PC Min 02/09/1988PLANNIAIG COMMISSION
CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA
7:30 P.M. MlNUTES FEBRUARY 9, 1988
The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day. .fn regular
session at the regular meeting place, the Council Chambers of City Hall, 70 N.
First St., Campbell, California.
ROLL CALL
Present Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Olszewski,
Dickson, Christ= Planning Director Arthur
Kee, Planner II Marty Woodworth, Engineering
Manager Bill Helms, Cfty Attorney Bill
Seligmann, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis.
Absent
Stanton, Walker.
Chairman Christ noted that Commissioner Stanton was absent due to illness, and
Commissioner Walker was absent because of a business commitment.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/S: Olszewski, Dickson
COMMUNICATIONS
That the minutes of the Planning Commission
meeting of January 26, 1988, be approved as
submitted. Motion carried 3-0-2-2, with
Commissioners Kasolas and Perrine abstaining
due to absence from the meeting of January
26, 1988, and Commissioners Stanton and
Perrine being absent this evening.
Planning Director Kee 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.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
UP 87-22 Continued public hearing on the application
Maj, S. of Ms. Susan Maj for a Use Permit to allow
the establishment of a 'Hobby Kennel" (3-6
dogs) on property known as 948 Crockett Ave.
in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning
District.
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
that Staff is recommending a continuance of this item in order that the
applicant might submit revised plans.
-2-
Mr. Dan Jordan, 970 Crockett Ave., opposed the use permit and presented a
petition (attached hereto). Mr. Jordan indicated that the applicant currently ~~
runs a dog training facility on this property and has a sign advertising that
use, which in his opinion, is in violation of the zoning ordinance-which
regulating home occupations. Mr. Jordan expressed a concern with the actual
intended use of the "hobby kennel', whether for personal use or as an extension
of the dog training business.
Ms. Susan Maj, applicant, noted that she has had the same number of animals on
her property for several years without complaints. She explained that any
expansion of the use is impossible because of the lack of space. Ms. Maj
stated that she had thought the requests of Staff had been met, as indicated in
her letter to the Building Department; however, she would submit a site plan.
She requested a continuance to March 22, 1988.
Mr. Tony Ferranti, 948 Crockett Ave., noted that there are exceptions made to
the setback requirements for children's playhouses and small sheds; and, the
dog houses were similar sizes. Additionally, Mr. Ferranti indicated that he
was not clear on what Staff was requiring in the way of plans.
Commissioner Dickson expressed a concern with the length of time this
application has been before the Commission because the applicant has more
animals than she should have under the code.
M/S: Perrine, Rasolas - That the public hearing on UP 87-22 be
continued to the Planning Commission meeting __
of March 22, 1988. Motion carried
• unanimously (5-0-2).
• r t
S 87-09 Continued public hearing to consider the
Anderson, K. application of Mr. Kurt Anderson for approval
of plans and elevations to allow the
construction of an office building on
property known as 3803 & 3835 S. Bascom Ave.;
• and, plans and elevations to allow the
construction of 2 single family homes on
property known as 1956 Whiteoaks Rd. in an
R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning
District.
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
that Staff is recommending a continuance.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on
his item.
M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the public hearing on S 87-09 be
continued to the Planning Commission meeting
of February 23, 1988. Motion carried _._
unanimously (5-0-2).
t • t i
-3-
PD 87-12 Continued public hearing to consider the
Pluto, D. application of Mr. David Pluto for a Planned
Development Permit, plans, elevations, and
development schedule to allow the conversion
of an existing residence to an office on
property known as 121 N. First St. in a PD
(Planned Development/Low-Medium Density
Residential and/or Professional Office)
Zoning District.
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
that Staff is recommending a continuance of this item.
Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is also recommending a
continuance in order that revised plans may be submitted.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this
item.
Discussion ensued as to whether there would be a quorum at the March 8, 1988,
meeting because of the number of commissioners attending the Planning
Commissioner's Institute. A motion to continued this item to the meeting of
March 22, 1988 failed.
M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the public hearing on PD 87-12 be
continued to the Planning Commission meeting
of March 8, 1988. Motion carried (3-2-2
vote).
. * •
PD 88-02 Public hearing to consider the application of
Enfantino, G. Mr. Gene Enfantino for a Planned Development
Permit, plans, elevations, and development
- schedule to allow construction of 4 townhomes
on property known as 660 W. Parr Ave. in a PD
(Planned Development/Low-Medium Density
Residential) Zoning District.
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
that Staff is recommending a continuance in order that revised plans may be
submitted.
Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is also recommending a
continuance with the applicant's concurrence.
Commissioner Kasolas asked that information be provided in the next Staff
Report regarding coverage of other properties in the immediate vicinity.
-4-
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this _
item.
Mr. Robert Hill, 1560 Capri Drive, indicated he had no objection to the plans;
however, he requested that the Commission provide a condition to address the
problem of noise, dirt, and construction crews parking vehicles and equipment
and supplies on his property as has happened in the past.
M/S: Olszewski, Perrine - That the public hearing on PD 88-02 be
continued to the Planning Commission of
February 23,.1988. Motion carried
unanimously (5-0-2).
Commissioner Dickson requested Staff to come back with a draft of a condition
which might address Mr. Hill's concerns; and, perhaps might be used as a
standard condition to control noise, dirt, .and parking problems during the
construction process.
• * •
ZC 87-15 Public hearing to consider the application of
PD 87-14 Ainsley Development, Inc. for a Zone Change
Ainsley Development from R-1-6 (Single Family Residential, 6000
sq.ft. minimum lot size) to PD (Planned ___
Development); and, for a Planned Development
Permit, plans, elevations, and development
schedule to allow construction of 9 single
family homes on property known as 921 ~ 931
Hazel Ave.
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
that Staff is recommending a continuance.
Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance to
the meeting of February 23, 1988, with the concurrence of the applicant.
A letter from Thomas 6 Patricia Ferguson, 910 Hazel Ave., was noted for the
record (attached hereto).
Commissioner Kasolas requested further information regarding the City's
experience with private streets, in that there appears to be a problem with
this type of situation (ie. development on Hacienda Ave.).
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this
item.
Mr. Bill Kelly, 740 Craig Ave., expressed a concern about privacy for his
property, and requested an 8' fence be built by the developer in his yard,as --
well as the provision of fast growing trees. He also requested that Plan C,
bedroom 3 be provided with stained glass windows to allow for privacy on his
property; and, that there be no bright lights or street lights for this
development.
-5-
Mr. Tom Ferguson, 910 Hazel Ave., reiterated the concerns expressed in his
letter, noting that he is concerned with parking in the area and felt that it
has not been adequately provided for in this development.
Commissioner Perrine noted that a continuance is being recommended in order to
provide the applicant an opportunity to come back with fewer lots, thereby.
solving several of the concerns expressed this evening.
Commissioner Dickson expressed concern with the PD zoning, noting that this
project appears to be too dense with inadequate parking, as well as a private
street to be maintained by the development itself. These situations are not
providing an overpowering benefit to the community as is required under the PD
zoning.
Mr. Joseph Navarro, 960 Hazel Ave., asked that the developer be required to
provide sidewalks for Hazel Ave. He also requested a stop sign to slow traffic
- down.
M/S: Dickson, Perrine - That the public hearing on ZC 87-15/PD 87-14
be continued to the Planning Commission
- meeting of February 23, 1988. Motion carried
unanimously (5-0-2).
r t
PD 88-01 Public hearing to consider the application of
Edsinger, R. Mr. Roger Edsinger for a Planned Development
Permit, plans, elevations, and development
schedule to allow the conversion of a house
to an office on property known as 219 Dillon
Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/
industrial) Zoning District.
Planner II Woodworth reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting that
Staff is recommending approval of this application.
Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is also recommending approval,
in that the Architectural Advisor expressed satisfaction with the presented
plans at the meeting.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to
speak on this item.
M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the public hearing on PD 88-01 be
closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2).
M/S: Olszewski, Perrine - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2505, including findings and conditions
as indicated in the Staff Report of February
9, 1988, recommending that the City Council
approve PD 88-01. Motion carried with the
following roll call vote:
-6-
AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ
NOES: Commissioners: None _
ABSENT: Commissioners: Stanton, Walker.
~ t f
S 88-02 Public hearing to consider the application of
Phu, T. Mr. Troung H. Phu for a site and
architectural application to allow the
move-on of a single family residence on
property known as 1590 Walters Ave. in an
R-1-9 (Single Family/Low Density Residential,
less than 4.5 units/gross acre) Zoning
District .
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
_ that Staff is recommending approval.
Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval with
the added condition that the revised plans come back to the Committee for
approval.
Commissioner Kasolas stated that the house did not fit into the neighborhood,
and that he would prefer the revised elevations to come back to the full
Commission. He indicated that he was not prepared to go forward on this item __
at this time.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this
item.
Mr. Randy Sacks, 1603 Walters Ave., wanted to make sure that the house being
moved on was not in addition to the existing house.
Mr. Woodworth indicated that the property will have only one residence, and
that the existing house is being removed.
M/S: Olszewski, Perrine - That the public. hearing on S 88-02 be
closed. Motion carried 3-2-2.
M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2506, including the findings and
conditions as indicated in the Staff Report
of February 9, 1988, and approve S 88-OZ with
revised plans to come back to the Site and
Architectural Review Committee.
Commissioner Dickson offered an amendment to the motion to provide for the
revised plans to come back to the full Commission for approval. The amendment
was accepted by Commissioners Perrine and Oklszewski.
-~-
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2506, including the findings and
conditions as indicated in the Staff Report
of February 9, 1988, and approve S 88-02 with
revised plans to come back to the Planning
Commission for approval.
Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would be voting 'no• in that he did not
feel that move-on's were in the best interest of the community.
AYES: Commissioners: Perrine, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ
NOES: Commissioners: Kasolas
ABSENT: Commissioners: Stanton, Walker.
t : :
_ V 88-O1 Public hearing to consider the application of
Felix, J. Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Felix for a variance to
the side and rear yard setback requirements
to allow a detached garage on property known
_ as 596 Emory Ave. in an R-1-10 (Single
Family/Low Density Residential, less than 3.5
units/gross acre) Zoning District.
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
that Staff is recommending approval.
Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending apppoval.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this
item.
M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the public hearing on V 88-01 be
closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2).
M/S:~ Perrine, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2507, including findings and conditions
as indicated in the Staff Report of February
9, 1988, approving V 88-01. Motion carried
with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Stanton, Walker.
* f •
The Commission recessed at B:55 p.m.j the meeting reconvened at+ 9:10 p.m.
* •
-a-
V 88-02 Public hearing to consider the application of _~
Hicks, J. Mr. Jim Hicks fora variance to the front,
side, and rear setbacks to allow the
construction of a single family home on --
property known as 657 Regas Dr. in an R-1-6
(Single Family/Low Density Residential, less
than 6 units/gross acre) Zoning District.
Planner II Woodworth reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting that
Staff is recommending approval of the requested front yard setback, and denial
of the requested side and rear yard setback requests.
Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. A continuance is being recommended in that the
Committee doesn't necessarily agree with Staff's recommendation for approval of
the front yard setback. The Committee is of the opinion that the lot may be
developable in another way.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and ivnited anyone in the audience to
speak on this item.
Mr. Emilio Falcocchia spoke against the variance for pedestrian and vehicular
safety reasons.
Mr. Jim Hicks, applicant, noted that the average home in this area is 2700
sq.ft. At this time, he is mainly concerned with the front setback, noting ---,
that if this is granted he might be able to construct a 2100 sq.ft. home on the
property.
M/S: Dickson, Perrine - That the public hearing on V 88-02 be
continued to the Planning Commission meeting
of February 23, 1988. Motion carried
unanimously (5-0-2).
s : •
V 88-03 Public hearing to consider the application of
Cliff, B. Mr. Bill Cliff for approval of a variance to
Sections 21.06.010 and 21.12.050 to allow
three dwelling units on a lot which has an
area of approximately 6,575 square feet, in
lieu of 9,000 square feet as required in an
R-M (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning
District on property known as 65 Shelley
Ave.
Planner II Marty Woodworth reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988,
noting that Staff is recommending denial of this request.
Commissioner Kasolas noted that changes in the regulations have resulted in
more restrictive rules for remaining in-fill projects. Much of .the development --~
in this area was done prior to the new zoning ordinance, and the Commission
should be able to look at this situation to see if the rest of the street could
be developed under the current rules. .
-9-
Commissioner Dickson noted that the variance is a very strong mechanism which
must be used strictly or the whole ordinance looses its purpose. Commissioner
Dickson continued that this hardship is self-imposed.
Planning Director Kee reported that considering the gross area, including to
the centerline of the street, there would be enough area to qualify for three
units.
Commissioner Dickson indicated that the zoning on this property fs R-M-S;
therefore, the net lot area must be used, not the gross area.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this
item.
Mr. Bill Cliff, applicant, stated that the proposed development does fit in
with the low-medium density for the area; everything else on the street is
built under the PD zoning.
Mr. Mark Snow, MHS Design, stated that the buildings footprint is 36$, which is
less than most development in the area, setbacks and parking are being met, and
the project fits within the codes except for the square footage of the lot.
Commissioner Olszewski asked what findings would be used for approval of this
variance.
Discussion ensued about the possible findings, and a continuance in order that
a full commission be present. The applicant agreed with a continuance.
Ms. Nell Shah, realtor for the property, spoke in favor of the variance because
of the housing shortage.
Chairman Christ noted that a petition has been received on this matter
(attached hereto).
M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the public hearing on V 88-03 be
continued to the Planning Commission meeting
• of February 23, 1988. Motion carried
unanimously (5-0-2).
: •
Commissioner Dickson requested that the City Attorney review the Variance
checklist, and include information in the next agenda packet.
ZC 87-14 Continued public hearing to consider the
PD 87-13 application of MHS Design Group for a zone
MHS Design change from R-M-S (Multiple Family
Residential) to PD (Planned Development )=
and, a Planned Development Permit, plans,
elevations, and development• schedule to allow
the construction of 3 townhomes on property
known as 65 Shelley Ave.
-10-
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting -
that this item is directly related to V BB-03, therefore Staff is recommending
a continuance.
Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and
Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance
for revised plans.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this
item.
M/S: Perrfne, Olszewski - That the public hearing on ZC 87-14/PD 87-13
be continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of February 23, 1988. Motion carried
unanimously (5-0-2).
• s t
ZC 87-12 Continued public hearing to consider the
PD 87-11 application of Mr. Alex Kotylar for a zone
Kotylar, A. change from R-3-S (Multiple Family
Residential) to PD (Planned Developments and,
a Planned Development Permit, plans,
elevations, and development schedule to allow
the construction of 23 townhomes on property
known as 400 Union Ave. _~
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
that Staff fs recommending a continuance for revised plans.
Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak on this
item.
M/S: Olszewski, Dickson - That the public hearing on ZC 87-12/PD 87-11
be continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of February 23, 1988. Motion carried
• unanimously (5-0-2I.
• •
MISCELLANEOUS
R 87-07 Continued request for reinstatement of
S 85-14 previously approved plans allowing
Johnson, R. construction of a retail building on property
known as 915 b 921 S. San Tomas Aquino Rd. in
a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning
District.
Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report of February 9, 1988, noting
that Staff fs recommending a continuance in that revised plans have not been -
submitted.
-11-
M/S: Dickson, Perrine - That R 87-07/S 85-14 be continued to the
Planning Commission meeting of February 23,
1988. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2).
• ~
TS 88-01 Tentative Subdivision Map - Lands of Telesis
Lands of Telesis Construction - 3675 S. Bascom Ave. - APN
414-40-59.
M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the Planning Commission find the
proposed map in accord with the General Plan;
and, that the Planning Commission recommend
that the City Council approve this Tentative
Subdivision Map subject to the conditions as
indicated in the Staff Report of February 9,
1988. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2).
* • •
M 86-27 Staff Report - One-year review of parking -
Fulk, A. 1436 Whiteoaks Rd. - M-1-S (Light Industrial)
Zoning District.
M/S: Kasolas, Dickson - That this report be noted and filed. Motion
carried unanimously (5-0-2).
# • .
OTHER ITEM BROUGHT UP BY COMMISSION
Commissioner Dickson noted that he would not be at the meeting of March 8,
1988, because he is attending the Planning Commissioner's Institute in Anahefm.
Planning Director Kee requested that the issue of continuances be agendfzed for
the meeting of February 23, 1988.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting
was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
APPROVED: Ronald W. ,Christ
Chairman
ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee
Secretary
RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis
Recording Secretary
~~ ~~ ~~
To t City of Campbell Planning Commission
Dear Sirs,
We, the residents of the city of Campbell oppose the
permit to establish a hobby kennel at 94B Crockett Ave. for
the following reasonss
i. The applicant's (Susan Maj> use permit request is for a
kennel for 3-b dogs, which is two dogs more than the
amount o4 dogs she intends to keep on her property.
2. A limit of 2 adult (older than 4 months) dogs is a
reasonable amount per household.
3. If she indeed want to keep 4 dogs on her property, she
should submit a hobby kennel for only 4 dogs not S-b.
4. Constant barking and yelping by extra dogs upset the
immediate neighbors.
~. City of Campbell ordinance allows the dog kennel owner to _`
keep dogs 24 hours of the day. The owner of the dog kennel
said she is working during the day. Who is going to take
care of the dogs in her absence?
b. The propose 1 i mf t of 3-6 dogs i s hard to enf orce. If she
is allowed a use permit far 3-b dog kennel, what is there
to keep her from possibly housing 2 additional dogs?
7. Once it is know that there is a dog kennel in addition to
her dog training establishment, property values of
surrounding homes could depreciate in value. The personal
gain of the residential business should not supersede the
interest of the surrounding neighbors.
8. The applicant for the dog kennel says that she is only
going to tr:in dogs. The city ordinance does not limit dog
kennels to dog training. It does allow everything legal in
reference to running dog kennels.
9. What about puppies? The ordinance allows hobby breeding.
What if the owner realizes that training is non-
profitable, and decides the real money is in breeding.
Even with only 4 dogs with 6 puppies each kept for the
allowed four months allowed by the city, the kennel could
keep raising puppies until this property is overwhelmed. ---
10. The applicant presently operates a dog training
establishment at 948 Crockett Ave. She is presently not
oper:tinq within the established guidelines covered by
the Home .Occupation Permit of the City of Campbell. The
concept of operating a business in a residential area is
that no perception of business in the residence actually
~ ~~ ate.
~~ . 2 .
exists. She presently violates these guidelines by
having a business sign vi si bl a from the street, business
is not being conducted solely within the housether
clients and their dogs are being train outdoors), she
also keeps vehicles used in her business on the property
which is not allowed. Taking this into consideration
what makes believe the hobby kennel is not just an
outdoor expansion of her businesstwhich would also be in
violation of the home occupation permit).
11. She has stated at a previous hearing that she intends to
use the hobby kennel to house her. dogs. There is already
a cyclone fenced enclosure on the property at this time.
Why does she need another? As I have stated, her
intentions for the use, either personal or business
related are unclear. If her business is increasing where
it is no longer feasible to operate out of the home,
which she isn't , she should make plans to expand her
business in a business related area not a residential
section of Campbell .
12. If we are going to present the appearance of a
residential neighborhood, Susan Maj should comply with
the home occupation permit guidelines, the ordinance
allowing only 2 dogs, and not be allowed to build a hobby
kennel.
13. A business permit is like drivers licence, it is not •
right, it is a privilege.
Si nc
Name
Addr
Camp
Name
Addr
Campbell,Ca. ~- ~
Name: ____ ~SiL~.lx'{(r11Q .l~~l~
Address_ ~~o ~,~C~~~-Y----
Campbell ae •
Name _ ~
Address _ _
Campb 1 /~~
Name s
Address_S~_/ __ _ __
CampbelL~~a.
Names ___
Address ~ _~~
Campbel 1 , Ca. ~j~~p
Names
Addre
Campb
Names
Addre
, Ca.
Address
Campb ,C
Name: _
Addres j
Campbell, a
Names .(
~'
Address_~~
Campbell,Ca~
Namea____
Address__ ~(¢_
Campbell,Ca.
A ~.~- .~
rnzy .
d~-En~ yea, 5
February 8, 1988
Arthur Kee
City of Campbell
Planning Commission
70 North First Street
Campbell, California 93008
Re: ZC 87-33/PD 87-14, 921 ik 931 Hazel Ave
Dear Mr. Kee
This letter is in response to the letter we received dated
January 28, 1988, and regards the referenced project on Hazel
Ave.
My wife and I live at 910 Hazel Ave, which is across the
street from the project. We are pleased that Ainsley
Development wants to improve the parcel. We f eel this will
be an isprovement in our communitee. However, we have some
concerns relating to the project. .
i. We reviewed the plans and saw that most of the lot.
sizes were aproximately 6000 sq.ft.. Many of the lots in the
neighborhood exceed that size, including our own and our next
door neighbors. We feel it would be more reflective of the
neighborhood if the Ainsley homes were on lots in the 8000 to
10,000 sq ft size. In addition several neighbors have
expresed concerns regarding the relatively small set backs.
The increased lot sizes may afford the existing neighbors
more privacy
2. Hazel Avenue already receives a lot of traffic, our
concern is the increased traffic these new homes will bring.
Have traffic studies been made on Hazel Ave.? What traffic
control-measures are possible? Has the idea of closing Hazel
Ave. ever been investigated?
3. In reviewing the plans we noticed a shortage of
parking on the street, for the number of homes. We do not
want the overflow parking to be on our side of the street.
4. During construction we ar• concerned about: traffic
controls pedestrian saifetyi increased garbage, dust and
noises and possible damage to adjacent properties.
Sincerely,,
,~
Thomas and Patr i c i a Ferguson FE ~ ~t ~ ;~`r, _.._
CITY Or G~;~.~~_ :. L:_
PLANNING DEPART M.c.NT