Loading...
PC Min 02/10/1987PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 7:3U P.M. MINUTES FEBRUARY 10, 1987 The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular session at the regular meeting place, the Council Chambers of City Hall, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California. ROLL CALL Present Commissioners: Kasolas, Stanton, Olszewski, Christ, Dickson; Planning Director A. A. Kee, Planner II Tim J. Haley, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, City Attorney William R. Seligmann, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent Commissioner Perrine. In the absence of Chairman Perrine, Vice-Chairman Christ acted as Chairman for this meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/S: Olszewski, Stanton - That the minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of January 27, 1987 be approved. as submitted. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). COMMUNICATIONS Special Presentations "Living Scrapbook" This presentation will be continued to the meeting of February 24, 1987 in order that a full Commission might be present. Acting Chairman Christ noted that correspondence has been received from Chairman Perrine indicating his absence because of business commitments. Mr. Kee reported that further communications received pertained to specific agenda items and would be considered under each item. ORAL REQUESTS At this time, Acting Chairman Christ invited the audience to come forth with items not agendized. There being no one wishing to speak under this portion of the agenda, the meeting continued. -2- FRCHITECTURAL APPROVALS fMM 86-29 Continued application of Mr. Mack Kusumoto, M. Kusumoto for approval of a modification to sideyard setbacks to allow the construction of a second story addition to an existing single family residence located on property known as 1536 Keith Dr. in an R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Planning Director Kee reported that the applicant has requested a continuance to March 10, 1987. M/S: Stanton, Dickson - That MM 86-29 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of March 10, 1987, at the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). PUBLIC HEARINGS SUP 87-01 Public hearing to consider the Morgan, D, application of Mr. David Morgan for a Use Permit to allow an auto stereo installation business to operate from a detached garage on property known as 2220 S. Bascom Ave, in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Planning Director Kee reported that the applicant is requesting a continuance of this item to March 10, 1987. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance to March 10, 1987. Acting Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. John Wagner, 1058 Shady Dale, spoke against the requested use, citing noise problems from testing of the installed equipment; and questioned the preparation of a Negative Declaration. Mr. Bob Sweet, 259 Moneta Way, expressed his concern with the noise level of the proposed use. Mr. Charles Purnell, 1070 Shady Dale, spoke against the proposed use because of noise level. Mr. Purnell also spoke regarding increased traffic in his neighborhood because of traffic mitigation measures installed on Bascom Ave. -3- Mr. Kee explained that an Environmental Impact Report was not prepared for this item, therefore a Negative Declaration was prepared indicating that an EIR was not required. Mr. Douglas Turk, owner of 2220 S. Bascom Ave., stated that the applicant intends to do a noise level study for the next meeting. The prior installation facility, referred to by one of the speakers, was on the adjacent property in an unenclosed area. The applicant will be making every effort to control the noise, and he will be happy to meet with those who have spoken this evening. M/S: Kasolas, Olszewski - That the public hearing on UP 87-O1 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of March 10, 1987, at the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). Commissioner Dickson asked Staff to agendize the issue of traffic problems in this area to see if problems have been caused by some of the past approvals in this area. ~ * s UP 87-02 Public hearing to consider the Stowers, R. application of Mr. Richard Stowers, on behalf of Eastfield Children's Center, for approval of a conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a two-story clinical services building and a central kitchen addition to an existing children's center located on property known as 251 Llewellyn Ave. in a P-F (Public Facilities/Public, Semi-Public) Zoning District. A letter from Mr. R. K. Imaino (attached hereto) was read into the record. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance to February 24, 1987, at the applicant's request. Planning Director Kee stated that Staff is in concurrence with the recommendation for continuance. Acting Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Richard Stowers, architect, indicated that there is one existing building to be removed, and one to be relocated resulting in an additional square footage of approximately 14,000 sq.ft. -4- M/s: Olszewski, Kasolas - That the public hearing on UP 87-02 be continued to the Planning .Commission meeting of February 24, 1987 at the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). / S 87-01 Public hearing to consider the Kerkorian, K. application of Mr. Kent Kerkorian for approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of a two-story office building on property known as 409 E. Hamilton Ave. in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The applicant is requesting a continuance to the meeting of February 24, 1987, in order to address concerns indicated in the Staff Report. Acting Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Kasolas, Olszewski - That the public hearing on S 87-01 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 24, 1987 at the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). 86-22 Continued public hearing to consider the MM 86-26 application of Warren Jacobsen Jacobsen, W. Associates for a modification to an existing Use Permit (UP 81-11) and approval of plans to allow a two-story addition to an existing church (The Home Church) on property known as 1711 S. Winchester Blvd. in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Planning Director Kee reported that the applicant is requesting that this item be withdrawn {correspondence attached hereto). Acting Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Dickson, Kasolas - That the public hearing on S 86-22/MM 86-26 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). -5- M/S: Olszewski, Stanton - That S 86-22/MM 86-26 be denied without I, prejudice and removed from the agenda, ~- at the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). w /PD 86-02 Continued public hearing to consider the Anderson, K. application of Mr. Kurt Anderson for a Planned Development Permit and approval of plans, elevations and development schedule to allow the construction of a duplex on property known as 274 Everett Ave, in a PD (Planned Development/Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. Planning Director Kee reported that Staff has received a communication from the applicant requesting one final continuance. Staff would concur with this request; however, Staff will be recommending that this item be concluded at the next meeting. Acting Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Kasolas, Olszewski - That the public hearing on PD 86-02 be continued to the Planning commission meeting of February 24, 1987 at the '-" applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). '~P 86-17 Continued public hearing to consider the Sando, M. application of Mr. Michael Sando for a use permit to allow the construction of a screen roam addition to an existing apartment unit on property known as 2055 S. Winchester in a C-3-S (Central Business District) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee, however, the applicant was not present. The Committee is coming forth without a recommendation; however, the Committee would like to report that the requested screenroom addition does not appear to cause a negative impact on the parking situation at this site. Planner II Tim Haley explained that a previous application on this site was for the addition of a living area. The current application is requesting a patio (screenroom) area.. The application before the Commission is at the applicant's initiation, it is not a referral from the Council. -6- Commissioner Dickson noted that he had suggested that the applicant reapply. Commissioner Dickson felt that the Commission did not look at the parking situation on this site, and noted that the Commission has the authority to alter the parking requirements. Commissioner Kasolas asked if there was a way to allow this use for a specified period of time; and, require conformance at the end of that specified time. City Attorney Seligmann indicated that, legally, this is a possibility. Commissioner Dickson indicated that he was unsure of how to bring a nonconforming use into conformance; however, this use does not seem to be causing any problems, and, there does not seem to be a parking problem in this area. Commissioner Christ asked if this screenroom addition was an expansion of a residential use. Mr. Kee responded that it has been Staff's position that it was an expansion of a residential use. Acting Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone to speak for or against this item. Mr. Michael Sando, 2055 S. Winchester Blvd., stated that the screenroom is separate from his living area; and, there is no parking problem on the site, nor has there ever been. Mr. Sando noted that he would just like a little bit more room. M/S: Olszewski, Dickson - That the public hearing on UP 86-17 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1) . M/S: Olszewski, Dickson - That the Planning Commission adopt the following findings, and adopt a Resolution approving UP 86-17, subject to the following conditions: Findings: (1) To date, there has not been a demonstrated parking problem on this site. (2) The long-term effects of the non-conforming use cannot be determined at this time. (3) That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such use, or detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. -~- Conditions: (1) The Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of five years, after which time the applicant will have to re-apply for the use. (2) Applicant to secure any building permits necessary from the Building Department, within 60 days of this approval. Discussion Commissioner Kasolas asked on what basis, without any changes whatsoever, can this application be approved, when it was denied previously. Mr. Seligmann stated that there. was a significant and real change in the application because-there is now a screenroom patio area rather than a living room addition. Commissioner Christ added that the previous application did not contain comments from Staff regarding the fact that there is not a parking problem on this site. Commissioner Olszewski stated that he would agree that it is not in the community's best interest to continue a nonconforming use; however, each application should be evaluated on it's own merit. Therefore, it may be prudent to include a time limitation on this use permit.. Commissioner Kasolas indicated that he could support the motion if a time limit of five years was specified, at which time the applicant could reapply. Commissioner Dickson felt that a one year review period would solve this problem. Vote on motion AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Stanton, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine. The Commission recessed at 8s20 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 8:35 p.m. TA 86-03 Continued public hearing to consider a City-initiated proposed text amendment to Sections 21.41.130 & 21•.41.140 of the Campbell Municipal Code modifying the review procedure of applications for change of use, construction, demolition, relocation or material change in an Historic District. -8- Planner II Tim Haley briefly reviewed this proposed text amendment, noting that the intent of the proposed text amendment to this section of the Historic Preservation Ordinance was to reduce the review procedure time and the number of reviewing bodies involved in applications for additions and alterations in historic districts. Exhibit A of the Staff Report shows the elimination of the Planning Commission for this review procedure for some applications; and, the attached Exhibit C eliminates the Historic Preservation Board from the review procedure and places the responsibility with the Planning Commission. Staff is of the opinion that it is important to either eliminate the Board or the Planning Commission from the review procedure, if a reduction in review procedure time is to be achieved. Based upon Section 21.41.070 of the Zoning Ordinance, the thrust of the Historic Preservation Ordinance's responsibilities rest with the Board. Staff, consequently, would recommend the proposed text in Exhibit A. Commissioner Kasolas asked Commissioner Dickson if he was satisfied with the Staff Report in relation to the motion made at the last meeting. Commissioner Dickson indicated that he had asked Staff to address the issue of handling the review process similarly to reviews of minor modifications, and to look at the criteria for initiating an historic district. Commissioner Kasolas noted that the issue is one of procedure. This is a proposed text amendment to an existing ordinance which adds a zoning district. Commissioner Kasolas was under the impression that the matter was referred to the Commission for a full review of the amendment, and that the intent of the Commission was to give some discussion that a district may be different from a single entity. Commissioner Kasolas concluded that he was prepared to move this matter along without further discussion. Acting Chairman Christ opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Haley noted that an application for an historic designation can originate from the City Council, the Planning Commission, the Civic Improvement Commission, or the property owner (in the case of an historic landmark designation), or 60$ of the property owners (in the case of an historic district). There is nothing in the ordinance, at this point, that stipulates there must be support of the property owners for designation. Mr. Haley added that the public hearing noticed under these proceedings, TA 86-03, spoke only of amending Sections 21.41.130 and 21.41.140. Commissioner Kasolas commented that the existing ordinance specifically did not contemplate or include the formation of a district. What is before the Commission is a proposed change to allow for the formation of a district. Therefore, the issue of a district is before the Commission. -9- Corra~issioner Kasolas continued that he believed the previous motion said that the Commission might want to consider some requirements for the `-- formation of a district. How can one say that the existing ordinance sets toxth how something comes before the Commission, if in fact the district was never considered or never a part of the ordinance because it wasn't appropriate at that time. Commissioner Kasolas concluded that he disagreed with Staff's interpretation; however, he was prepared to move forth on the item. Acting Chairman Christ noted that this issue was not a part of the public hearing notice, therefore, not appropriate at this time. Perhaps the Commission could make a suggestion to the Council regarding this matter. Brief discussion ensued regarding the noticing of different sections of this ordinance for public hearing. M/S: Olszewski, Stanton - That the public hearing on TA 86-03 be closed. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasola, Stanton, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine. M/S: Olszewski, Dickson - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for TA 86-03. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasola, Stanton, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine. M/S: Dickson, Stanton - That the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Sections 21.41.130 and 21.41.140, as indicated in Exhibit C of the Staff Report dated February 10, 1987-. Discussion on motion Commissioner Dickson spoke in favor of Exhibit C which provides for the review before the Planning Commission., noting that the public is more attuned to coming before the Commission for these types of requests. Commissioner Dickson felt that these matters could be handled similarly to minor modifications on Planned Developments, thereby eliminating some of the confusion. -10- rnmvii~soner Olszewski noted that the adoption of Exhibit C would remove the His*_oric Preservation Board from the decision-making process to a significant degree. He asked what the intent and purpose of the Historic Preservation Board is. Mr. Haley indicated that the Historic Preservation Board would still review requests for demolition; and, the role of the Board is to review applications for districts and landmarks. G~:~~.issioner Kasolas stated that he would be supporting the .motion. Vote on motion AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Stanton, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine. /ZC 86-10 Continued public hearing to consider a / HPB,8~-Ol City-initiated zone change from R-1 (Single Family Residential) and/or P-O (Professional Office) to R-1-H and/oi P-O-H (Historical Overlay honing District) for the Alice Avenue Neighborhood (all properties having frontage on Alice Ave.: 20 through 235 Alice Ave., 235 S. First St., 189 &190 S. Third St•., 2200 S. Winchester Blvd.). Planner II Tim Haley reported on this item. Commissioner Dickson asked Mr. Haley if there was a petition requesting this historic district. Mr. Haley stated that there was an informational survey done in 1984 asking the Alice Ave, residents if there was any interest in the formation of an historic district. There has been no petition-. A group of residents approached the Civic Improvement Commission requesting the Commission's assistance in the initiation of an application for a district. Commissioner Stanton referred to the minutes of the Historic Preservation Board of July 23, 1986, and asked if the Board supported the formation of a district even though there were negative comments from the residents. Mr. Haley noted that the Board is not required to make a recommendation based on the testimony of the residents. -11- M/S: Olszewski, Stanton - That the public hearing on ZC 86-10 be ` closed. Motion carried with the` following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Stanton, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine. M/S: Olszewski, - 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 a Resolution recommending approval of a zone change from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to R-1-H `(Single Family Residential H~.storic District). Motion dies for lack of a second. M/S: Olszewski, Dickson That the that the Negative prepared carries vote: Planning Commission recommend City Council accept the Declaration which has been for this project. Motion with the following roll call AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Stanton, Olszewski, Dickson, Christ NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine. M/S: Dickson, Stanton - That the Planning Commission adopt a ` Resolution recommending that the City Council deny ZC 86-10, based on the following finding:` That there has not been a preponderance of evidence from the neighborhood requesting the zone change. Discussion on motion Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would have no hesitation whatsoever to reconsider this item at some later date if it could be shown that a preponderance of the neighborhood did, in fact, sign a petition that they wanted to be part of an historic district. Commissioner Kasolas continued that it is evident that bringing these matters forward is good historical -12- inventory management, and his negative vote should not be taken as a vote -- against history or well-meaning citizens who have been contributing members of this community. Commissioner Kasolas added that historic districts have proven to be of benefits, particularly when initiated by the residents. He asked why the commercial property facing Winchester Blvd. was included in the proposed district, noting that if the park and the commercial property is taken out, some options for the street may be closed for the future. Commissioner Kasolas concluded that he would like to think that the Commission would indicate to the Council its' willingness to reconsider this matter if it can be shown that there is a substantial majority of the residents who are directly in favor of the district. Acting Chairman Christ stated that he would be speaking against the motion, although he would not support a motion for approval either. Commissioner Christ continued that the Commission has just recommended amendments to an ordinance and he would prefer to see this zone change matter continued until that ordinance has reached its final form and been approved by the Council. Additionally, he would like to see further testimony from the neighborhood once the ordinance is in place and the residents know what they are dealing with. Commissioner Olszewski noted that there is little doubt that this zone change is going to affect the property rights of the residents on Alice Ave. Commissioner Olszewski continued that, whereas he was unable to support a motion for denial, he would also feel uncomfortable at this point supporting a motion for approval based on evidence as to the desire of the residents of Alice Ave. Commissioner Stanton asked who initiated this request for an historic district. Mr. Haley responded that the application was initiated by the Civic Improvement Commission at the request of a group of residents from Alice Ave. Commissioner Stanton stated that he cannot support the motion for approval without evidence of support from the residents. Commissioner Kasolas noted that the designation does not seem to be disfavorable, rather the method of getting to the point of designation. There seems to be a need for the Alice Ave. residents to sign something indicating their desire for this historic district. Acting Chairman Christ noted this is why he feel= it would be better to continue this until after the ordinance is in place. Commissioner Kasolas indicated that it might be appropriate to ask the Council if they would like to agendize other sections of the ordinance for review, in that the ordinance can have significant impact on the area. -13- Vct? on motion AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Stanton, Dickson NOES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine Commissioner Kasolas requested that the issue of requirements for formation of historic districts be agendized for the next meeting. Commissioner Dickson felt that the Council should consider the matter and then request the Commission to agendize it. Mr. Seligmann stated that he is of the opinion that the matter should be agendized at the Planning Commission level. MISCELLANEOUS ~ PD 84-06 Continued public hearing to consider a Fleischli, T. Development Agreement for a previously approved office/hotel complex on property known as 920 E. Hamilton Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance. M/S: Kasolas, Stanton - That PD 84-06 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 24, 1987 with the applicant's concurrence. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1) . ,~ V S 66-21 Continued request of Mr. Tam Ly to Request modify an existing site plan to Ly, T. eliminate approved landscaping area in front of Anastasia's Fitness Center located on property known as 2931 S. Winchester Blvd. in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Planning Director Kee reported that this item was continued from the meeting of January 27, 1987 in order that the Staff could contact the applicant regarding the submittal of a revised plan. Staff has contacted -14- the applicant, and he has expressed some willingness to submit a proposal. However, to date, he has not submitted a plan; consequently, Staff would __ like to give additional time for the submittal of a proposal. A continuance to the meeting of February 24, 1987 is recommended. M/S: Kasolas, Stanton - That S 66-21 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 24, 1987. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). Request Continued request of Mr. Joe Testa for Testa, J. approval of a two foot lattice extension to an existing six foot fence on property known as 830 Virginia Ct. in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that, at its meeting of Janaury 13, 1987 the Commission continued this item in order that the applicant and the neighbor could attempt to compromise on the fence extension. Staff has been in contact with both parties, and apparently a compromise has been reached. However, Staff has requested a written agreement between the two, yet has not received it. A continuance is recommended to assure that a proper agreement has been reached between the two. M/S: Olszewski, Dickson - That this request be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 24, 1987. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1) . < < Commissioner Kasolas requested Staff to agendize the issue of fence setbacks and heights for the next meeting. ~SA 86-66 Signing request of Mimosa Skin Care & Mimosa Skin Care Nails appealing the decision of the Planning Director for property known as 2075 S. Bascom Ave, in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District.` Commissioner Olszewski reported that this matter was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance to March 10, 1987 with the applicant's concurrence. M/S: Kasolas, Olszewski - That SA 86-66 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of March 10, 1987. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1) . r -15- / Request Request of Mr. Joe Ventimiglia to have Ventimiglia,. J. the Planning Commission add "auto sales" as an allowed use in the M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District with approval of a Use Permit. Planning Director Kee reported that Staff is of the opinion that auto sales could be an acceptable use in the M-1-S district, .depending on the location. In addition, there are existin€~ nonconforming auto sales businesses in the M-1-S zoning district. If the Commission does wish to allow auto sales in`t~e M-1-S zoning district, a Use Permit should be required in order that a caieful review of the proposed use could be undertaken. M/S: Kasolas, Dickson - That the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution adding auto sales as an allowable use in the M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District, subject to approval of a IIse Permit. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). r , The Commission recessed at 9:30 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:40 p.m. 1/ R 87-01 Request of Mr, John Koutlos for a S 85=16 reinstatement of previously approved Kout~os, J. plans allowing the construction of 7 apartment units on property known as 250 N. San Tomas Aquino Rd. in an R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning Districb. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending that the application be re-evaluated in terms of current, City codes, however, there is no recommendation for approval in that the applicant wished to make a presentation to the Commission. Planning Director Kee reported that the plans and elevations were approved some time ago. The applicant applied for a building permit in March 1986; however, because of complications arising from evicting tenants from the structure to be demolished on the subject site, the applicant was unable to take out his building permit prior to the expiration of the approval. in the interim, the City's parking requirements have changed, thereby requiring the provision of two additional spaces on the subject site. From a design standpoint, it is extremely difficult to make room for two additional parking spaces on this site. The applicant is requesting that the original approval be reinstated so that he can move ahead with the plans submitted to the Building Department for a building permit. Mr. Kee concluded that Staff has taken the strictest interpretation of the ordinance in its' recommendation. -16- . , Commissioner Kasolas stated that he was unaware that the recently adopted zoning ordinance stipulated additional parking under the provision for "guest" parking; and, at no time did he ever intend that the parking requirements should be increased. He noted that his basic intention was that some of the required parking be designated for guest use only. Commissioner Kasolas asked how the requirement for two additional spaces came about. Mr. Kee indicated that the increased parking requirement was brought into effect by the adoption of the newly revised Zoning Ordinance, as adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council in November 1986. Commissioner Kasolas asked if Staff had any creative suggestions as to how to address this problem. Mr. Kee noted that there is only one area to provide the additional spaces, and tha the landscaping on the street elevation - additional space. Mr. Ree indicated that authority to require more or less parking ordinance. on the site which could be used t would require the removal of thereby allowing room for one the Planning Commission has the than what is required under the Commissioner Kasolas stated that the Commission might also condition the reinstatement to provide for the landscaping area to become parking if a problem occurs in the future. Commissioner Kasolas continued that this site is very much in need of development, and the issue of one or two parking spaces should not create a hardship on the entire neighborhood. Acting Chairman Christ asked Engineering Manager Helms if there was off-site parking available in the immediate area. Mr. Helms indicated that there is off-site parking in this area. Commissioner Olszewski stated that he would prefer not to designate the landscaping area for parking; and, that he is looking at this application as a reinstatement - not a new application. The problem regarding parking was caused by a change in the ordinance. Mr. Sam Hinman, representing Mr. Koutlos, gave a brief history of the property including the eviction problems; the positive comments from the neighborhood regarding the demolition of the structure on the site; and, the timing problems which have occured. Mr. Hinman asked the Commission for a favorable recommendation, noting that he would very much like to get the project moving in a positive direction. Commissioner Dickson stated that he felt the application deserved one extension under the old regulations; and, he pointed out that the project was in the middle of the density range, which was very favorable-. -I7- M/S: Dickson, Stanton - That the Planning Commission adopt the following finding and approve the applicant's request for reinstatement of R 87-01/S 85-16 subject to previous conditions of approvals (1) The project was approved under the previous parking standards for residential uses. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). ,/SA 87-06 Request of Mr. Joe Elek for approval of Santa~Cruz Sign Co. signing program - 845-895 S. San Tomas Aquino Rd. - C-1=S (Neighborhood Commercial)'Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance to March 10, 1987, with the applicant's concurrence. M/S: Stanton, Olszewski - That consideration of SA 87-06 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of March 10, 1987. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-1). r ~ * * ~Ir Staff Report Public Works Continued Staff Report from Public Works Department regarding traffic conditions in the City. It was the consensus of the Commission that this item be continued to the meeting of February 24, 1987, in order that Chairman Perrine may be present, in that this item was of particular interest to him. Staff Report Staff Report regarding City Council '` UP 86-14 action on UP 86-14 - 422 E. Campbell Avenue - Campbell Soup & Co. restaurant. Planning Director Kee reviewed the Staff Report for the Commission, indicating that the City Council conditionally approved UP 86-14, subject to the property owner signing an agreement to participate in a parking district in the future. Mr. Kee noted that the property owner has not, as yet, signed this agreement, therefore, the Use Permit has not been granted yet. Zt was the consensus of the Commission that this Staff Report be noted and filed. -18- h y O'1'HEP. ITEMS BROIIGHT UP BY COMMISSION Commissioner Dickson asked the City Attorney for a position paper on Planned Development changes when they pertain to site and architectural changes on the plans. Commissioner Dickson believes that the plans are part of the ordinance] therefore, what determines the point when a new public hearing should be taking place. How many changes can be made before a new public hearing is called? It was the consensus of the Commission that this issue be agendized for the next meeting. A i1.T(1TTANMFNT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m~. APPROVED: Ronald W. Christ Acting Chairman ATTEST: Arthur A. Ree Secretary RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis Recording Secretary