Loading...
PC Min 04/22/1986PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 7:30 PM MINUTES APRIL 22, 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, Fairbanks; Planning Director A. A. Kee, Planner II Marty Woodworth, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, Acting City Attorney Bill Seligmann, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis . Absent Commissioner Kasolas. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/S: Fairbanks, Stanton - That the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 8, 1986 be adopted as submitted. 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. PUBLIC HEARINGS V 86-01 Continued public hearing to consider the Krupp, J. application of Mr. and Mrs. Jeffery Krupp for a 5-foot variance to the sideyard setback requirement to allow the construction of a carport on property known as 174 Cherry Ln. in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that the Planning Commission continued the consideration of this request so that the applicant could submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the conversion of the garage to a hobby room. The applicant has submitted a Use Permit application at this time that has been scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of May 13, 1986. Staff is recommending that this variance application be continued to May 13, 1986 so that both of these requests may be considered at the same meeting. Vice-Chairman Perrine opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. -2- Mrs. Rosemary McCormick, 162 Cherry Lane, asked why there was a recommendation for continuance, noting that the applicant did not meet the deadline and has not come forth with information that would allow the additional unit to remain a rental unit. She questioned what a deadline meant to the City. Mr. Norman McCormick, 162 Cherry Lane, asked if the variance is in any way dependent upon the use permit; and, if not, why can't the variance be ruled upon this evening. Mr. Kee explained that the applicant has submitted an application for a use permit, which has been set for public hearing on May 13, 1986. Staff is of the opinion that this variance item and the use permit item are related, and therefore the Commission may wish to consider them simultaneously. If the variance is denied, the use permit could not be approved. Commissioner Dickson noted that the Commission has always tried to allow applicants to look at all options; and, although he would not vote for another continuance, he would like to look at both applications at the same time. Mr. Greg Price, representing Mr. and Mrs. Krupp, stated that all the necessary information for the use permit has been filed. There is not request for a 5 foot variance on the use permit application; and, there is ___ absolutely no request for approval of a rental unit. The applicant has requested a continuance so that both applications may be heard simultaneously. Commissioner Olszewski indicated to Mr. Price that he would be ready to make a decision on the application at the next meeting, and he would hope that all the necessary information was available in that he could not see granting another continuance. M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - That V 86-01 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 13, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). ZC 86-01 Continued public hearing to consider the Anderson, K. application of Mr. Rurt Anderson for a 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 S townhomes on property known as 235 N. Third St. ----- -3- Mr. Kee reported that at its previous meeting of April 8, 1986 the Planning Commission continued the consideration of this application so that revised plans could be submitted. As of this writing, Staff has not received a revised submittal, consequently, a continuance is recommended to May 27, 1986. Vice-Chairman Perrine opened the public hearing, and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - That ZC 86-01 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 27, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). PD 84-06 Continued public hearing to consider a Fleischli, T. Development Agreement for a previously approved office/hotel complex on property known as 920 E. Hamilton Ave. in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that this item was originally scheduled for public hearing at the Planning Commission on March 25, 1986. The applicant requested a 2 week continuance, and the item was continued to the. meeting of April 8, 1986. Since no new information was available for the Commission's consideration, the development agreement was continued to the April 22, 1986 meeting. Staff still does not have any new information for the Commission to review. Since the item was originally scheduled for hearing in March, Staff is concerned that the current public hearing may not provide sufficient notice to all interested parties. For this reason, Staff is recommending that the hearing be closed and that this item be removed from. the agenda. Mr. Seligmann, responding to questions from the Commission, indicated that the Planning Commission will have to take action on the agreement before the City Council; however, there is presently no executed or offered agreement by the developer which is why it is being recommended for removal from the agenda. Vice-Chairman Perrine opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - That the public hearing on PD 84-06 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). M/S: Christ, Fairbanks - That the Planning Commission deny the - development agreement on PD 84-06 without prejudice in order to remove it from the agenda. Motion carried ____ unanimously (6-0-1). -4- 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 area of a commercial center on property known as 75 N. San Tomas Aquino Rd. in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending, with the concurrence of the applicant, that the item be continued in order that the applicant may submit revised plans addressing the design of the proposed structure. Mr. Kee indicated Staff's concurrence with this recommendation. M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - That MM 86-08 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 13, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). MM 86-10 Application of Mervyn's department Mervyn's store for a modification to an approved Planned Development Permit to allow a warehouse addition to an existing building on property known as 950 W. Hamilton Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval. Mr. Ree noted that Staff is recommending approval, subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Report. There was discussion regarding emergency vehicle access, hydrant locations, sprinkling systems, and on-site traffic and parking circulation. Mr. Jim Morelan, architect, appeared before the Commission to further explain the pro3ect and answer questions. Mr. Moreland referred to Condition No. 3 in the Staff Report, and requested that this condition be deleted in that the parking lot does not have "bumpers" and the store prefers it that way for cleaning and safety reasons. Mr. Kee indicated that there is no recommendation to change the existing parking. Condition 3 is a standard condition, with the key word being "appropriate." -5- M/S: Fairbanks, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve MM 86-10, -- subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Report. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). SA 86-16 Application of Mr. Steve Golden for Golden, S. approval of a temporary off-site sign at 241 W. Sunnyoaks Ave. to advertise the sale of townhomes located at 570 W. Sunnyoaks Ave. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is in concurrence with Staff, particularly reasons 2 6 3, and is therefore recommending denial. Mr. Kee indicated that Staff is of the opinion that this signing request cannot be supported for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated that his project would be inadequately identified or unusually difficult to locate. 2. The proposed sign is situated in a landscape area where it may restrict traffic visibility at this intersection. 3. Approval of this signing request will establish an undesirable precedent for identification of a number of other townhome and condominium developments currently in various stages of construction in the area. Commissioner Fairbanks asked Mr. Helms if the proposed sign was reviewed by the Public Works Department relative to sight visibility. Additionally, Commissioner Fairbanks noted she would be more comfortable if, under Finding ~3, the word would is changed to could. Mr. Helms responded that the Public Works Department is not recommending approval of the proposed sign in that it is proposed for location on a site that the City has had critical concern for sight distance. It is the Staff's opinion that with some types of vehicles under some circumstances this sign could present a problem with sight visibility. Mr. Steve Golden, 59 N. Santa Cruz Ave., Los Gatos, stated that the sign was necessary because the townhomes were set back off the street; The only other way to advertise is by newspaper, and that is expensive; the sign will not be needed more than six months; and, the sign is proposed to be 6' off the ground, thereby not creating a visibility problem. THere was discussion of the number of similar townhome projects along Sunnyoaks Ave.; and, other signing possibilities and locations. Commissioner Fairbanks expressed her concern regarding the traffic visibility on this site, noting that the parking was required to be dropped below-grade for this reason. She continued that she did have have a problem with setting a precedent, but rather with the proposed corner location for the sign. -6- Mr. Golden asked if the sign would be allowed if it were moved further back on the site. Mr. Helms responded that Staff is of the belief that any sign in that area detracts from visbility, and should not be approved. M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - That the Planning Commission adopt the following findings, and deny SA 86-16: 1. The applicant has not demonsrated that his project is unusually difficult to locate or inadequately identified. 2. The proposed sign may create a traffic visibility problem at this intersection. 3. Approval of this request could establish an undesirable precedent. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). Mr. Kee noted the appeal procedure for the applicant. SA 86-17 Sign application of Sunflower Nutrition Sunflower Nutrition Center for property known as 2230 S. Bascom Ave. in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is in agreement with Staff's recommendation for denial. A continuance was discussed with the applicant, however, it was the applicant's wish that the issue be brought before the Commission. Additionally, the Committee is of the opinion that landscaping on this site should be discussed. Mr. Ree indicated that there were existing signs when this property was annexed into the City, and the lettering of those existing signs has been changed which, under the ordinance, constitutes a new sign. Commissioner Fairbanks asked if it was clear to the Site Committee if the applicant understood the signing ordinance. Commissioner Olszewski noted that the sign ordinance was explained a number of times during the meeting. Mr. Frank Clarizio, applicant, stated that he was told he could keep his sign when the site was annexed into the City ten years ago. He continued that a sign company indicated to him that the plastic part of the sign which contains the lettering is not the "sign", but rather the "facing". He changed the "facing" -- not the "sign. Mr. Kee noted that the sign could be kept as it was; however, it has been changed - the lettering is different. According to our ordinance, the sign has been changed. Unfortunately, it is not the sign company who defines a sign, but rather the City's ordinance. -7- Commissioner Olszewski asked the record to show that the applicant was informed of the City's signing policy, as just stated by Mr. Kee, at the ----- Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting. If the applicant so desires, an opinion from the City Attorney may be obtained. Mr. Clarizio stated that he had asked the City Attorney. The City Attorney told him that it became a new sign when it was changed. Mr. Clarizio noted that he did not take anything down, he just changed the letters. Commission Fairbanks asked if the Planning Commission chooses to deny this request, and the applicant chooses to return the sign to the way it was when it was grandfathered in, would he be able to do that. Mr. Seligmann stated that if the sign were returned to it's original state at this point, it would now have to be approved in whatever form it has been changed. - Mr. Kee indicated that the Planning Commission would have the authority to approve the sign going back to it's original state. Commissioner Dickson noted that the Commission would be approving a non-conforming sign if this was done. There was additional discussion regarding the possibility of returning the sign to its original state; the relocating of the subject business; and the possibility of a continuance. Mr. Clarizio stated that he would like a continuance in order to work with Staff on a revised signing proposal. Commissioner Olszewski suggested that the applicant incorporate the concerns from the Site Committee, as well as those stated this evening, in the re-design of his signing. M/S: Fairbanks, Christ - That SA 86-17 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 13, 1986 in order that revised plans may be submitted. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). PUBLIC HEARINGS ZC 86-03 Public hearing to consider the applica- Pinn, A. tion of Mr. Alan Pinn for approval of a zone change from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to PD (Planned Development); and, approval of a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of 18 townhomes on property known as 1164-1178 Smith Ave. -8- Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. Concerns were expressed regarding the elevations fronting Smith Ave.; the density; the possibility of narrowing the street in order to retain some of the existing trees and provide adequate on-site parking; the possibility of changing some of the setbacks to relieve the lined-up appearance; and, indicating on the plans which trees are to be preserved and which are to be removed. The Committee is recommending landscaping in the front area which will help to blend the development with the neighborhood, and a reduction of two units, as well as a continuance of this public hearing to May 13, 1986. Commissioner Fairbanks asked if this location would be appropriate for alternative street improvements. Mr. Helms responded that Smith and Linda Aves. are developed with standard street improvements. Commissioner Fairbanks asked how the south elevations address the single family properties on that side. Mr. Ree responded that the project is approximately 100' from the single family structures. Commissioner Fairbanks stated that this is another example where PD zoning has abused densities and setbacks. If this piece of property is any ___ indication of what we are going to be doing in this area, the PD zoning is not workable/livable. Commissioner Christ felt that having the units face the court resulted in a more cohesive neighborhood situation; however, he hoped that the Smith Ave. elevation could incorporate some landscaping elements to address Smith Ave. and tie the development in with the entire neighborhood. Commissioner Dickson questioned the procedures for changing a zoning from R-1 to PD, noting he had not seen this done before; questioned whether a PD zoning could be better than and R-1 zoning, requesting a written opinion; expressed concern about the availability of open space for this project, requesting calculations; and, expressed concern about setbacks adjacent to abutting properties, noting that the setbacks should be at least one-half the height of the building wall if there are two-story structures. Vice-Chairman opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Commissioner Dickson questioned the traffic report which was included as part of this application, as well as the current Circulation Element of the General Plan regarding Harriet Ave. noting that he foresees increased traffic through the San Tomas Area. He asked if the circulation studies have been updated since it was decided not to take Harriet Ave. all the -- way through. -9- Mr. Helms explained the existing Circulation Element, noting that at the time that Harriet was removed, the plan was to upgrade San Tomas Aquino -- Rd. There probably is more traffic moving through the neighborhoods than would be if Harriet had been completed. When the Council removed the plans for Harriet, San Tomas Aquino Rd. and Burrows were both upgraded, and .the Circulation Element current recognizes these streets, as well as Burrows Rd., to be upgraded arterials. This should bring about a reduction of traffic on Linda Dr. There was additionally discussion regarding changes in the area forcing people onto residential streets; accuracy of calculations made in the traffic report; and amount of traffic that specific streets can carry. Commissioner Christ expressed a concern about the possible future General Plan changes in this vicinity having an impact on traffic in the area, noting that this concern should be addressed. Commissioner Fairbanks expressed a concern with the density of the proposed project. She felt that the project did not address the San Tomas Policy, and requested that the applicant to re-read the policy, as well as look more seriously at the harmony of the development. Commissioner Fairbanks also requested further information on the cumulative traffic impact. Mr. Al Pinn noted that he would reserve his comments until after revisions have been made to the project. -- M/S: Olszewski, Fairbanks - That the public hearing on ZC 86-01 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 13, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). TS 86-03 Pinn Bros. Tentative Subdivision Map - Pinn Bros. Construction - 1164, 1176 ~ 1180 Smith Ave. M/S: Christ, Fairbanks - That TS 86-03 be continued to the meeting of May 13, 1986 in that it is directly related to ZC 86-03. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). TA 86-01 Continued public hearing to consider a City-initiated City-initiated text amendment to revise the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Campbell. -10- Mr. Woodworth reviewed this item for the Commission, noting that during the study session with the Commission several issues were raised regarding the code, however Staff was not certain if the majority of the Commission was in favor of the changes and, consequently, they were not made part of the code. The issues are: (1) guest parking requirements for townhomes, condominiums, and apartments; (2) notification procedures; and, (3) Planned Development District. If the Commission wishes to make these part of the code it can be so amended prior to the City Council hearing. Commissioner Fairbanks expressed her appreciation to Staff and the Zoning Ordinance Review Committee for their work. Commissioner Fairbanks stated that she would like to see the matter continued in order that Staff could come back with verbage addressing the three issues under discussion. Commissioner Dickson stated that he was not concerned with ~2, in that he felt there was not a problem. Regarding #1, he expressed concern about changing parking in that Campbell has the most stringent requirements in the valley; and, if the requirements are going to be changed, they should be looked at very carefully. Regarding #3, Commissioner Dickson felt that this issue should most definitely be looked at, in that he felt there is a real problem with the way the PD zoning is handled. Commissioner Olszewski felt that issue #2 should be considered further, noting his experience with not knowing what was happening across the street from his home when the Fire Station was being built. Regarding ~1, ___ Staff could include an informational report containing parking comparisons with other cities along with the suggested verbage for the ordinace. ' Commissioner Christ stated that he would like to see all three of the issues indicated by Mr. Woodworth further addressed. Regarding ~1, Commissioner Christ noted that, in his opinion, it is not the amount of parking, but rather that we have designated guest parking. Perhaps a percentage would be more appropriate, rather than a specific number per unit. Regarding ~2, Commissioner Christ noted that he would not like to see Staff having to post sites, and he would prefer no change to the current procedures. On issue #3, he noted his complete agreement with Commissioner Dickson. Commissioner Stanton noted that he would support ~1 from a standpoint of additional parking, not but designated guest parking; and, he felt that ~2 was not necessary. M/S: Christ, Olszewski - That TA 86-01 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 13, 1986 in order that additional issues may be addressed. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). -11- MISCELLANEOUS R 86-03 Request of Mr. Terry Stines for a ZC 83-09 reinstatement of previously approved TS 84-01 plans and elevations allowing the Stines, T. construction of 8 townhomes on property as 44 ~ 56 Sunnyside Ave. in an PD (Planned Development/ Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval based on a report from the applicant at the meeting stating that he has been experiencing some startup and financing problems and expects to have them solved within six months. Mr. Kee added that at the last City Council meeting, there was some discussion about further General Plan review for this area; however, no moratorium was enacted. The Council will have an opportunity to review this reinstatement request. Staff is recommending approval as indicated in the Staff Report. Mr. Kee noted that the plans were referred back through the Fire, Public Works, and Building Departments; however, there is no public hearing. The existing guidelines indicate that unless there is a change in the General Plan or Zoning, the reinstatement may be decided on without a public hearing. The Commission or the Council may require a public hearing if they so desire. M/S: Olszewski, Fairbanks - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the revised development schedule and reinstate its _ approval of this project, subject to the previous conditions of .approval; and that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council grant a one year extension to its approval of the tentative subdivision map for this project. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). Review Six-month review of traffic control at Smith ~ Elam Avenues ~ Hack ~ Audrey Avenues. Mr. Helms reported that the Public Works Staff has monitored the intersections in accordance with the Planning Commission's request. The intersections are functioning well at this time, with no apparent problems. Commissioner Fairbanks asked if anyone from the neighborhood has been contacted, or is aware that this issue is under discussion this evening. -12- Mr. Helms indicated that the markings are very visible, and Staff would think that if there were problems, the area residents would report them. It was the consensus of the Commission that. the report be acknowledged and filed. OTHER ITEMS BROUGHT UP BY COMMISSION Commissioner Olszewski asked about street naming procedures, noting that several streets signs do not indicate North, South, East or West direction. Mr. Helms responded that the direction is not included on the street sign unless it is a part of the official street name. A public hearing before the City Council is required to change an official street name. Vice-Chairman Perrine reported briefly on the status of the Historic Preservation Task Force, noting that the Committee will be recommending to the City Council that the City take a more active role in preservation. Commissioner Olszewski asked about park fund monies and the status of adding parks, noting that it would be nice to have more small parks, particularly in areas like Smith Ave. - Mr. Helms indicated that the Quimby Act monies, about $1,000 per residential unit, have been appropriated by the City Council for park and recreational purposes--specifically, Morgan Park and facilities at the Community Center. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m. APPROVED: Jay Perrine Vice-Chairman ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee Secretary RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis Recording Secretary CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: MM 86-10 APPLICANT: Mervyn's SITE ADDRESS: 950 W. Hamilton Ave. P.C. MTG. 4-22-86 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. 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: 50,360 sq. ft. of retail use; 3,152 sq. ft. of office use; and 21,508 sq.ft. of warehouse use. 2. Building occupancy will not be allowed until public improvements are installed. 3. 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. 4. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code. 5. 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. 6 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. 7. 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 ad3acent to the trash enclosure area to service these containers. 8. Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City requirements for the handicapped. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 9. Obtain an excavation permit, pay fees and post surety to install handicap ramps at the intersections of Marathon Drive and Hamilton Ave. and Gale Drive. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 10. All cargo containers shall be removed from the site upon completion of the proposed building addition. BUILDING AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS No comments. RECOP'II~'IENDED FINDINGS FILE N0: SA 86-16 APPLICAPdT: GOLDEN, S. SITE ADDRESS: 570 W. SUNNYOAKS 1. The applicant has not demonsrated that his project is unusually difficult to locate or inadequately identified. 2. The proposed sign may create a traffic visibility problem at this intersection. 3. Approval of this request could establish an undesirable precedent. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Prior to construction of the sign applicant to provide evidence of authorization to the Planning Department from the property owner. 2. Approval to expire six months from the date of Planning Commission approval. 3. Applicant to obtain an necessary building permits. REVISED DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE - ZC 83-09/TS 84-01 APPLICANT: Int. TERRY STINES (B/J6 A DEVELOPMENT CO., MR. D. BLUNT) SITE ADDRESS: 44 ~ 56 SUNNYSIDE AVE. P. C. MTG: 4/22/86 1. Construction to being within six months of City Council approval. 2. Construction to be completed within one year of starting date. 3. Tentative Subdivision Map approval valid until October 3, 1986. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R 86-03/ZC 83-09/TS 84-01 APPLICANT: Stines, T. SITE ADDRESS: 44 b 56 Sunnyside Ave. P.C. MTG. 4/22/86 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. Revised elevations indicating changes to the window treatment to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Planning Director upon recommendation of the Architectural Advisor 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 r..f a building permit. 4. 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. 5. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount of $5,000.00 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. 6. Applicant to submit a plan to the Planning Department, prior to installation of PGbE utility (transformer) boxes, indicating the location of 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. 11. 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. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R 86-03/ZC 83-09/TS 84-01 APPLICANT: Stines, T. SITE ADDRESS: 44 6 56 Sunnyside Ave. PAGE 2. 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 approv 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 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 b 11.414, 1979 Ed. Uniform Fire Code. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 19. Process and file a tract map. FIRE DEPARTMENT 20. Provide AC powered single station smoke detectors in each dwelling unit. 21. Provide 2A:lOBC fire extinguishers in each dwelling unit. 22. Provide sign with address numbers (min. 4") facing Sunnyside Ave. 23. Fire retardant roof covering is required on the five-unit building (UBC _~ 1704). BUILDING DEPARTMENT { 24. Property line separation shall be two-hour fire resistive separation. ARTHUR A. KEE ~•« Mnr-c~ 9, 196y Planning Director '~~ f,o,,, JOSEPH El.lI07T Director of Public Works ~,b,«i Tentative Subdiviskon~Map9t ~ ( he Lands of _Zi APN 413 Oq ~3 --------------------------• The following conditions of approval are recommended concerning the subject tentative subdivision map submitted by (1r n A v a c• Installation of a sanitary sewerage system to serve all lots within the sub- division in conformance with the proposed plans of the County of Santa Clara Sanitation District No. 4. Sanitary sewerage service to be provided by said ~. District No. 4. Installation of a water distribution system to serve all lots within the sub- division in conformance with thesaidnwatertcompany.Io Fireahydrant sand appurte- Water service to be provided by mantes shall be provided and installed at the locations specified by the Fire Chief, Fire Department, City of Campbell. Fire hydrant maintenance ~. fees shall be paid to City at the rate of 5195 per fire hydrant. Subdivider shall create or provide any public service easement and any other public utility and/or public service easements as may be necessary for the 3. installation of any and all public utilities and/or facilities. Compliance with the provisions of Title 20. Subdivisions of the Campbell ~. Municipal Code. Subdivider to pay Storm Drainage Area Fee. Subdivider to furnish copy of Preliminary Title Report. Subdivider shall (install street improvements and post surety to guaranty the work) (execute an agreement and post surety to install street improve- . ments in the future and agree to join a Local Improvement District). to Dedicate additional right-of-way to widen feet from centerline. . C.C.bR.'s to be approved by City Engineer to insure provisions for maintenance of buildings and common area. Provide a grading and drainage plan for the review and approval of the City ~. Engineer. 7 . Obtain an excavation permit and pay fees and deposit for alt work in the public right of way. ~ pc. , n « i t-t ~ i c u ~ ~ to ~ca'1 ~ o n o } ~ct n ~ { o r ~ / 'C ~ ` pnr~c Purposes. 1 By: 6IL M. HELJ+IS Ennineerina Mrn+~~•r C. ~~ EMISSION 1985 ---- Planning Commission P.inutes January ~, 196 f r i R 84-13 Request of Mz. Nilliam pazian for ZC 83-09 a zeinstateeent of previously approved plans alloying the Haan' W' Construction of 8 townhomes on property known as 44 i 56 Sunnyside ~-ve. in an R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner powazd ze Review CommitteeiteTheaCoamitteezis by the Site and I-zchitectuzal recommending approval of the revised development sehedullassTvindows, Architectural 1ldvisor did bring up the area of sliding q and the applicant is in agreement with the a-rchitectuzal~isvisonot a comment and will be presenting this to the developer. condition of approval, but is felt would be desirable by the Architectural Rdvisoz. -18- That the Planning Commission M/S: Dickson, 1Casolas - zecommend that the City Council adopt the revised development schedule for this pro~eOto'•Motion carried unanisously • • •