PC Min 08/26/1986PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA
7:30 PM MINUTES AIIGUST 26, 1986
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: Dickson, Olszewski,
Christ, Perrine, Stanton, Kasolasj
Planning Director A. A. Ree, Planner II
Marty Woodworth, Engineering Manager
Bill Helms, Acting City Attorney Bill
Seligmann, Recording Secretary Linda
Dennis.
Absent Commissioner Fairbanks.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/S: Dickson, Perrine -
That the minutes of the Planning
Commission meeting of August 12, 1986 be
approved as submitted, with the
following change: Pg. 15, last para. -
change Commissioner Olszewski to
Commissioner Christ. Motion carried
unanimously (6-0-1).
COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Kee noted that communications received pertained to specific items on
the agenda and would be discussed at that time:
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS
MM 86-19 Request of Mr. John Cimino for a minor
Cimino, J. modification to a sideyard setback to
allow the construction of a second story
on property known as 1182 Lenor Ave: in
an R-1-6 (Single Family Residential)
Zoning District.
Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the
Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending
approval.
M/S: Dickson, Perrine - That the Planning Commission adopt the
attached findings and approve MM 86-19
subject to conditions indicated in the
Staff Report dated August 26, 1986.
Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1).
-2-
S~86-15 Continued application of Andarch -
Andarch Assoc. Associates for approval of plans and
elevations to allow the construction of
a warehouse/automotive repair building
on property known as 180 & 198 Kennedy
Ave: in an M-1-S (Light Industrial)
Zoning District.
Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the
Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending
approval.
M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission adopt the
attached findings and approve S 86-15
subject to conditions as indicated in
the Staff Report dated August 26, 1986.
Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1).
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ZC 86-09 Public hearing to consider the
Ghiai, Y. application of Mr. Yves Ghiai for a zone
change from R-2-S (Multiple Family
Residential) to PD (Planned Development)
and approval of plans, elevations, and
development schedule to allow the
construction of 5 townhomes on property
known as 272 W. Sunnyoaks Ave.
Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the
Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a
continuance with the applicant's concurrence:
Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the
audience to speak for or against this item.
Mrs. Johanna Mitrovich, 321 Sunnyoaks Ave., expressed her concerns with
the traffic in the area] the lack of open space for children to play on
this sites the layout of the street at this location= and the height of
the proposed buildings.
Mr. Ernest Cook, 282 Sunnyoaks Ave., asked that the structures be kept to
two stories.
Mrs. Mary James, 282 Sunnyoaks Ave., spoke regarding the "ugly" buildings
to the west of her, as well as the traffic difficulties because of the
narrow street. Additionally, Mrs. James asked that the structures be kept
at two stories.
-3-
Mr. Helms noted that there will be street improvements required in this
area as a result of the proposed development.
M/S: Olszewski, Dickson - That the public hearing on ZC 86-09 be
continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of September 9, 1986. Motion
carried unanimously (6-0-1).
* :
PD 86-02 Continued public hearing to consider the
Anderson, K. application of Mr. Rurt 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.
Mr. Kee reported that the applicant has requested a continuance on this
matter.
Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the
audience to speak for or against this item.
M/S: Stanton, Dickson - That the public hearing on PD 86-02 be
continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of September 9, 1986. Motion
carried unanimously (6-0-1).
IIP 86-10 Continued public hearing to consider the
Filice, A. application of Mr. Al Filice, on behalf
of Medevac, to establish a paramedic
station with a living unit and a
paramedic van in an existing building on
property known as 145 Dillon Ave. in a
PD (Planned Development/
Industrial) Zoning District.
Mr. Woodworth reported that Staff has contacted the Fire Department for
further comments on the application. The Fire Department reiterated their
concerns as expressed in the attached memo: They indicated that although
it is not an ideal situation with Medevac at the present location, it is
one which they feel they can live with. Staff is, therefore, recommending
that the Planning Commission adopt the attached findings and adopt a
resolution approving this use permit for a period of one year, subject to
the attached conditions. At the end of the one year period, the Planning
Commission will hold a hearing to review the use and may extend the time
period of the use permit or terminate it.
-4-
Commissioner Dickson asked if this type of operation was allowable in an ---
industrial zoning district.
Mr. Woodworth responded that it was allowable with a use permit.
Commissioner Christ asked for clarification if the City's emergency
vehicles and the Medivac vehicles were having conflicts because of using
the same routes.
Commissioner Dickson asked if information had been received on the trip
generation or areas of response for the Medivac units:
Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the
audience to speak for or against this item.
Commissioner Dickson stated that statistical programs are available to
find out the necessary information before action is taken. When a fire
station was established in the City, the issue was studied for a lengthy
time. He was not sure that this type of situation should be handled under
the Use Permit process, and that it should have the Council's attention.
Commissioner Dickson continued that he would like to see the applicant
address the areas of service and a forecast of trip generations:
Mr. Ree noted that Staff is recommending a one-year approval, with some of
the same concerns being expressed by Staff:
Commissioner Stanton explained that the County Board of Supervisors
divides the County into zones, and assigns emergency units within those
zones. Medivac is used as a back-up in this zone, and perhaps another
adjacent zone:
Commissioner Dickson noted that these things should be in writing with
conditions. Commissioner .Dickson continued that there has not been an
application like this before, and he is not sure that there is evidence
that the use will not be detrimental:
Commissioner Olszewski asked how long the use has existed at the present
site.
Mr. Kee responded that the use has been in existence since April 1985:
Commissioner Olszewski asked how Staff would analyze the trip generation
data and determine a safety threshold.
Mr. Kee indicated that Planning Staff would ask the Fire Department for a
report, and rely on their expertise.
Commissioner Christ noted that there are always going to be a certain
number of cases when both organizations go on call at the same time. His
concern is that the frequency of that happening may be reduced by their _
proximity of location: He asked for a response from the Fire Department
as to where the "close calls" came about -- by the Fire Station, or
elsewhere in the City. Depending on where the incidents happened would
determine if the problems were with the location of the Medivac unit.
-5-
Commissioner Dickson stated that he was very much in favor of the use;
however, he wanted to make sure that all the safety issues were looked
at. He felt that the Commission should also address the proper safeguards
of a living unit on the site:
M/S: Dickson, Christ - That the public hearing on UP 86-10 be
continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of September 9, 1986. Motion
carried with a vote of 4-2-1, with
Commissioners Perrine and Stanton voting
"no", and Commissioner Fairbanks being
absent.
Commissioner Olszewski stated that he is on record as supporting the
selected site; however, he certainly agreed with Commissioner Dickson that
the Commission should have the trip generation information, and that the
information should be analyzed by the Fire Department: He noted that he
is expecting some detailed comment from the Fire Department regarding the
matter.
Chairman Rasolas commented that if conflicts exist, there should also be a
proposal to work out the conflicts:
UP 86-11 Continued public hearing to consider the
Sando, M. application for Mr: Michael Sando for
approval of a Conditional Use Permit to
allow the construction of a residential
addition to an existing apartment on
property known as 2055 S: Winchester
Blvde in a C-3-S (.Central Business
District) Zoning District.
Commissioner Perrine reported that this application .was considered by the
Site and Architectural Review Committee: The Committee is in agreement
with Staff's recommendation for denial; however, the Committee would ask
that the applicant be heard.
Chairman Rasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the
audience to speak for or against this item:
Mr. Michael Sando, applicant, stated that he has provided the required
parking; and, he would be willing to put some flower boxes in the front of
the building.
Chairman Kasolas asked Mr. Sando if his application was with the full
knowledge and consent of the property owner:
Mr. Sando responded that it was with the knowledge and consent of the
property owner: He continued that part of the parking situation was
caused by the widening of the street= and, there has never been a parking
problem at this location.
-6-
Mr. Kee reported that this is actually a nonconforming use: The building
was constructed prior to the incorporation of the City: There are two
studio apartments on the top of a retail building: The Zoning Code states
that if you apply to expand a nonconforming use, it becomes a IIse Permit
procedure: In the Commercial Zoning District, there is no provision for
residential use: Staff is not aware of any parking problems in the area:
The issue is before the Commission because there are no approvals on the
structures, and a nonconforming use was expanded: The procedure would be
the same for a single residential use:
Commissioner Christ asked if the parking situation was due to the use of
the property, or something else:
Mr: Kee responded that the existing spaces do not meet the Zoning Code for
size or back-up distances: Staff cannot support an expansion of a use
when there is no room on-site to provide adequate parking:
Commissioner Dickson asked if there were any similar situations in the
area, or immediate vicinity:
Mr: Ree indicated that there are probably other nonconforming uses=
however, Staff is not sure if there are other residential/commercial
mixtures:
Commissioner Dickson asked if there was any way the applicant could revise
the parking plan to address Staff's concerns.
Mr. Sando noted that he has talked with the adjacent property owner about
leasing spaces but has had no response yet: There are 12 on-site spaces:
Mr. Sando indicated that he could tear down the addition if he moves out,
if that is the desire of the Commission:
Commissioner Stanton asked if there was room on-site for a complete
turn-around so that vehicles could exit to Winchester head first:
Mr: Sando responded that there is not a complete 360 degree turn-around=
however, there is turn-around room, and additional room will be gained
from the adjacent development:
Commissioner Olszewski felt that there is a hardship on an applicant, when
he is a tenant, to ask him to bring parking into conformance: The
applicant just added living space: He is not increasing the retail use of
the building: Commissioner Olszewski noted that the applicant's offer to
tear down the added space when he moves is interesting:
M/S: Stanton, Olszewski - That the public hearing on IIP 86-11 be
closed: Motion carried unanimously
Commissioner Dickson stated that he would be favorably influenced if the
applicant could come up with an acceptable parking plan, and if the
property would be brought into conformance when the applicant leaves]
however, he was not sure this would be possible:
-7-
Mr. Kee stated that it is not possible to meet the parking requirements
unless part of the building is removed: Leasing parking from adjacent
properties is not a workable solution because each site must stand on its
own from a parking standpoint:
Chairman Kasolas asked the applicant if he would like to have a
continuance:
Mr. Sando stated that he would like a decision.
Commissioner Perrine stated that this is a difficult situation.
Commissioner Olszewski noted that he is torn: The addition is only 300
sq:ft. and the applicant has lived there for ten years: He felt that the
applicant has been caught up in the system, and there is still a chance
for a workable solution:
M/S: Perrine, Stanton - That the Planning Commission adopt the
attached findings and adopt a Resolution
denying UP 86-11. Motion carried with
the following roll call votes
AYES: Commissioners: Dickson, Perrine, Stanton, Kasolas
NOES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ
ABSENT: Commissioners: Fairbanks.
Chairman Kasolas advised the applicant of the appeal process:
The Commission recessed at 8:40 p:m:j the meeting reconvened at 8s55 p.m.
UP 86-09 Continued public hearing to consider the
Loher, J. application of Ms: Joan Loher, on behalf
of Raggedy Ann and Andy Preschool and
Daycare, for approval of a Use Permit to
allow the establishment of a preschool
and daycare center on property known as
1291 Elam Ave: in a C-1-S (Neighborhood
Commercial) Zoning District:
Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the
Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending
approval in that the applicant has addressed all concerns expressed in the
Staff Report:
Mr. Kee indicated that Staff is in agreement with the recommendation for
approval.
A letter, dated August 24, 1986, from the applicant was noted and is
attached hereto.
-8-
Chairman Kasolas asked at what point does one need to apply for a use
permit - how many children?
Mr, Kee responded that a use permit must be obtained when caring for 7 or
more children:
Mr: Seligmann noted that the issue is preempted by State law:
Commissioner Christ asked if the curb is going to be marked in such a way
that other people in the area will be preempted from parking at the
drop-off location:
Mr. Helms responded that this is a low traffic street, and Staff doesn't
anticipate that it will be necessary to restrict parking along the curbs
however, if the need arises, Staff would not be opposed to restricting
parking during certain hours: Mr: Helms noted that there is a condition
for a one year review; during which time Staff will monitor the situation.
Commissioner Dickson asked about the fencing on the site.
Mr: Kee noted that the site will be completely fenced, with a gate across
the driveway. The fencing and landscaping plan is to come back to the
Planning Director for approval:
Commissioner Dickson asked about the distances to adjacent properties, and
the distance to the shopping center and liquor sales in the center:
Commissioner Dickson would like comment from the Alcoholic Beverage
Control regarding the proposed child care use adjacent to a recently
approved liquor sales use:
Chairman Kasolas asked if the sidewalk and driveway approach would
actually be installed or just a surety posted-:
Mr: Helms stated that the improvements would be required to be installed.
Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the
audience to speak for or against this item.
Mr: Kurt Anderson, representing applicant, stated that the applicant has
been before the Commission three times, and now it appears that another
continuance may be required: Mr: Anderson felt that this was unfair to
the applicant:
M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That the public hearing on iJP 86-09 be
closed: Motion carried with the
following roll call votes
AYES: Commissionerss Dickson, Christ, Perrine, Stanton
NOES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Kasolas
ABSENT: Comn-issionerss Fairbanks:
-9-
M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That the Planning Commission adopt the
attached findings and adopt a Resolution
approving Up 86-09 subject to conditions
as indicated in the Staff Report dated
August 26, 1986:
Discussion on motion
Commissioner Dickson noted that he is raising the issue of the closeness
to a liquor store because he has just become aware of the issues that the
ABC considers when they look at an application: There has been a liquor
store approved within 100 feet of this proposed childcare usej and, there
is no way for the ABC to know if anyone objects unless we tell them what's
happening:
Vote on motion
AYES: Ccmmissioners: Olszewski, Christ, Perrine
NOES: Commissioners: Dickson, Stanton, Kasolas
ABSENT: Commissionerss Fairbanks:
Motion for approval fails.
M/S: Dickson, Stanton - That UP 86-09 be continued in order that
information may be obtained from the
Alcoholic Beverage Control: (No action
taken on this motion:)
Discussion
Mrs. Joan Loher, applicant, felt that she was being treated unfairly, and
that these issues should have been brought up before: Mrs: Loher noted
that it is really 300 feet to the front door of the shopping center:
Chairman Kasolas indicated that the Commission is concerned with the
safety of the children with respect to the charge of the use permit:
Mrs. Loher noted that she has received strong support from the neighbors
for the daycare use.
Chairman Kasolas indicated that the condition of the adjacent property is
definitely a safety hazard to children: He asked for a status report on
the site, noting that there have been serious allegations regarding the
adjacent property.
Commissioner Olszewski asked if the children are kept in the house and the
yard.
Mrs. Loher responded that this is correct.
Commissioner Olszewski asked if Staff would approve fencing that would
allow a child to see something beyond the fence:
-10-
Mr. Kee responded that Staff would look at the fencing proposal and make a
decision at that time:
Commissioner Dickson stated that he did not feel the Commission could take
appropriate action on a use like this without knowing what is going on in
the neighborhood: He is also aware of the considerations that the ABC
takes. When you throw a use like this in the middle of something that has
already been approved, it would be good to have the ABC's comments:
Chairman Kasolas noted that there are obviously many changes going on in
this particular area, with increased densities requiring services: The
issue remaining is whether or not this is an appropriate location for this
type of use because of the other problems in the area= or, can we work to
accommodate this use and take care of the neighborhood;
Mrs. Loher stated that the children are her primary concern: The State
has the final authority on her licensing; however, without the City's
approval, she cannot go ahead:
Mr. Anderson asked if it would be possible to take some action which would
allow the issue to go before the State first, then bring it back to the
Commission, noting that the applicant is on hold until a decision is made:
There was additional discussion regarding the liquor store which was
recently approved in the area; the status of adjacent properties with
regard to code enforcement issues; and, the fencing plan for the daycare:
M/S: Olszewski, Perrine - That UP 86-09 be approved for one year,
and that comments from the Alcoholic
Beverage Control be considered with the
one-year review:
Discussion on motion
Commissioner Dickson stated that he was opposed to the motion for reasons
indicated earlier:
Commissioner Christ commented that this application appears to be a light
at the end of a tunnel, in that there must be people willing to start the
trend to improve neighborhoods in order to get new life into an area:
Vote on motion
AYES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ, Perrine
NOES: Commissioners: Dickson, Stanton, Kasolas
ABSENT: Commissioners: Fairbanks:
Motion fails:
-11-
Commissioner Dickson asked the. applicant if she would be in favor of a
continuance:
Mrs. Loher responded that she did not see the purpose of the continuance.
M/S: Dickson, Stanton - That the public hearing on UP 86-09 be
re-opened. Motion failed with the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Dickson, Stanton, Kasolas
NOES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ, Perrine
ABSENT: Commissioners: Fairbanks:
:Commissioner Dickson believed that the Commission should recommend the
application be forwarded to the City Council because of the tied votes:
Commissioner Stanton noted that the applicant may wish to further explore
the neighborhood situation:
Commissioner Christ did not see how information would be available from
the pending code enforcement court case in two weeks= and, he felt that it
might not be possible to get an appropriate response from the ABC in this
time frame: Commissioner Christ stated that he did not feel the
continuance was appropriate because he did not think the other agencies
would be able to address the concerns.
Chairman Kasolas noted his concern with the whole neighborhood -- not just
a few properties:
At this time, Mr•: Anderson requested a continuance on behalf of his
client:
M/S: Dickson, Stanton - That the public hearing on UP 86-09 be
re-opened, with the concurrence of the
applicant: Motion carried with a vote
of 6-0-1-:
M/S: .Dickson, Stanton - That the public hearing on UP 86-09 be
continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of September 9, 1986 in order
that additional information may be
obtained regarding the code enforcement
court case and the Alcoholic Beverage
Control: Motion carried with a vote of
5-1-1, with Commissioner Olszewski
.voting "no", and Commissioner Fairbanks
being absent-:
-12-
ZC 86-OS Continued public hearing to consider the --~
Naderzad, Q: application of Messrs: Que Naderzad and
Steve Saray for a zone change from R-M-S
(Multiple Family Residential) to PD
(Planned Development/Low-Medium Density
Residential= and approval of a Planned
Development Permit, plans, elevations,
and development schedule to allow the
construction of 14 townhomes on property
known as 104 & 120 Redding Rd.
Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the
Site and Architectural Review Committee: The Committee is recommending
approval.
Mr. Kee reported that Staff is also recommending approval, subject to
conditions indicated in the Staff Report:
Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the
audience to speak for or against this item:
Mr. Robert Gunn, 90 Redding Rd:, expressed concerns regarding the distance
and line of sight between bedrooms in four of the units: He requested
that these units be staggered, or that 24" box trees be provided to
diffuse the line of sight:
Mr: Dennis Ajax, 92 Redding Rd:, expressed a concern with the shake
roofing materialf and, agreed with Mr: Gunn's request for 24" box trees,
although he would prefer the units be offset:
Commissioner Olszewski asked Mr: Ajax about his previously stated concern
regarding the fencing and repair easements:
Mr. Ajax indicated that this issue appears to be a moot point, although he
is not totally satisfied with the situation:
Mr: Que Naderzad, applicant, stated that he will provide 24" box trees to
screen the bedroom line of sight, as requested-:
Commissioner Dickson asked if the building separations and setbacks were
standard under the existing zoning: Commissioner Dickson also asked if
there was a way to be able to look at surrounding developments prior to
plans being drawn to avoid things like bedrooms being across from one
another:
Mr: Kee stated that the setbacks and building separations were in
conformance with the regular zoning district-: Staff does review
developments in relation to surrounding structures, but not on a room to
room basis:
Commissioner Dickson asked the applicant if he would look at the plans to
see if something could be done to offset the floor plans:
-13-
Mr. Naderzad responded that a plan revision to offset floor plans would be
impossible at this point: It would mean a tremendous redesign and
sacrificing open space. The provision of trees would take care of the
privacy issue and help the sale of the properties:
Mr. Bill Brown, 104 Redding Rd:, noted that he has had 14 bedroom windows
looking onto his property for some time, he is surrounded by two story
townhomes:
M/S: Olszewski, Perrine - That the public hearing on ZC 86-OS be
closed: Motion carried with a vote of
5-1-1, with Commissioner Christ voting
"no", and Commissioner Fairbanks being
absent:
M/S: Perrine, Olszewski -
That the Planning Commission recommend
that the City Council accept the
Negative Declaration which has been
prepared; and, that the Planning
Commission adopt the attached findings
and adopt Resolutions recommending that
the City Council approve ZC 86-08,
subject to conditions as indicated in
the Staff Report dated August 26, 1986,
with the added condition that 24" box
trees be provided in the rear yards of 4
units which have bedrooms across from
the adjoining property, and the
landscaping plan to come back to the
Site Committee for approval.
Discussion on motion
Commissioner Olszewski stated that he would be speaking for the motion,
and he would like Mr: Gunn and Mr: Ajax to know that the Site and
Architectural Review Committee meetings were open to the public, and that
their opinion would be appreciated:
Vote on motion
AYES: Commissionerss Dickson, Olszewski, Perrine, Stanton, Rasolas
NOES: Commissioners: Christ
ABSENT: Commissioners: Fairbanks-:
* ~
Referral Referral from City Council on the
Anderson, R: application of Mr: Kurt Anderson for a
ZC 86-01 zone change from R-M-S (Multiple Family
Residential) to PD (Planned
Development), and approval of a Planned
Development Permit, plans, elevations
_ and development schedule to allow the
construction of 4 townhomes on property
known as 235 N: Third St:
-14-
Mr. Kee reported that Staff is recommending that this item be continued to
the Planning Commission meeting of September 23, 1986.
M/S: Stanton, Christ - That ZC 86-01 be continued to the
Planning Commission meeting of September
23, 1986: Motion carried unanimously
(6-0-1)
,r * •
MM 83-14 Request of Our Mother of Perpetual Help
Post, G: Church for an extension of time for the
use of two temporary structures on
property known as 110 W--: Latimer Ave: in
an R-3-S (Multiple Family Residential)
Zoning District:
Mr. Kee responded to questions from the Commission, noting that Staff has
not received any complaints regarding this use or this site] the trailers
cannot be seen from the street] the extension is on a yearly basis because
the City has a policy of not encouraging these types of uses:
Commissioner Dickson felt that this use should be looked at like a mobile
use for schools, rather than trailers:
M/S: Dickson, Perrine - That the Planning Commission grant a
12-month extension to the approval to
use two temporary structures at this
location. Motion carried unanimously
(6-0-1) .
* ~
SA 86-34 Continued sign application of the
Gaslighter Gaslighter Theater - 400 E: Campbell
Ave: - PD (Planned Development/
Commercial) Zoning District:
Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the
Site and Architectural Review Committee-: The Committee is recommending
that the matter be referred to the Redevelopment Agency before action is
takem: The applicant is very interested in working with the City on the
Downtown Area:
M/S: Perrine, Stanton - That SA 86-34 be referred to the
Redevelopment Agency at the applicant's
request:
Discussion on motion
Commissioner Dickson noted his opposition in that it is delaying action on
an existing sign:
-15-
Mr: Woodworth explained that only the frame for the proposed sign has been
erected:
Vote on motion
Motion carried with a vote of 4-2-1, with
Commissioners Dickson and Christ voting "no",
and Commissioner Fairbanks being absent:
R 86-06 Request of Mr: David Thede, on behalf
S 83-13 of Morris Management Co:, for (1) a
Thede, D: reinstatement of previously approved plans
for the construction of a research &
development complex on property known as 743
& 749 Camden Ave: in an M-1-S (Light
Industrial) Zoning District] and (2) a
request for construction of this project in
two phases:
Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the
Site and Architectural Review Committee. As a result of lengthy
discussion, the Site Committee would like to add a condition regarding the
landscaping within the Phase II area: Commissioner Perrine noted that the
lengthy development time has been due to the number of jurisdictions
involved:
Commissioner Christ expressed concern with the mechanical equipment and
screening on the roof, and requested that this be looked at carefully:
M/S: Stanton, Perrine - That the Planning Commission approve R 86-06,
subject to the previous conditions of
approval, and with the following added
conditions:
1: All conditions required for S 83-13 still
apply:
2: All conditions of the Public Works
Department to be completed prior to Phase I
occupancy:
3: Phase II construction to begin within two
years of Phase I occupancy:
4: Area for Phase II development to be
maintained free of weeds and debris:
-16-
5-: In the event that Phase II
construction does not begin within two
years of Phase I occupancy, then
applicant must submit a landscape plan
for the approval of the Site and
Architectural Review Committee
indicating perimeter landscaping around
the unbuilt portion of the site:
Landscaping to be installed within 60
days of approval of this plan:
Motion carried with a vote of 6-0-1-:
Request Request of Mr: Scott Borgia to have a
recording studio classified as an
allowed use in the M-1-S (Light
Industrial) Zoning District:
Mr: Kee reported that Staff has received a request for a continuance:
M/Ss Dickson, Olszewski - That this request be continued to the
Planning Commission meeting of September
9, 1986: Motion carried unanimously
(6-0-1)
OTHER ITEMS BROIIGHT IIP BY COMMISSION
Chairman Kasolas indicated that he would not be at the meeting of
September 9, 1986;
Commissioner Perrine noted that he may be on vacation at this time also:
Commissioner Olszewski requested that Mr~: Gunn and Mr: Ajax be notified
when the landscaping plan for 104 & 120 Redding Rd: is being considered by
the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting, in that he would like
to see the situation worked to everyone's benefit:
There was brief discussion as to whether or not the notifying of property
owners regarding the Site Committee meeting should be Commission policy:
It was the consensus of the Commission that it should not become policy:
Chairman Kasolas asked what the City's policy is when someone wants to
change the color of a development approved under a PD•:
Mr; Seligmann responded that if the color was part of the PD ordinance, it ~.
would be in violation of a City ordinance to change the color of the
structures:
-17-
Commissioner Dickson noted that if a person's home is constructed under
the PD Ordinance, he needs to come back for permission to paint his home.
He felt that these types of additional costs should be disclosed to
homebuyers under PD developments -- additional costs might be incurred:
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the
meeting was adjourned at 10:32 p:m:
APPROVED: George C: Kasolas
Chairman
ATTEST: Arthur A: Kee
Secretary
RECORDEDs Linda A: Dennis
Recording Secretary
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
APPLICANT: CIMINO, J.
SITE ADDRESS: 1182 LENOR WY
P.C. MTG.: 8-26-86
1. The 5'9" sideyard setback 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.
2. The adjacent neighbor approves of the applicant's request.
3. The addition matches the existing house and is of good design quality.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
APPLICANT: CIMINO, J.
SITE ADDRESS: 1182 LENOR WY
P.C. MTG.: 8-26-86
1. Applicant to obtain all necessary permits from the Building
Department.
2. Fire, Building, and Public Works Departments - No comments.
July 25, 1986
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed our neighbors, Robert and Veronica B1~ron
at 1182 Lenor 4~7ay, plans for their second story addition
and have no probler.;s with them.
,•
sincerely,
==
~ ~=' n
~ L~ C~ L~ ~~'C~
JUl 311986
CfTY OF CAMPBELL
PLANNINLi DEPARTMENT
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
FILE NO. S 86-15
APPLICANT: ANDARCH ASSOCIATES
SITE ADDRESS: 180 & 198 KENNEDY AVE.
P. C. MTG.: 8-26-86
1. The project will be of a high quality design and aesthetically pleasing.
2. Parking is provided in compliance with City codes.
3. Substantial landscaping has been provided which adds to the aesthetics ofs
the project.
4. The project conforms with the code and regulations of the City.
5. 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 OF APPROVAL: S 86-15
APPLICANT: Andarch Associates
SITE ADDRESS: 180 & 198 Kennedy Ave.
P.C. MTG. 7-22-86
The applicant is 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.
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 wit
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. 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.
4. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount of
$3,000.00 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.
5. 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.
6. Applicant to submit a letter to the Planning Department, satisfactory to
the City Attorney, prior to application for building permit, limiting the
use of the property as follows: 450 sq.ft. office use; 7,708 sq.ft.
automotive/warehousing/industrial use.
7. All mechanical equipment on roofs and all utility meters to be screened as
approved by the Planning Director.
8. Building occupancy will not be allowed until public improvements are
installed.
9. 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.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 86-15
APPLICANT: Andarch Associates
SITE ADDRESS: 180 & 198 Kennedy Ave.
Page 2.
10. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.16.070 of
the Campbell Municipal Code.
11. Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall indicate
clearly the location of all connections for underground utilities includir)g
water, sewer, electric, telephone and television cables, etc.
12. 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
21.68.030 of the Campbell Municipal Code).
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City requirements for
the handicapped.
18. 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. IIniform Fire Code.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
19. Automotive repair occupancies shall meet requirements for an H-4 occupancy.
20. One-hour separations shall be provided between auto repair and warehouse
occupaniies.
21. Property line walls shall be constructed as four-hour walls.
22. Provide an automatic sprinkler throughout the building.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
No comments at this time.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 86-15
APPLICANT: Andarch Associates
SITE ADDRESS: 180 & 198 Kennedy Ave.
Page 3.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
23. Process and file a parcel map to combine the two lots.
24. Dedicate additional right of way to widen Kennedy Avenue to 30 feet from
centerline.
25. Submit three copies of the on-site grading and drainage plan to the
Director of Public Works.
26. Obtain an excavation permit, pay fees and post surety to relocate driveway
and any other work in the public right of way.
ITEM N0. 7
'- Raggedy Ann & Andy Pre-School
1291 Elam Avenue _-_
Campbell, CA 95008
August 24, 1986
Members of the
Planning Commission
City of Campbell
California 95008
RE: IIP 86-09
Dear Members:
The State of California requirement allows for one (1)
employee for each twelve (12) children in care. (See attached
copy of State Regulation #81065.5•)
The applicant requests a IIse Permit for twenty-four
(24) children thus allowing for two (2) employees.
At the Architectural Review .Commit'tee meeting of August. l2, --
1986 it was determined that two (2) employee parking spaces
would be sufficient for the proposed day care/pre-school.
It was recommended that the existin plans showing three (3)
parking spaces be amended to show two (2~ parking spaces with
a turn-around. This has been accomplished.
Thank you for your attention in this matter.
Sincerely yours,
d~-" _" "
G`~c~ ~l -
oan M. Loher
jml/j .
81065.5 ~ ------ --------------------------.•
CHILD CARE CENTERS
----------------------------------- _ ~eaulations ..,
-------------~------------ --M---'
81066.6 TEACHER-CHILD pATlO
81065.6 • :;
:r
(a) There shall be an -ove[alI ratio of not less than one teacher present to 12 hildren in
attendance, except as specified in (b)and (c) below. .~
(1) The number of children in attendance shall not exceed licensed capacity.
(2) Whenever children are engaged in activities away from the center no teacher shall
• be in charge of a group of more than 12 children.
I
• (AJ Activities outside the perimeter of t/re licensed child care center pose additions/
hazards to children. An eNort should be made to gain an Bdult-chi/d ratio o/ at
/east 1:6 through the use o/ adu/t volunteers.
(b) The licensee shall be allowed to use teacher's aides in a teacher-child ratio of one >
teacher and one $ide for every 15 rhildren in attendance.
(c) Child development programs funded by tFre State Department of Education and operating
under the provisions of Title 5 of the California Administrative Code shall not be required •,
to meet the teacher-child ratios specified in (a) and (a) above. Title b staffing ratios shall +
be applicable in such centers.
(d) The licensee shall be permitted to include the director in the teacher-child ratio" when
actually engaged in teaching a group of children. •
. (1) The licensee shall be permitted to include the substitute child care center director "
in the teacher-child ratio when actually engaged in teaching a group of children.
(e) Each licenser#'shall maintain an up to date list of qualified teacher substitutes, as defined .
in Section 81001(a)(6), who shall be called immediately in case of emergency or illness
to meet the teacher-child ratios required by this chapter.
(f) During nap periods the teacher-child ratio specified in Section 81079(c) shall apply.
,• P
(g) .The teacher shall not be required to perform housekeeping or maintenance duties which
prevent him/her from performing duties related to providing care and supervision.
(h) Persons employed for clerical, housekeeping and maintenance functions shall not be ~, ~`~
included as teachers in the teacher-child ratio. `~
3
11 )' The licensee shall be allowed to use such persons as emergency substitutes for ~ ~"
teachers while a qualified teacher substitute is being secured.
81065.7 STAFFING - PARENT-COOPERATIVE CENTERS
8106b.7
(s) Parent-cooperative centers shall employ a full time teacher in addition to the director
and participating parents when the number of children reaches 25.
(b) There shall be at least one staff member or participating parent present for each five
children in attendance.
CALIFORNIA-DSS-MANUAL-CCL Issue 525 Effective 1/1/84 ~ '+•.
(MANUAL LETTER NO. 83-55) ~ .~n:.„i'
''L:~. i
our mother of perpetual help chapel
Society of St. Pius X
110 West Latimer Avenue
Campbell, CA 95008 -_
(408) 374-4214
City of Campbell Planning Department
70 North First Street
Campbell, California 95008
Dear Mr. Kee:
August 11, 1986 _.
Another year has now elapsed without our having found a solution to our space
problems so we are again forced to request a further extension of the approval
of the Planning C annision to continue using our trailers. `
During the past year we received from the Campbell Dept. of Public Works a
letter expressing the city's interest in purchasing our property for inclusion
into the Community Center. We met with Mr. Bill Helms and discussed this in-
terest in more detail, and also discussed our problems with Mr. Phil Stafford
of your department. The net is that we have a potential buyer for our property
as soon as we can locate a suitable location to move to.
Mr. Stafford suggested that we might be able to purchase the church at 860
Harriet Ave., but upon approaching the owners we discovered that it is not for
sale. He also directed our attention to two undeveloped acres behind that
church on Elam Ave., and we have written to and tried to call the owners but
with no response so far. -
We are still in contact with Mr. Barry Willbanks of Coldwell-Banker. He is a
realtor and specialist in church property in the Southern San Francisco Bay
Area and is aware of virtually all activity in that field. He reports that
nothing fitting our needs has cane on the market in the past year. We also
have at our disposal the services of Mr. Harold Ellis of Fox E~ Carskadon. He
is a member of our congregation and is actively watching for property for us.
We see no alternative to continuing to proceed in the same manner as we have
been doing and we do still plan to move ,)ust as soon as an opportunity presents
itself. In the interim, however, we are becoming more and more dependent on
the space provided by our two trailers in order to be able to offer to the
members of our congregation the services they desire. We could perhaps add to
our permanent structure but are of the opinion that you would be disinclined to
grant us a permit based on our limited parking, and in any case such construc-
tion would seen econanically ill advised given our plans to move. The two
trailers still have not presented any problems that we are aware of since they
are very much out of sight to nearly everyone in the neighborhood. We there-~
fore request that we be granted at least another year's extension to the ap-
proval to use them or preferably until we are able to accomplish the move.
Begging the Commission's continued patience with us on this matter, we remain,
Most appreciatively yours,
Fr. Gregory Post
Pastor
'J
Mr. Harmon W. Johnson QUv 1 2 986
Business Manager
CITY OF CAMPBELL
PLANNINd DEPARTMENT
CONO 1 T IONS OF APPROVAL S 83-18 P. C. Mtg.: 3/27/84
APPL i CAT 1 ON of LRS Associates P. C. Mtg.: 4/10/84 __
Page 1 743 C 749 CATiDII~ A~'E.
nJa Revised elevations and/or site plan to be approved by the Plannin
Director upon recommendation of the Architectural Advisor, w~th~n
30 days of the Planning Commission approval.
L Revised elevations and/or site plan to be approved by the Site b
Architectural Review Committee and/or the Planning Commission with-
in 30 days of Planning Commission approval.
2 Property to be fenced and landscaped as indicated and/or added in
red on plans. Landscaping and fencing shall be maintained in
accordance with the approved plans.
3 Landscaping plan indicating type and size of plant material, and
location of irrigation system to be submitted for approval.of the
Site b Architectural Review Committee and/or Planning Commission
prior to app icat~on fora ui ding permit.
n/a Landscaping plan indicating type and size of plant material, and
location of irrigation system to be submitted for ap9rovamiotf the
Planning Director rior to application fora buildin pe
4 Fencing plan indicating location and design details of fencing to __
be submitted for approval of the Planning Director prior to applica-
tion for building permit.
5 Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the
amount of $ 10,000 to insure landscaping, fencing, and striping
of parking areas wit ~n 3 months of completion of construction; or
(2) file written agreement to complete landscaping, fencing~ii•strip-
ing of parking areas prior to application for a building pe
6 Applicant to submit a plan, prior to installation of PGbE utility
(transformer) boxes, indicating the location of the boxes and
_ screening(if boxes are aboveground) for approval of the Planning
Director.
~ Applicant to submit a letter, satisfactory to the City Attorney,
limiting the use of the property to: 70,568 square feet of
research and development use and 17,64 square feet of manufacturing
use, prior to issuance of a building permit.
8 A11 mechanical equipment on roofs and all utility meters to be
` screened as approved by the Planning Director.
9 Building occupancy will not be allowed until public improvements
are installed.
~n/a: not applicable to this application.
`1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 83.18
APPLICATION OF: LRS Associates
Page 2
The applicant is notified as part of this application that he/she is required
to meet the following conditions in accordance with Ardinance of the City of
Campbell and Laws of the State of California. -
- A All parking and driveway areas to be developed in compliance with
Section 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code. All parking spaces
to De provided with appropriate concrete curbs or bumper guards.
B Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section
20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code.
C 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 tele-
vision cables. etc.
D 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 the Building Depart-
. ment (Section 21.68.030 of the Campbell Municipal Code).
E Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell Municipal Lode 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 Palley Disposal Company. This
requirement applies to all single-family dwellings, multiple apart-
ment units, to all commercial, business, industrial, manufacturing,
and construction establishments.
F Trash container(s) of a size and quantity necessary to serve the
development shall be located in area(s) approved by the Fire De-
partment. 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.
G Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City re-
quirements for the handicapped.
N/A 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.
N/A ~.
Applicant is hereby notified that he will be required to pay
Park Dedication In-Lieu Fee which will be assessed at the time
the subdivision map is submitted.
STANLiARD FIRE HAZARD ABATEMENT COMMENT: 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 Xept secured by having windows boarded up and doors aealed shut, or be demolish
ed or removed from the property. Sect. lI.?Ol ~ 11.414, 1979 Ed. Uniform Fire Cod
.~ ~l
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 63-18
APPLICATION OF: LRS Associates ~-
Pa ge 3
FIRE DEPARTT~-NT
Access
H. _ Provide 20 foot Fire Department access driveway serving the entire complex.
I.~ Parking shall be prohibited on fire access driveways with signs posted to
that effect.
J. Building projections and/or landscaping shall not encroach upon the open
space above driveways.
Occupancy
K. A signed document with intention of occupancy shall be provided.
L. Any areas using quantities of hazardous materials in excess of Table 9A-
Uniform Building Code, shall be classified as Group H1 or H2 occupancies.
D1. Any such areas in item M2 (above) shall be constructed in accordance with
Chapter 9-U.B.C., and shall be separated from other areas of the building
by two-hour occupancy separations. (Table 5-B U.B.C.)
N. Areas described in item M2 (above) shall be located on the ground floor.
(U.B.C. - Table S-D)
~' tiater Supply
0. R$quired fire flaw is 3,500 gpm.
P. Provide new municipal hydrant on the west side of Camden Avenue, 25 ft. south
of the S.P. RR right of way.
Q. Provide three (3) on-site hydrants (M~aiicipal style) at locations shown on
the site plan (C.F.D. office copy)
Fire Protection
R. Provide a fully supervised sprinkler system to be monitored by a central
station alarm company. System shall be designed in accordance with NFPA
Standard 13; Ordinary Hazard (Group 3) in all areas and Extra Hazard (Group Z)
in areas using flammable/combustible liquids.
S. Sprinkler system shall include 1~ inch hose outlets for Campbell Fire Dept. use.
Hazardous Materials
T. All storage, handling and use of hazardous materials shall conform to require-
ments of the City of Campbell Hazardous 1~faterials Ordinance (C.M.C. Title 17)
and the Uniform Fire Code.
U. All necessary permits required in item M1 (above) shall be obtained prior to
building occupancy.
The applicant is notified that he/she shall comply with all applicable Codes or
Ordinances of the City of Campbell which pertain to this development and are not
herein specified.
~~1 ~ ~l
• ' ~NDITION.S OF APPROVAL: S 83-18
APPLICATION OF: LRS Associates
SITE ADDRESS: 743 f, 749 CAr~I AVE
PACE 4
BUILPTNG T)EPAR'I*SEhT
Y. Roof covering (not shown) shall be fire retardant. (Sect. 1704) ~
PUSLI C WORKS PEPAR'IT4T?
A'. Process and file a parcel map to combine the two lots.
X. Pay storm drainage fee.
Y. Obtain an excavation permit for all work in the public right-of-way.
Z. Provide right-of-way on Camden Avenue and titi'inchester Blvd. for street
purposes as required by City Engineer.
AA. Construct street improvements on Camden Avenue, Winchester Blvd.,
and within revised Camden-Winchester intersection as required by
City Engineer.
BB. Participate in the amount of SO$ of traffic signal and drop gate
installation in Camden-h'inchester intersection.
PLA\^~'ING I~PAR'IT~'~?
CC. Prior to occupann-, owner will provide floor plans illustrating area
of research and development and manufacturing uses for approval of
the Planning Director.
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 26, 1986
1. All conditions required for S 83-13 still apply.
2. All conditions of the Public Works Department to be completed
prior to Phase I occupancy.
3. Phase II construction to begin within two years of Phase I occupancy.
4. Area for Phase II development to be maintained free of weeds and
debris.
ADDITIONAL CONDITION ADOPTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION ON AUGUST 26, 1986
In the event that Phase II construction does not begin within two
years of Phase I occupancy, then applicant must submit a landscape
plan for the approval of the Site Review Committee indicating perimeter
landscaping around the~unbuilt portion of the site. Landscaping to
be installed within 60 days of approval of this plan.
-I