask the Council to consider adopting an emergency ordinance. M/S: Kasolas, Dickson - That M 88-22 be continued to the meeting of November 8, 1988; and, that the City Council be asked to adopt an emergency ordinance amending Section 21.08.070 of the Campbell -- Municipal Code. -3- Discussion on motion Commissioner Olszewski opposed the motion, noting that there may be other possibilities for this large lot; that the two-story could be built to the rear with a minimum of visual problems in the front; that he felt that the code need not be changed; and, that the impact should be considered for all properties equally - not just for the adjacent properties. Chairman Christ opposed the motion, noting that he is in favor of the ordinance as it stands; and, that he feels there are other alternatives available to the applicant. Vote on motion Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Stanton, Perrine, Dickson NOES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Walker, Christ ABSENT: Commissioners: None. ~c*~ PUBLIC HEARINGS V 88-06 Continued public hearing to consider the Leinwetter, P. application of Mr. Paul Leinwetter for a variance to the side and rear yard setbacks and a variance to the requirement allowing only one accessory building over 200 sq.ft. in size in order to allow the construction of a detached carport on property known as 1171 E1 Solyo Ave. in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, noting that. Staff is recommending denial of this request. Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this item. Mr. James Hurley, 1143 E1 Solyo Ave., asked how long the applicant would be given to remove the structure. City Attorney Seligmann responded that the applicant would have at least ten days in which to remove the structure because of the appeal period. After the appeal period of ten days, the City would then proceed through legal channels which would add time to the process. Mr. Paul Leinwetter, applicant, stated that he has decided to take the structure down. Mr. Leinwetter requested that he be allowed the keep the carport structure until after the rainy season, guaranteeing that it be removed by the end of April 1981. The applicant noted that he did not have the financial means to make major modifications to the structure to meet the City's or the neighbor's requirements. -4- M/S: Walker, Perrine - M/S: Perrine, Kasolas - Discussion on motion That the public hearing on V 88-06 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0) That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2561 denying V 88-06; and, that the sub3ect carport structure be completely and totally removed within 180 days from this date (April 25, 1989). Discussion ensued regarding the applicant adding a roof to the illegal structure. Amendment to motion M/ Walker - That the motion for denial be amended to stated that the structure cannot be modified _.. or added to in any way during the 180 day period. Motion fails for lack of a second. ' Discussion on motion Commissioner Olszewski opposed the motion, because he felt that allowing the structure to stand for 180 more days was not desireable. ~I Commissioner Stanton agreed with Commissioner Olszewski, noting that this issue has been dragging on for some time. He stated that the structure should removed at the end of the appeal period. Vote on motion Motion for denial and removal of structure within 180 days carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: Stanton, Olszewski, Walker ABSENT: Commissioners: None. ~~~~ R 88-03 Continued public hearing to consider the UP 84-04 application of the South Bay Covenant Church South Bay Covenant for a reinstatement of a previously approved Use Permit which allowed the establishment of a church on property known as 1300 Sheffield Ave. (Dover School) in a P-F (Public Facilities) Zoning District. Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, noting that Staff is recommending approval of this reinstatement for a period ~ to expire June 30, 1989. - -5- Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this item. m Mrs. Charlotte Wendell, Manchester Ave., thanked the Commission for their help with the problems at Dover School, and noted that the City must establish a policy wherein school property is treated as a total entity, rather than on a piecemeal basis. Additionally, Mrs. Wendell thanked the School District for meeting with the residents, noting that she hoped to be able to continue working with them towards resolution at the school sight. M/S: Perrine, Walker - That the public hearing on R 88-03/UP 84-04 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). M/S: Perrine, Stanton - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2566, incorporating findings as indicated in the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, approving R 88-03/UP 84-04 for a period ending June 30, 1989. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Stanton, Perrine, Olszewski, Walker, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: None. Commissioner Dickson asked that the City Council correspond with the School District regarding multiple use issues at school sites, and that some kind of dialogue continue between the School District and the City. Commissioner Kasolas asked if it would be more appropriate to consider what is allowable under the P-F (Public Facilities) Zoning District when it is taken from a school use and turned into commercial or quasi-private uses. Commissioner Walker suggested that Use Permits on school sites might be coordinated to expire all at the same time. Commissioner Olszewski noted that the situation is very delicate. He felt it necessary to continue some type of dialogue between the City and the School District; and, agreed that the School District should consider a master development and master plan on school sites to weigh cumulative impacts of the uses. Commissioner Dickson noted that Dover School is not the only school site, and he would like to circumvent future problems if possible. ~ ~ ~ -6- MISCELLANEOUS SA 88-45 Cal-Neon Planner II Haley reviewed the Staff is recommending approval conditions as indicated in the Signing request - McWhorter's - 295 E. Hamilton Ave. - C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Staff Report of October 25, 1988, noting that of the applicant's request, subject to the report. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was before the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval of the wall mounted sign reading "McWhorter's", and the freestanding sign reading "McWhorter's Stationers", as well as the awning sign reading "Hallmark Cards". Approval is not being recommended for signage reading "Gifts, Furniture, and Copy Center" - this signage is viewed as excessive signage which would set a precedent, in that it advertises services. Mr. Craig Maynard, Cal-Neon Sign Co., asked for reconsideration of signage on the awnings.at the parking lot elevations. Mr. Maynard indicated that McWhorter's has become quite diversified, thereby requiring the additional signage. Also, the signage down the side of the building will help to brighten up the building. Mr. Maynard noted that there are numerous other signs in the area which indicate services or products.. McWhorter's is of the opinion that if their facility is correctly identified from the outside of the building, they can mitigate the need for unattractive window signage in the future. City Attorney Seligmann commented that findings must be made for denial of specific signage. Chairman Christ stated that he considers "Hallmark" a particular brand, and "Copy Center", etc., as types of services offered - and, he has voted against these types of signs in the past. Commissioner Kasolas referred to signage at the Standard Oil service station on Bascom & Hamilton Aves., noting that the Commission unanimously disapproved of the excessive signage at that location; however, there was a policy set for approval. The signage being requested by McWhorter's is much less than Standard Oil's. M/S: Perrine, Walker - That the Planning Commission adopt findings as indicated in the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, and approve SA 88-45 as follows: (1) A wall mounted sign reading "McWhorter's", measuring 4Q.6 sq.ft.; (2) One awning sign reading "Hallmark Cards"; (3) A freestanding sign reading "McWhorter's Stationer's", measuring 48 sq.ft. and a height of 12'0"; and, that the Planning Coasaission find that additional signage as follows are not necessary to identify the -- location of the building, given the approved signage: (1) Awning signs reading "Gifts, Furniture, Copy Center". Motion carried - unanimously (7-0-0). ~ ~ ~ -7- PUBLIC HEARINGS TA 88-04 Continued public hearing to consider a City-initiated City-initiated amendment to Chapter 21.26 (C3 Central Business District) of the Campbell Municipal Code to provide development and use regulations for the downtown area. Mr. Marty Woodworth, Redevelopment Manager, reviewed the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, noting that a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this proposal. Additionally, the City Attorney has proposed some revisions to the draft and these should be incorporated into the text before it goes to the City Council. Discussion ensued regarding the various types of uses allowable in the downtown area. Commissioner Kasolas expressed concern with making a list of allowable uses, noting that there appears to be too many "nos" and more red tape. Commissioner Perrine asked about provisions for outdoor dining; type of allowable roof designs; allowing cast bronze or iron metals for signage; clarification on banners; and acceptable signing designers. Chairman Christ noted that his major concern was regarding setbacks - with the proposed lack of setbacks, an alley-like corridor is being created which will not provide for opportunities for light and shadow or interesting nooks. Commissioner Olszewski felt that a statement is needed in the text to encourage architectural diversity to encourage pedestrian use. Commissioner Walker felt that the district provides for the retention of historic buildings which insures architectural diversity. Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this item. Mr. Jim Lyle, Pacific Design Group, agreed very strongly about diversity of architectural styles. Mr. Lyle continued that he felt that mansard roof should be not disallowed, but that the choice should be left open to avoid design boredom. Commissioner Olszewski agreed with Mr. Lyle, however he felt that the proposed text amendment was the way in which to proceed. Mr. Woodworth answered the Commission's questions, and noted that the regulations are intended as guidelines only. Staff feels that there are a number of things which give the Commission and City Council the necessary flexibility. Chairman Christ felt that a change of wording (ie. using discourage or encourage) would accomplish to intent of the ordinance, but seem less restrictive to a developer. -8- Commissioner Perrine recommended that the text be changed to say that "mansard roof are not encouraged, unless..."; and, (Pg. 9) that stained glass be allowed as well. M/S: Perrine, Dickson - That the public hearing on TA 88-04 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). M/S: Perrine, Walker - Discussion on motion 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 No. 256 2, including the findings as indicated in the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, and the revisions as recommended by the City Attorney in memorandum of October 24, 1988, recommending that the City Council approve TA 88-04. Commissioner Kasolas stated that would be in favor of changing the PD (Planned Development) Zoning to C3 by resolution - not by ordinance. However, he thought that many of the provisions in the amendment were too restrictive and would tend to discourage development; and, he expressed great difficulty in trying to legislate architectural expression. Vote on motion AYES: Commissioners: Stanton, Perrine, Olszewski, Walker, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: Kasolas ABSENT: Commissioners: None. ~ * ~ The Commission recessed at 9:55 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 10:05 p.m. Commissioners Kasolas and Dickson left the meeting at this time. ~ ~ ~ GP 88-02 Continued public hearing to consider a City-initiated General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan addressing land use policies in the downtown area. Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, noting that Staff is recommending approval of this amendment. Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this item. M/S: Stanton, Walker - That the public hearing on GP 88-02 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). -9- M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - AYES: NOES: ABSENT: That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this item; and, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2563, incorporating findings as indicated in the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, recommending that the City Council approve GP 88-02. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: Walker Commissioners: Stanton, Perrine, Olszewski,~D~~~, Christ Commissioners: None Commissioners: Kasolas, Dickson. ~ * ~ ZC 88-04 Continued public hearing to consider the City-initiated City-initiated zone change from PD (Planned _.. Development) to C3 (Central Business District) for properties located within Civic Center Dr. and Orchard City Dr. (Downtown Core Area).. Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, noting that Staff is recommending approval of this zone change. Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this item. M/S: Stanton, Walker - M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - AYES: NOES: ABSENT: That the public hearing on ZC 88-04 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this item; and, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2564, incorporating findings as indicated in the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, recommending that the City Council approve ZC 88-04. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: Walker Commissioners: Stanton, Perrine, Olszewski, ~ili~, Christ Commissioners: None Commissioners: Kasolas, Dickson. * * ~ TA 88-06 Public hearing to consider City-initiated City-initiated amendments to Chapter 21.06 (PD - Planned Development District) of the Campbell Municipal Code. -10- Principal Planner Stafford reviewed the Staff Report of October 25, 1988. City Attorney Seligmann noted that if this amendment is approved, decisions of the Commission and/or Council would not be subject to referendum or initiatives; and, findings would be required for approval of projects in the Planned Development Zoning District. Discussion ensued regarding appeal procedures, tracking procedures, and noticing procedures. Commissioner Olszewski felt that the time spent tracking the notices for Planned Developments could be better spent by Staff in many other ways. Commissioner Perrine asked if this amendment would affect development agreements - would the resolution have as much power as an ordinance. Mr. Seligmann responded that challenging an ordinance requires a slightly higher standard of reasons for making the decision. With resolutions, it is only required to show that findings were incorrect - this is a slightly lower standard of proof. If the findings for approval are in order, the difference is very small. Chairman Christ expressed great concern about losing any of the legalities associated with an ordinance. M/S: Stanton, Perrine - M/S: Stanton, Perrine - AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: That the public hearing on TA 88-06 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for TA 88-06; and, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2565, incorporating findings as indicated in the Staff Report of October 25, 1988, recommending that the City Council adopt Staff Recommendation ~~2 which reads "Amend Chapter 21.06 so that Planned Development Permits may be approved by Resolution rather than by Ordinance, as indicated in Exhibit A." of TA 88-06. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: Walker Stanton, Perrine, Olszewski, ~~f:1I~1~, Christ None Kasolas, Dickson. ~ ~ -11- MISCELLANEOUS Staff Report Staff Report regarding cancellation of meeting of December 27, 1988. M/S: Walker, Stanton - That the Planning Commission meeting of December 27, 1988 be cancelled. If, for some reason, there are a number of applications filed for this meeting, the Commission can consider rescheduling the meeting to another date in December. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). ~ ~ ~ SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS Subcommittee Report Site & Architectural Review Procedure Committee; Tree Preservation Committee; Site & Architectural Review Committee; Dover School Uses Subcommittee. Tree Preservation Committee Commissioner Olszewski commented that this Committee is actually more of a Tree Conservation Committee; and, that the suggested ordinance only addresses new developments involving townhome and multiple family developments (not single family homes). Commissioner Perrine noted that this might encourage large trees to be preserved in a development where they would not have enough water, etc. He felt that design elements were needed and that there were too many restrictions. The ordinance should address trees that are not healthy or trees that are not appropriate. Commissioner Olszewski stated that it is not really the intent of the Committee to work on the details, but rather to identify or see if a problem existed. Staff could then address the details. Commissioner Perrine and Chairman Christ felt that the topography map requirement should be eliminated when the draft is composed by Staff. ADJOURNMENT ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee Secretary RECORDED: Linda Dennis Recording Secretary ~ ~ There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m. APPROVED: Ronald W. Christ Chairman