Loading...
PC Min 05/27/1986PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 7:30 PM MINUTES MAY 27, 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 (7:35 p.m.), Christ, Perrine, Stanton, Fairbanks, Kasolas; Planning Director A. A. Kee, Principal Planner Phil Stafford, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, Acting City Attorney Bill Seligmann, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/S: Perrine, Christ - That the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 13, 1986 be approved as submitted. Motion carried with a vote of 5-0-1-1 (with Commissioner Fairbanks abstaining due to absence from the sub3ect meeting, and Commissioner Olszewski not being present at the time of the vote). Commissioner Dickson commented that if it is believed that the minutes reflect what happened at the meeting, they should be voted on -- abstention should not be automatic due to absence from the subject meeting. Mr. Seligmann believed that the correct procedure would be to abstain if one was not present at the meeting. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Kee noted that communications received pertained to specific items on the agenda and would be discussed at that time. PUBLIC HEARINGS ZC 86-03 Continued public hearing to consider Pinn, A. the application of Mr. Alan Pinn for approval of a zone change from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to PD (Planned Development); and approval of a -2- A Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of 18 townhomes on property known as 1164-1173 Smith Ave. Pir. Kee reported that Staff is recommending a continuance, with the applicant's concurrence, in order that revised plans might be submitted addressing concerns previously discussed . Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to spea[; for or against this item. (Commissioner Olszewski entered the chambers at this time (7:35 p.m.) M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - TS 86-03 Pinn Bros. That the public hearing on ZC 86-03 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 10, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). * * ~ Continued Tentative Subdivision Map - Lands of Pinn Bros. Construction - 1164, 1176 ~ 1180 Smith Ave. Mr. Kee indicated that a continuance would be in order, since this item is directly tied to the previous ZC 86-03. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M.S: Christ - Fairbanks - That TS 86-03 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 10, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS S 86-09 Application of Mr. Tony Monsef for Monsef, T. approval of plans and elevations to allow an addition to an existing restaurant (Renzo's) on property known as 1700 W. Campbell Ave. in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee, and noted that the existing wall sign is to be removed and the existing free-standing sign will remain. The Committee is of the opinion that the design is acceptable, and is recommending approval. -3- Mr. Kee reported Staff is of the opinion this shopping center; that tree wells in required as a condition of approval; and the appearance of the restaurant and the Staff is recommending approval, subject Staff Report. that there is adequate parking in the parking area are being that the addition will enhance shopping center. Therefore, to conditions as indicated in the P1/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission adopt findings as indicated in the Staff Report dated May 27, 1986 and approve S 86-09, subject to conditions (attached hereto). Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). ZC 86-01 Continued public hearing to consider Anderson, K. the application of Pir. Kurt Anderson for a zone change from R-M-S (Plultiple Family Residential) to PD (Planned Development); and approval of a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule. to allow the construction of 5 townhomes on property known as 235 N. Third St. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee expressed a concern regarding the density of the proposed development, the size of the private yards, and the orientation of Unit B to the street. Mr. Kee noted that Staff is recommending a continuance in order that revised plans might be submitted addressing the Site Committee's concerns. Additionally, Mr. Kee explained the method of calculating lot size in the PD Zoning District. There was brief discussion regarding the surrounding zoning, and the plans for moving the post office facility. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. 14r. Kurt Anderson, applicant, noted that the project has been reduced to 4 units, and it is his feeling that design problems can be worked out to the satisfaction of the Site Committee. ~iowever, the project owners are requesting direction from the Commission regarding density. Mr. Anderson continued that a further reduction to 3 units would result in the driveways backing into the streets. Chairman Kasolas stated that he felt it was inappropriate to ask the Commission for a policy statement during a public hearing; however, it was the decision of the Commission if they should chose to discuss such policy. Chairman Kasolas felt that the Commission did not set policy, only interpret it to it's best ability. -4- Commissioner Olszewski noted that the Site Committee felt it might be beneficial to look at how the buildable square footage is determined, noting that 3.49 units would be allowable under the R-M zoning. Commissioner Dickson felt that the PD ordinance gets misinterpreted too many times, noting that it states that the PD zoning must provide a more desirable project. He felt that the plans must be exceptional to warrant the Planned Development zoning; and, that increased density did not provide a more desirable project. The project owner, noted the density of surrounding projects; and, expressed a willingness to solve architectural and design problems for the approval of 4 units. Responding to a question from Commissioner Perrine regarding the General Plan designation for this site, Mr. Kee indicated that the General Plan speaks in terms of gross acres which is calculated to the center of the street. The allowable density is determined by the zoning, R-M in this case, and is calculated by the net lot area; thereby providing for the difference in density allowable. Mr. Kee added that the property immediately to the north has a different General Plan designation and a medium density zoning of up to 20 units per gross acre. Commissioner Fairbanks asked the applicant if he wished for a decision this evening, rather than a continuance. Commissioner Olszewski noted that the Site Committee was of the opinion that the design of the project is acceptable, and the proposed change for Unit B has been red-lined on the presented plans, should the Commission wish to act on this item this evening. Mr. Kee repeated that Staff is recommending a continuance to June 10; however, if there are to be no revision to the plans, then Staff would recommend that the Commission recommend acceptance of the Negative Declaration, adopt findings, and adopt a resolution recommending approval. Mr. Anderson stated that his clients would like a decision this evening. M/S: Perrine, Christ - That the public hearing on ZC 86-01 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). M/S: Fairbanks, Dickson - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council not accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for ZC 86-01; and, that the Planning Commission adopt findings as indicated in the Staff Report dated May 27, 1986 (attached hereto); that an additional finding be made that the presented plan has not demonstrated a more desirable use than under any other zoning classification; and, that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council deny ZC 86-01. -5- ~ Dicussion of Motion Commissioner Olszewski noted his disagreement with Finding 4P3 indicated in the Staff Report, in that the Site Committee was of the opinion that the project design was acceptable. Vote on Motion AYES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ, Dickson,Stanton, Fairbanks, Kasolas NOES: Commissioners: Perrine ABSENT: Commissioners: None. Mr. Kee noted the Council agenda procedure for the applicant. ZC 86-04 Public hearing to consider the applica- Chan, F. tion of Mr. Fred Chan for a zone change from C-PD (Condominium-Planned Development) 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 1430 W. Latimer Ave. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee recognized the difficulty of developing this parcel; however, concern was expressed regarding front elevation design, a need for uncovered visitor parking, Fire Department turn-around difficulties, breaking up the roof design, and the layout of the front doors. Therefore, a continuance is being recommended. Mr. Stafford reported that Staff is in concurrence with the recommendation for continuance. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - That ZC 86-04 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 24, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). ZC 86-05 Public hearing to consider the applica- Jacobsen, W. tion of Mr. Warren Jacobsen for a zone change from PO (Professional Office) to PD (Planned Development); and, approval of a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of an office building on property known as 42 & 60 W. Campbell Ave. -6- Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. A continuance is recommended, with the applicant's concurrence. _, Commissioner Fairbanks asked about concern #4 in the Staff Report, relating to design proportions and details. Commissioner Perrine noted that the Architectural Advisor has expressed concern with the support columns which looked out of proportion to the building. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Christ, Fairbanks - That ZC 86-05 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 24, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). UP 86-OS Public hearing to consider the applica- Kovacs, L. tion of Mr. Louis Kovacs for a use permit to allow the operation of an indoor soccer facility in a previously approved industrial building on property known as 842-854 Camden Ave. in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. -~ Mr. Kee reported that the applicant is requesting approval of a use permit to allow the operation of an indoor soccer facility in the industrial building. There would be no change in the building's exterior. Staff is of the opinion that the indoor soccer facility will not be detrimental to businesses and persons in the area, consequently approval is recommended with a 6 month review of the facility. As part of the application, the applicant is also requesting that beer and wine be allowed to be sold at the facility. Staff is of the opinion that beer and wine at the facility could encourage rowdiness, consequently Staff cannot support this part of the application. Chairman Kasolas asked how the Commission could make a finding based on speculation (ie. rowdiness). Mr. Kee responded that the finding could be made on the premise of the use permit being harmful to the health, safety, and morals of the community. Commissioner Fairbanks noted that, based on her experiences with soccer, she would agree with Staff's opinion regarding the alcohol use. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. -7- Mr. Louis Kovacs, applicant, appeared to answer questions of the Commission. He explained that a 4' dasher board would surround the play area, with one exit to the field, and more exits out of the building. The goals would be secured to the floor. Commissioner Olszewski asked about the required parking in this zoning district, and if 25 provided spaces would be adequate. Mr. Kee responded that Staff is of the opinion that the provided parking will be adequate., in that players and observers usually come together, and the facility is not open during normal business hours. Mr. Kee added that a six-month review is being recommended. Discussion ensued regarding available parking in this vicinity; the similarity of this facility to the gymnastics school; and obtaining information from similar facilities regarding their parking. Mr. Kovacs stated that the facility is not spectator oriented, and seating is not provided. He indicated that there is a similar facility at the San Mateo Fairgrounds which does sell beer and wine. The beer and wine would be incidental to his operation, and if the snack bar use is approved, minimal seating would be provided in this area. Mr. Kovacs noted that there is still concern about the exit requirements which have to be worked out with Staff. Commissioner Christ noted that he was still concerned with the parking, and asked if there was someway the applicant could control parking through scheduling. He continued that if there is a maximum of 20 people at the facility at one time, and another 20 arriving before some have left, it could result in a maximum of 40 vehicles at the facility. Mr. Rovacs explained that there would be a maximum of 15 people using the facility at any one time, with a 15 minute. interval between teams leaving and arriving. Scheduling the use every other hour would not be economically feasible, in that the use is marginal to begin with. Additionally, the applicant indicated that he has checked with his neighbors regarding possible parking easements should a problem arise. Commissioner Dickson asked that the item be continued in order to get some feedback from another facility. Commissioner Fairbanks noted that Soccer World had been an indoor use; however, they also sold sporting goods. She felt that the proposed use different than the San Mateo facility. Commissioner Fairbanks supported the approval of this use permit with the 6-month review. M/S: Fairbanks, Olszewski - That the public hearing on UP 86-05 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0) . M/S: Fairbanks, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission adopt findings (as attached hereto), and adopt a resolution approving the use permit allowing an indoor soccer facility, but denying the request to allow the sale of beer and wine, subject to conditions indicated in the-Staff Report. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: -8- Discussion on motion Commissioner Christ stated that he would be supporting the motion, noting - that if the facility is not spectator-oriented, a bar area is not necessary. Serving alcohol at the facility would encourage people to spend more time at the site, thereby impacting. parking. Commissioner Olszewski stated that he would be speaking in favor of the motion, noting. that this type of use provides a good mixed use for the area. He also commented that he was impressed that the applicant has spoken with his neighbors regarding possible parking easements. Commissioner Dickson stated that he would be opposing the motion. Although he felt it was an excellent use, he felt that the parking was insufficient. Vote on motion AYES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ, Perrine, Stanton, Fairbanks, Kasolas NOES: Commissioners: Dickson ABSENT: Commissioners: None. UP 86-06 Public hearing to consider the applica- Haynes, J. tion of James and Deborah Haynes for approval of a Use Permit to allow the - conversion of a garage to living space j on property known as 400 Sunberry Dr. in ~ an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee, and approval is recommended. Mr. Stafford stated that Staff is also recommending approval. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Perrine, Fairbanks - That the public hearing on UP 86-06 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). Pt/S: Fairbanks, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission adopt findings (attached hereto) and adopt a resolution approving UP 86-06, subject to conditions as indicated in the Staff Report. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ, Perrine, Dickson, Stanton, _.___ Fairbanks, Kasolas NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: None. -9- The Commission recessed at 8:45 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:00 p.m. i - GP 86-OZ Public hearing to consider the applica- Kealoha, J. tion of Ms. Joyce Kealoha for a General Plan Amendment from Commercial to Low-Medium Density Residential (6-13 units per gross acre) on property known as 1849 Pollard Rd. Mr. Kee reported that the subject property is triangular in shape and approximately 1 acre in size. It is bound by townhomes to the west, the railroad tracks and proposed Highway 85 corridor to the northeast, and Pollard Rd. and the Town of Los Gatos to the south. A 75 foot wide PG~E easement for high tension wires runs over the property which severely restricts the buildable area of the parcel. The existing General Plan designates the land to the west as Low-Medium Density Residential (6-13 units per gross acre). The applicant is requesting the same designation on her property. Presently, the applicant's property is the only parcel on the north side of Pollard Rd. indicated as Commercial. It is Staff's opinion that a Low-Medium Density Residential designation would be more appropriate and would be more consistent with the surrounding land uses. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Fairbanks, Stanton - That the public hearing on GP 86-02 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - That the Planning Commission adopt findings (attached hereto); and, that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending approval of GP 86-02. Motion carried by following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ, Perrine, Dickson, Stanton Fairbanks, Kasolas NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: None. PD 86-04 Public hearing to consider the applica- Kealoha, J. tion of Ms. Joyce Kealoha for a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow construction of a new garage and living unit while retaining the existing house .w. on property known as 1849 Pollard Rd. in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District. -10- Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee, and the Committee is recommending approval. Mr. Kee stated that Staff is also recommending approval. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Dickson, Fairbanks - That the public hearing on PD 86-04 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). M/S: Olszewski, Perrine - That the Planning Commission adopt findings as attached hereto, and adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve PD 86-04, subject to conditions of approval indicated in the Staff Report. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Christ, Perrine, Dickson, StaIlton, Fairbanks, Kasolas NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: None. EIR 86-01 Public hearing to consider a Draft Sahadi, F. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which has been prepared for the proposed expansion of an existing motel located at 675 E. Campbell Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/Commercial & Public Facilities) Zoning District. Mr. Kee briefly reviewed the report, noting correspondence from the Santa Clara Valley Water District, a memorandum from the Parks & Recreation Commission, and a letter from the Los Gatos Cree'~c Streamside Park Committee (attached hereto). The Recording Secretary read these letters into the record. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Scott Lefavre, AICP, consultant, appeared before the Commission to answer questions. Ms. Linda Ulmer, California Fish & Game Biologist, addressed the EIR, noting that the integrity of the riparian community is moderate, and she agrees with the species listed in the report. The key point is the continuity of the riparian park running from the Santa Cruz mountains to the Bay. Ms. Ulmer felt that the EIR was very vague with mitigation measures, and agreed with the Santa Clara Valley Water District regarding stabilization of the creek bank with riprap. Ms. Ulmer stated that the proposed project is not in the best interests of the fish and wildlife in the area. -11- Responding to a question from Commissioner Perrine regarding bank stabilization, Ms. Ulmer referred to the Water District's comments regarding bank erosion, and noted that construction activity would require further stabilization which would result in denuding of the banks. Mr. Don Hebard, 205 Calado Ave., showed a video tape of the creek. Mr. Hebard addressed the EIR, noting his concern regarding bank stabilization turning the creek into a channel. He continued that this section of the creek is the only natural section in the City. Campbell took the lead in opening up the creek for public use, and was followed by Los Gatos and San Jose. The Los Gatos Creek Streamside Committee is very much concerned about the cumulative effect any building on the creek. Mr. Hebard expressed appreciation of the Creek Streamside Committee and community to Mr. Sahadi for the installation of the bike path along the creek, noting that this was done without any obligation to do so. Mr. Hebard felt that this action sets a tone for other developers to follow. Mrs. Christine Svensson, member of San Jose City Park & Recreation Commission, and candidate for the Water District Board, spoke regarding the involvement of the County, San Jose, and Campbell in the creek plan, noting that development should be controlled along the creek with careful consideration being given to minimize environmental disturbances. Mr. Robert Hicks, 621 E. Campbell Ave., asked about the traffic, erosion, and bank stabilization. Mr. Hicks noted that the EIR proposes a retaining wall for mitigation, and he expressed a concern that both creek sides would have to be stabilized. He added that the existing structure could be built to 75 feet in height, and take less of the creek. '_: Ms. Debbie Lindquist, Los Altos, noted that Campbell's park plan is the "tops", with the important factors being the trail system that goes from the Bay to the Santa Cruz mountains. She felt that the stream continuity should not be interrupted. Mr. Earl Hagadorn, Consulting Civil Engineer for the EIR, spoke regarding water deflection and stabilization, noting that it is not necessarily true that both banks would require retaining measures in that it would depend on the creek's natural flow pattern. Commissioner Perrine asked for clarification on the channelization methods, maintenance, and erosion impacts. Mr. Helms responded that he is familiar with some minor erosion taking place near the tennis courts, noting that some relatively minor stabilization treatment would address the problem at this point. Mr. Hagadorn responded that channelization implies a geometric change in the natural water course, done in response to a perceived flood threat. He continued that this area is suspected to have fill dirt; that this channel usually fills up to 40-50% of it's depth; and, erosion would require toe stabilization. Commissioner Olszewski noted the following concerns which he would like to see addressed in the Final EIR: response to comments from the Santa Clara ~_T~ Valley Water District as indicated in their letter of May 23, 1986; and, traffic stacking up at Campbell and Union Avenues, as mentioned in the EIR. -12- Commissioner Dickson noted the following concerns: Pg. 8 of EIR - it should be noted that comments were received from the Parks & Recreation Commission and the Los Gatos Creek Streamside Park Committee. Pg. 11 of EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife seems a relative term - should be amplified; Para. 2 - how is habitat re-established? - should be mentioned in this paragraph. Pg. 12 if EIR - Figure 5 is missing in some of the reports - and zoning in last paragraph should be PD, think PF should also be mentioned - the use of PF on this project is questionable. Pg. 16 (top of pg.) of EIR - the Planning Department can only recommend, but it is up to the Planning Commission and the City Council to determine what use is compatible - the wording should be changed. Pg. 28, Para. 343 of EIR - doesn't mention anything about the walking path and the park atmosphere that is going to be changed. Pg. 38 of EIR - impacts mentioned in paragraph near the bottom need interpretation - don't know how this can be evaluated. Para. 362 - impact mentioned in very good statement - an accurate statement which is not mentioned too much in the report. Para. 5 of Staff Report dated May 27, 1986 - don't find this in the EIR. Para. 8 of Staff Report - not addressed. Commissioner Dickson continued that the creek channel can be fixed to stop erosion; however, this may prevent the very thing that we are trying to preserve -- the creek habitat. He felt the EIR should say whether something is an opinion or fact, and that this project may destroy some things that may never be regained. Commissioner Dickson concluded that although he has the utmost respect for the Campbell Inn and the project architects, he felt this report left a lot of things unanswered in his mind. Mr. Fred Shadi, 1901 S. Bascom Ave., noted that approximately 14 feet of habitat on the eastern bank was eroded away in this years storms, with _ very little being taken away from the western bank. This may be an instance where a man-made structure can preserve what habitat is left. The proposed structure will not hang over into the creek. The structure will be built into the slope, with the support structure containing holding spikes for the bank that is sensitive to erosion. Mr. Sahadi felt that the 32' wide building would help to stabilize the remaining slope. Commissioner Dickson commented that the natural erosion might be beautiful in someone's eyes -- it's a relative thing. He also noted that -the proposed structure will destroy vegetation under the building. Commissioner Olszewski noted that the term "ecologically construct-ive" was used this evening, and he would like to see that. substantiated in the EIR. Mr. Lefavre noted that testimony should be focusing on mitigation measures for the impacts that are known about this proposal. Commissioner Perrine asked what tampering with the environment would occur with the normal maintenance of the channelization. Mr. Lefavre responded that this depended on the creek during a specific time period and the money available. Information regarding this was received from a consultant biologist and from Mr. Hagadorn. The situation was very different at one time, however, the creek was widened by man. -13- Commissioner Fairbanks referred to Para. 5 of the Staff Report dated Iiay 27, noting that she felt the EIR did not address this issue. She felt that the creek is a natural area doing it's own thing. At times, that may included it's washing away -- but that is part of the naturalness. She felt that the EIR has not addressed this issue, and would like the Final EIR to do so. Mr. Fiebard noted that the drawings he reviewed indicated that there will be approximately 50 feet of building extending over the creek -- 50 feet from the bike path. He felt that the EIR has spoken very clearly regarding the conditions that exist, but that some of the projects impacts are woefully understated and not addressed. He urged the Commission to continue the EIR until issues are properly address, including the concerns expressed by the Fish and Game Department and the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Commissioner Stanton asked i~Ir. Lefavre if he had been in possession of the documents presented this evening, would the EIR have been the same. Mr. Lefavre responded that the report would have responded directly to these issues expressed in the communications. Commissioner Dickson indicated that Pg. 4 Table 1 Landscaping Coverage - it should be clearly stated that this is not supplied by the project, but rather natural terrain. Commissioner Christ expressed his concern with the visual impact and the sunlight exposure (loss during morning hours) to the creek. M/S: Perrine, Christ - Discussion of motion That the public hearing on EIR 86-01 be continued to the meeting of June 24, 1986 in order that the consultant might address concerns expressed in this evening's public hearing. Commissioner Olszewski noted that the information brought out this evening is exactly what the draft EIR is supposed to do. Then the concerns should be addressed by the Final EIR. The Commission can accept the Final EIR, or request that it be improved. Mr. Kee indicated that Staff is of the understanding that the EIR is an informational document whose purpose is to gather information. The Commission certainly would have the right to continue the item to gather responses to the issues they have raised. Commissioner Olszewski thought that the Draft EIR did it's job rather well in that a number of issues were brought out, and there is still plenty of time for other issues to come out if need be. He stated that he certainly would not be in favor of the motion, and felt that the Draft EIR should be accepted as it is, and he would anxiously await the Final EIR. -14- ~ Commissioner Christ stated that the Draft EIR did not respond to all significant environmental impacts as stated in the Staff Recommendation lA; and, consequently, he would be speaking in favor of the motion. ~" Commissioner Olszewski felt that time was being wasted in that the Final _ EIR is to respond to all the expressed concerns, and the Final EIR must Y come back to the Commission. Commissioner Perrine explained that he chose to go with a continuance on the small chance that there are further issues, he would rather have the public hearing open to deal with those issues. Commissioner Dickson added that the Draft EIR is deficient in that it did not address two items that were requested to be addressed. Chairman Kasolas noted his agreement with Commissioner Olszewski. Vote on motion AYES: Commissioners: Dickson, Christ, Perrine, Fairbanks Stanton, NOES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Kasolas ABSENT: Commissioners: None. PD 85-12 Public hearing to consider the Sahadi, F. application of Mr. Fred Sahadi for approval of a Planned Development Permit __.. and approval of plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the expansion of an existing motel accommodating 73 additional units, breakfast room, conference rooms and related service facility on property known as 675 E. Campbell Ave. in a PD (Planned Development_/Commercial and Public, Semi-Public) Zoning Facility. Mr. Kee noted that Staff is recommending a continuance of this item in light of the continuance of EIR 86-01, which is directly related. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Sahadi, applicant, felt that Staff's recommendation was sound, and he is in agreement with a continuance. M/S: Olszewski, Fairbanks - That PD 86-12 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 24, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). -15- The Commission recessed at 11:12 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 11:20 p.m. Commissioner Fairbanks left the meeting at this time. MISCELLANEOUS R 86-OS Application of Mr. John Neves for S 85-09 reinstatement of previously approved Neves, J. plans and elevations to allow the construction of a 5-unit addition to an existing 8-unit apartment complex on property known as 180 & 181 Burnham Crt. in an R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Perrine reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee, and the Committee is recommending approval. M/S: Perrine, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission grant aone-year extension of its approval, subject to previous conditions of approval as indicated in the Staff Report, for S 86-09. Motion carried with a vote of 5-1-1, with Commissioner Dickson voting "no", and Commissioner Fairbanks being absent. Commissioner Dickson noted that he opposed the reinstatement because of density, which is at the maximum end of the scale. MM 86-08 Continued application of Mr. Bruno Bicocca, B. Bicocca for a modification to an existing development to construct a flower stand in the parking are of a commercial center on property knwon as 75 N. San Tomas Aquino Rd. in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. M/S: Christ, Dickson - That MM 86-08 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 10, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). -16- SA 86-24 Sign application of Anastasia's for Anastasia's property known as 2931 S. Winchester Blvd. in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. M/S: Christ, Olszewslci - That SA 86-24 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 8, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). ~ * ~ PUBLIC HEARINGS TA 86-01 Continued public heairng to consider City-initiated a City-initiated text amendment to revise the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Campbell. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. ZS/S: Dickson, Christ - That TA 86-01 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 10, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). OTHER ITEMS BROUGIiT UP BY COMMISSION Commissioner Perrine requested that Staff check into apparent modifications to the flower stand at Winchester and Budd Ave. Chairman Kasolas felt that the Commission should discuss, at some future date, the policy issue of density in the downtown area (i.e. Mr. Anderson's project which tried to put density in the downtown area). ADJOURNt4ENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:28 p.m. APPROVED: George C. Kasolas Chairman ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee Secretary RECOP.DED: Linda A. Dennis Recording Secretary RECOPII~IENDED FINDINGS FILE N0: S 86-09 APPLICANT: MONSEF, T. P.C. MTG.: 5/27/86 1. The addition will enhance the appearance of the restaurant and the `~ shopping center. 2. Additional landscaping will be provided which will enhance the appearance of the shopping center. 3. Adequate parking is provided at Kirkwood Plaza to accommodate the restaurant expansion. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 86-09 APPLICANT: Monsef, T. SITE ADDRESS: 1700 W. Campbell Ave. P.C. MTG. May 27, 1986 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 with the approved plans. 2. Landscaping plan indicating type and size of plant material, and location of irrigation system and material samples and building colors to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Site and Architectural Review Committee and/or Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount of $2,000.00 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. 4. Applicant to submit a plan to the Planning Department, prior to installation of PG&E utility (transformer) boxes, indicating the location of the boxes and screening (if boxes are above ground) for approval of the Planning Director. 5. 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: Maximum of 235 seats. 6. All mechanical equipment on roofs and all utility meters to be screened as approved by the Planning Director. 7. Building occupancy will not be allowed until public improvements are installed. 8. 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. 9. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code. 10. Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall indicate clearly the location of all connections for underground utilities including water, sewer, electric, telephone and television cables, etc. 11. 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). -- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 86-09 APPLICANT: Monsef, T. • SITE ADDRESS: 1700 W. Campbell Ave. PAGE 2. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City requirements for the handicapped. FIRE DEPARTMENT i ~_ 15. Provide two exits from the new patio dining area. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT No comments. BUILDING DEPARTMENT No comments. ~~~ ~~ Sonia ClaraValley Woter District~~~~~ ~` 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95118. TELEPHONE (408) 265.2600 May 23, 1986 Mr. Arthur Kee Planning Director City of Campbell 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008 Attention Mr. Philip Stafford Dear Mr. Kee: We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the expansion of the Campbell Inn and have the following comments: Channel Stability The existing channel is subject to erosion, sloughing and scour as evidenced by the deeply incised channel. It also appears that portions of the existing bank consist of fill -- material. We do not consider this to be a stable channel. Under these circumstances, bank protection would need to be provided along the entire length of the project. Also, when one side of a channel is lined, the opposite banks are then subject to increased erosion. We would, therefore, request that erosion protection be provided on the opposite bank. Maintenance Access When a channel is improved with bank protection, our maintenance activities also change. These activities could be performed from the proposed maintenance road, however, working in the confined space under a building overhang, over railings and through columns would certainly make these activities more difficult. An access-road and ramp would have to be provided on the south end of the building so maintenance vehicles can pass from one end of the site to the other. Two and one-half feet of freeboard is also required above the 1% water surface elevation. Water Related Hazards The EIft states that the building and bank protection will be designed by the proper professionals in a safe and adequate manner, however, the District can assume no responsibility for their design or construction. The District cannot be held liable for any damage to the building or any part of the project from flooding or debris or any other cause including our maintenance activities. In this regard, it should also be noted that although the elevation of the 1% flood has been estimated and provided for design, and freeboard of 2.5 feet has been requested, there may be circumstances in which the AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Mr. Arthur Kee ~ Z May 23, 1986 estimated flood elevation (and freeboard) is exceeded. This could result from debris buildup on bridges downstream or from flood flows in excess of the 1% flood. For these and other reasons, in past years, the District has not approved the construction of any major structure that would overhang or exist within a major District facility. Vegetation and Wildlife The mitigation measures described in the DEIR are too vague and general to be of much value in determining the adequacy of the mitigation program. The final EIR should specify the amount and exact location where revegetation will be carried out. Typical native plant species to be planted should be indicated. On-site revegetation is preferable to off-site revegetation although extensive slope protection may preclude revegetation. Pie 40, first paragraph The first sentence should be revised. The project would still be within our easement. The limits of our easement are a matter of record. The District has adopted a recommend creek park chain policy and has been working with the various cities to enhance those creeks which are a part of the park chain as a park or natural setting. The proposed project does not appear to enhance the creek setting. We are also concerned about the cumulative impacts of this type of project particularly along those creeks where so much effort has already been made to preserve the natural setting. -- Specific comments have been made in response to the items addressed in the EIR, however, our major concern is for the concept of the project itself. We cannot approve construction of a major structure overhanging a watercourse in a District easement as proposed. We appreciate the opportunity to review this draft and we wish to receive all subsequent documents. Sincerely, ~~lc.~ ~~~~IX.~ -~ W. F. Carlsen Division Engineer Design Coordination Division •~ ~~~ jr Il C~ii i~ rdiaY ~~ ~ 1986 _ CITY pF CAMPBELL pL,ANNING DEPARTMENT ` / COIJDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 85-09 APPLICANT: Neves, J. SITE ADDRESS: 180 & 181 IIurnham Court ~ P.C. MTG.. May 28, 19S5 i 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. Revised elevations and/or site plan indicating garages, stair detailing, and existing floor plans to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Site and Architectural Review Committee and/or the Planning Commission prior to application for a building permit. 2. Property to be fenced and landscaped as indicated and/or added in red on the plans. Landscaping and fencing shall be maintained in accordance with the approved plans. 3. 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. 4. Fencing elan indicating location and design details of fencing to be submitted to the Planning Department and approves: by the Planning Director nr.ior to issuance of a building perrait_ 5. 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 conplete landscaping, fencing, and striping of parking areas. Bona or agreement to be filed with the Planning Department prior to application for a building permit. G. Applicant to submit a plan to the Planning Department, prior to . installation of PG&r utility (transformer) boxes, indicating the location o~ the boxes and screening (if boxes are -above ground) for approval of the Planning Director. 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. 10. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code. "~` `' _- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 85-09 .~ APPLICANT: Neves, J. • ~'„;Yy,°_~ SITE ADDRESS: 180 & 181 Burnham Ct. "" PAGE 2 11. Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall indicate clearly the location of all connections for undezground utilities including 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 }~ installed until application is approved and permit issued by Planning and Building Departments (Section 21.68.030 of the Campbell i:unicipal Code). i 13. Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell !'uricinal 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 apartmen*_ 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. C~nless 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. Tipnlicant shall comply with all arr.rcFriate Stsi•~ and City requirements for the handicanned. 16. Noise levels for the interior of residential units shall comply with minimum State (Title 25) and local standards as in~'icated in the [i:,is Element of the Campbell General Plan. 17. The applicant is hereL•y notified that the property is to be maintained free of any combustible trash, dPL•ris and weeds,_until the time that actual construction co^~me-~ces. All existing structures shall be secure:i by having windot:s boar~c~« un gad doors seaicd shut, or be de:~•olished or re^~oved from the property. Sect. 11.201 & 11.414, 1979 Ed. Uniform Fire Code. FIRE DEPART[•;E1:T 18. Snood shingle roof covering shall meet Class C fire retardant requirement if more than 3,000 sq.ft. of projected roof area. PL'RI,IC t•:ORKS DFPART!•;E[:T 19. File and process a parcel map to combine the two lots. BUILDING DEPARTMEtJT 20. Exterior wall, roof and location okay. PLANNING DEPARTMEI~'T 21. Applicant to provide evidence of recorded 2' ingress/egress ease- ments for driveways to the Planning Department prior to issuance of a building permit. r---_. `~ County of Santa Clara California LOS GATOS CREEK STREAMSIDE PARK COMMITTEE Arthur Kee Planning Director City of Campbell Campbell, California 95008 Dear Mr. Kee: G~.ARq ,~P COG y~ a S~ RECR~ At its meeting of May 20, 1986, the Los Gatos Creek Streamside Park Committee reviewed the .above draft E. I. R. and unanimously adopted the following comments: 1. The E. I. R, does not adequately describe the environmental and ecological consequences of eliminating the entire east bank of the creek over the 600 ft. or more of the project. 2. The E. I. R. does not adequately deal with the effects on that portion of the creek of the bulk, mass and height of the project thrust out into the center of the creek. 3. The project would effectively remove a significant area of open space the community has so desperately tried to maintain . 4. Permitting this kind of intrusion into the creek would set a dangerous precedent in the County. Campbell has not allowed any construction inside creek banks. San Jose and Los Gatos have-recently adopted a Master Plan denying such development. If Campbell were to abandon its highly respected position it would be extremely difficult for the other cities in Santa Clara County to hold the line. Expansion of the Campbell Inn may be desirable to the City but there must be some way to accommodate it without adopting this plan. Very tru yours, D ~~~~~~ on r C D e a d, ha irman MAY 2 7186 CITY OF CAMP6ELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT Public Services A`yehcy Psrks and Recreation 298 Garden Hill Drive Los Gatos, California 95030 (408) 358-3741, Reservations 358-3751 ® An Equal Opportunity Employer ITE>•1 N0. 8B MEMORANDUM To: From: Planning Commission ~~~~ti Gerrie Gohr, Chairman Parks S Recreation Commission Date: May 23, 1986 Subject: PROPOSED CAMPBELL INN EXPANSION Principal Planner Phil Stafford addressed the Parks S Recreation Commission at the meeting of April 14 to explain the proposed expansion of the Campbell Inn, and to advise the Commission that any recommendations or suggestions should be forwarded to the Planning Commission before the public hearing set for May 27. The plans call for the construction of an additional 73 units, with the new buildings extending over the creek bank. Parks l; Recreation Commissioners are extremely concerned about .the bicycle path. As called for in the plans, the path would be running between two buildings, not at all compatible with the natural setting along the rest of the bike path. Commissioners do not think that the inn guests should be crossing the bike path, as they would have to do to go from the inn office to some of the rooms. Commissioners asked if the bike path could be tied in with the maintenance roadway which runs along the creek. A concern of the Commissioners in re- gard to using this maintenance road would be that solid concrete panels used on portions of the path ceeafe~isolated, covered areas that may be hazardous to solitary runners or bicycle riders. However, the other above-mentioned concerns would be avoided. Commissioners also request that landscaping be included in the proposed expansion. CITY OF CAMPBELL GG/le