Loading...
PC Min 12/10/1985PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 7:30 PM MINUTES DECEMBER 10, 1985 The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular session at the regular meeting place, the Council Chambers of City Hall, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California. ROLL CALL Present Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Toshach, Olszewski, Dickson, Fairbanks; Planning Director A. A. Kee, Planner II Marty C. Woodworth, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, Acting City Attorney Bill Seligmann, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/S: Dickson, Christ - That the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of November 26, 1985 be approved as submitted. Motion carried with a vote of 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Perrine abstaining because of absence at the November 26, 1985 meeting. Chairman Fairbanks noted, for the record, that Commissioner Perrine was out of town on business, which precluded his attendance at the November 26 meeting. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Kee noted that communications received pertained to specific items on the agenda and would be discussed at that time. Mayor Kotowski introduced himself to the Commission and offered his assistance in the coming year. He spoke briefly about instituting a stronger code enforcement program in the City, and asked for the Commission's support in this endeavor. Commissioner Kasolas asked if a Code Enforcement Officer would be hired. Mayor Kotowski responded that this is a possibility if, after review, the Council finds itself in need of a person to handle this program. The Council would like to have someone at the City-level be able to handle the non-legal items. * * ~ -2- Chairman Fairbanks commented that this is her last meeting as Chair. She thanked the Commissioners for their support and input during the past year, noting that she felt that everyone has worked well together, making her job easier. She also thanked Staff for its readiness and quick responses to questions she has had. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS S 85-14 Continued application of Mr. Marc Williams, M. Williams for approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of a 7182 sq.ft. retail building on properties known as 915 & 921 S. San Tomas Aquino Rd. and 1271 Elam Ave. in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that the applicant has requested a continuance to January 14, 1986. M/S: Kasolas, Christ - That S 85-14 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986 at the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). S 85-16 Application of Mr. John Indiveri for Indiveri, J. approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of a 7-unit apartment building on property known as 250 N. San Tomas Aquino Rd. in an R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Kasolas reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The existing structure is the only remaining single family structure in the immediate area. The Committee is recommending approval subject to red-lining of the presented plans, and subject to revised elevations coming back to the Review Committee. The applicant is in agreement with the changes. Mr. Kee stated that Staff is in agreement with the Review Committee's recommendation. The red-lining consists of changes in the window treatment, stairways, outside walkways, and roof materials. There was brief discussion regarding the provision of handicapped parking, which will show up on the revised plans; the surrounding zoning, which is __ apartments; and, the number of bedrooms per unit--five 2-bedroom units, and two 1-bedroom units. -3- Commissioner Olszewski expressed a concern about provision of guest parking. Commissioner Kasolas assured the Commission that guest parking has been thoroughly reviewed for this project, and all other projects on the agenda. This project is within the set guidelines. Commissioner Christ added that he had similar concerns regarding the parking, and the matter was discussed with the applicant. The applicant felt that he was unable to provide more parking, but would if there was room. Discussion continued regarding the City's parking standards and parking studies. It was the consensus of the Commission that this issue be further discussed at the end of the meeting. M/S: Toshach, Perrine - That the Planning Commission accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project; that the findings indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet be adopted; and, that S 85-16 be approved, subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet, red-lining of presented plans, and revised plans to come back to the Site and Architectural Review Committee for approval. Motion carried with a vote of 6-1-0, with Commissioner Olszewski voting "no". S 85-17 Application of Mr. Val McMurdie for McMurdie, V. approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of an office building in an existing office complex on property known as 2069 & 2075 S. Winchester Blvd. in a C-3-S (Central Business District/Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Kasolas 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. Commissioner Olszewski expressed his concern with the percentage of landscaping (10$), and asked that the landscaping plan be reviewed by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. -4- Commissioner Kasolas responded that the applicant will be up-grading the existing landscaping, and the 10$ is for the over-all site. Condition 3 addresses the review by the Site Review Committee. M/S: Olszewski, Toshach - That the Planning Commission adopt findings as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet; and, that the Planning Commission approve S 85-17 subject to conditions as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). S 85-18 Application of J. Michael Horton, AIA, Horton, J. for approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of an 8-unit apartment complex on property known as 68 Sunnyside Ave. in an R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Kasolas reported that this application was discussed extensively by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Commitee expressed concern regarding the existing house in that it is proposed to remain as a rental unit until some future date. Commissioner Kasolas ___ additionally noted that the proposed 2-car enclosed garages for an apartment complex raises an interesting question. The issue of guest parking was also brought up. The Committee was under the impression that the Commission has made itself clear that it did not want designated parking places which were enclosed with garages for apartments. Mr. Kee noted that what is being proposed is two enclosed parking spaces per unit for rental units--no guest parking. Staff is also concerned with the temporary retention of the existing house to be used as a rental unit. Commissioner Christ added that this is a family project and the applicant has indicated that the family would like to retain the existing house for income purposes--the units are being constructed for rental income, not to get around the parking requirements. M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That S 85-18 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986, with the concurrence of the applicant. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). * t -5- PUBLIC HEARINGS PD 85-10 Continued public hearing to consider Anderson, K. the application of Mr. Kurt Anderson for a Planned Development Permit and approval of plans, elevations and development schedule to allow the construction of 13 townhomes on property known as 75 Union Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/High Density Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that Staff has not received revised plans; consequently, a continuance is recommended. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing on PD 85-10, inviting anyone who wished to speak on this item to come forward. M/S: Christ, Olszewski - That PD 85-10 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986, with the applicant's concurrence. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). * * « ZC 85-09 Public hearing to consider the applica- Callahan, M. tion of Mr. Mike Callahan, on behalf of 866, Inc. for approval of a zone change from R-M-S to C-PD; and plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of 24 condominiums on properties known as 296, 360, 380, & 390 W. Sunnyoaks Ave. Commissioner Kasolas reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval per the Staff Comment Sheet, and as red-lined. The red-lining indicates the designation of 12 parking spaces for guest use only; and, this is to be reflected in the CC&R's for the project. The applicant is in agreement with this request. Mr. Kee noted that this project is above average, indicating the open space calculations; and, that Staff is also recommending approval. Commissioner Christ stated that the trash enclosure for the project has been located further toward the rear of the property as requested by the adjacent property owner; and, that this is one of the finest projects he has seen along Sunnyoaks Ave. There was brief discussion regarding the building heights, the usable open space, landscaping, and retention of existing trees. -6- Chairman Fairbanks commented, for the purpose of landscape plan review, that she would like to see the provided open space be usable. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Christ, Toshach - That the public hearing on ZC 85-09 be closed, in that no one wished to speak. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). M/S: Toshach, Christ - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project; and That the Planning Commission adopt the findings as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet, and adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve a zone change from R-M-S to C-PD; and That the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Planned Development Permit approving plans, elevations, and development schedule, subject to the conditions indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet, as well as red-lining of the presented plans indicating designation of 12 guest parking spaces; and that the provision of 12 guest parking spaces be included in the CC&R's for this project. Discussion of Motion Commissioner Dickson noted that the project is almost at maximum density; however, he was amazed at what the developer has done with open space and profiles on the project. This shows how one can have maximum density and still show a concern for the community. Commissioner Dickson stated that he would be voting in favor of the motion. Commissioner Olszewski concurred, although he noted his concern with the retention of existing trees remained steadfast. Chairman Fairbanks stated that she would be voting for the motion. This area has been under much discussion, it's in the San Tomas Area, and the applicant has done an excellent job of addressing open space and other considerations. It appears to be an ideal use of the PD zoning. -~- Vote on Motion __ AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Olszewski, Toshach, Dickson,. Fairbanks NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: None. V 85-04 Public hearing to consider the applica- Norman, R. tion of Mr. Richard Norman for a variance to the sideyard setback requirement to allow the construction of a carport approximately one foot from the side property line on property known as 1030 S. San Tomas Aquino Rd. in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. The Recording Secretary read a letter from Mr. Norman, dated October 30, 1985, into the record (attached hereto). Commissioner Kasolas reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending denial, _ based on the findings indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet, and is of the opinion that approval would set a bad precedent. Mr. Kee reviewed the application noting that in September of this year, Staff observed a carport being constructed on the subject property without permits. In addition, this structure failed to meet the sideyard setback requirement of 5 feet. Staff sent the owner a letter informing him of the violation and at this. time he is applying for a variance to the sideyard setback requirement. The carport is constructed approximately 1 foot from the side property line whereas a 5 foot setback is required. Staff is of the opinion that in this case the hardship was self-imposed as a result of constructing the structure without permits. The applicant already has a single car garage on the property, thus satisfying the parking standard. Also, it appears that there is adequate room in the rear of the lot where a carport or garage. could be constructed while conforming to all setback requirements. For these reasons, Staff cannot support the request. Commissioner Dickson asked about easements on the property because of the adjacent creek. Mr. Kee responded that the southerly property line runs along Page Ditch; the area under discussion is on the northly part of the lot. Commissioner Kasolas added that the Architectural Advisor indicated that he did not have sufficient detail on the presented drawing to give an architectural recommendation. -8- Commissioner Dickson noted that the property owner to the north must have a little problem with traffic because he has erected his own "caution" sign in the front yard. Mr. Helms stated that he was unaware of any such signing. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Richard Norman, applicant, stated that he felt Commissioner Kasolas should disqualify himself from the hearing in that, at this morning's site and Architectural Review Committee meeting, he expressed hostility which, in Mr. Norman's opinion, has contaminated his opinion and this hearing. Chairman Fairbanks stated that, with information provided in the Staff Comment Sheet and all past considerations on variances, she felt the Commission would be able to render a fair decision. Mr. Norman requested a continuance to seek professional guidance on the matter. Mr. Kee stated that Staff has no objection to a continuance. M/S: Toshach, Kasolas - That the public hearing on V 85-04 be closed. Discussion on Motion Commissioner Dickson asked the City Attorney if the Commission would be obligating itself in any way by granting a continuance, in light of the fact that someone went ahead without permits. Mr. Seligmann responded that the applicant has no right to continue or put structure there without permits. The Planning Commission may grant a continuance without obligation. Commissioner Toshach stated that, with the input provided by the Site Review Committee and the Staff Report, he believed he had all the evidence he needed to vote on this issue at this time. Commissioner Dickson noted that even though it appears that there is substantial evidence, it has been the Commission's policy to grant continuances if the applicant so requests. Commissioner Christ noted that it would be to the advantage of all concerned parties if this item were continued. He thought that the applicant is interested in a legal opinion and, once he obtains that opinion, he would take appropriate action to correct the problem. Chairman Fairbanks stated her agreement with Commissioner Dickson's comments. -9- Commissioner Toshach noted that this issue is a willful violation of the City's zoning code, and he would hold that to be injurious. Roll Call Vote on Motion to Close Public Hearing AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Olszewski, Toshach NOES: Commissioners: Perrine, Christ, Dickson, Fairbanks ABSENT: Commissioners: None. Motion to close public hearing fails (3-4-0). M/S: Christ, Dickson - That V 85-04 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986 at the applicant's request. Discussion on Motion Commissioner Toshach stated that he would be speaking against the motion for continuance for reasons expressed earlier. Roll Call Vote on Motion for Continuance AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Dickson, Fairbanks NOES: Commissioners: Toshach ABSENT: Commissioners: None. Motion for continuance passes (6-1-0). PD 85-11 Public hearing to consider the applica- Morelan, J. tion of Mr. Jim Morelan, on behalf of Jovan Jovanovic, for approval of a Planned Development Permit; and plans, elevations and development schedule to allow the construction of a building -addition and the construction of a new office/auto related building on properties known as 75 Dillon Ave. and 40 & 48 Railway Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/Industrial) Zoning District. Commissioner Kasolas reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. -10- Mr. Jim Morelan, 100 W. Rincon Ave., felt that the concerns stated in the --- Staff Comment Sheet could be addressed with minor plan adjustments. Mr. Moreland continued that he felt the question really before the Commission is the expansion of an auto repair use and its acceptability for this site. He had asked for additional time on this application in order to get some direction from Staff, and believed that Staff as well as some of the Commission was not in favor of the proposed use. Mr. Morelan stated that his client would like to know if it is worth his time to try to redesign the project. He felt that it was unrealistic to expect Railway Ave. to be greatly improved in the near future; and, asked for additional input from the Commission. Commissioner Christ noted that the Architectural Advisor felt that the plans for the Railway Ave. portion of the project were minimal and should be improved upon if the Commission was of the opinion that this use was acceptable for this area. Commissioner Kasolas added that the Architectural Advisor also indicated that the building on Railway Ave. did not relate well to this project; and, there was not a consensus for a recommendation of approval for the project as proposed. Commissioner Kasolas continued that the applicant may be requesting something of the Commission that is not possible, if he is asking if he would ever be able to have an auto repair use on Railway Ave, in that the Commission can only look at what is being proposed - on a case-by-case basis. Commissioner Christ commented that the Commission must look closely at the quality of development along Railway Ave. because of exposure to the loop street. Mr. Morelan felt that the questions were separable--land use and environmental visual impact; and that more can be done to the building architecturally. However, making an attractive building would be for naught if there is still objection to the use. Commissioner Olszewski noted his agreement with Commissioner Christ's comments. Commissioner Perrine stated that the applicant should be aware that the City Council is considering interim zoning for the downtown area until it can be looked at for a larger plan. Commissioner Toshach asked about a project to the south of this site which was recently approved, noting his concern for consistency. Mr. Kee indicated that the project to the south was specifically approved for a warehouse use. Chairman Fairbanks stated that the Commission can only respond to specific requests; however, she would repeat that, based on her own personal biases, she would be disinclined to consider the type of use which is being applied for. -11- Commissioner Kasolas stated that his mind is open, and he can only be governed by what he is being asked to judge at this particular time. Anything else would be to commit error, and he would caution the Commission. Commissioner Dickson asked if a use permit would be required for an automotive use if the zoning were not PD (Planned Development). Mr. Kee responded that it would require a use permit, in that auto repair is one of the uses identified as needing a use permit. Commissioner Dickson continued that the City already has a concern about this type of use; and, the City has .already zoned the entire downtown PD, thereby expressing concern for it's development. Although the architectural issues might. be solved satisfactorily, the use cannot be pre-judged because it is eligible under certain conditions. Mr. Morelan asked for a continuance based on testimony this evening. M/S: Kasolas, Olszewski - That PD 85-11 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986 at the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). The Commission recessed at 9:05 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:15 p.m. MISCELLANEOUS MM 85-26 Continued application of Mr. Jim Rueter, J. Rueter for a modification to approved plans to make exterior alterations to an existing building and to convert a portion of the building from storage use to office use on property known as 155 E. Campbell Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/Commercial) Zoning District. M/S: Dickson, Christ - That MM 85-26 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986 per the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). -12- MM 85-22 Continued application of Mr. Mark Noack Noack, M. for modificaton to an existing restaurant (Burger King) on property known as 49 W. Hamilton Ave. in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Kasolas reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The previously expressed concerns have been resolved, therefore, the Committee is recommending approval as red-lined (building elevations and retention of two parking spaces). :Commissioner Dickson indicated that he had heard exceptional good comments regarding green house additions. Commissioner Olszewski noted the traffic which backs up at this intersection because of this restaurant, and hoped that the additional parking spaces are not limiting driveway access to the site. Commissioner Toshach asked if the drive-up window que length changes as a result of this application. Mr. Kee responded that the que length would not change. M/S: Christ, Dickson - That the Planning Commission adopt findings as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet; and, that this project be approved, subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet and red-lining of presented plans. Motion carried unanimously (~-0-0). MM 85-28 Application of Mr. John Camarene for Camarene, J. an addition to the Dairy Queen Restaurant on property known as 2255 S. Winchester Blvd. in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Kasolas reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is making a recommendation for approval as set forth in the Staff Comment Sheet. The applicant proposes to screen in 200 sq.ft., and the improvements we are asking for may be equal to the cost of improving the 200 sq.ft. The applicant would like to see if there is any flexibility with the conditions of approval because of special circumstances involving the lease. Mr. John Camarene reported that the improvements required by the conditions of approval would cost almost $8,000--much more than he had intended. His lease on the property is for five more years, and the -13- property owner will not participate in the improvements. Mr. Camarene stated that he is willing to compromise, but he felt that requirements are unreasonable. Commissioner Christ noted that there if an alternative plan for watering the landscaping were presented, he would be willing to consider it. He added that he would be happy to support a continuance so that the applicant could look at alternatives. Commissioner Kasolas stated that the Staff's recommendation is standard for these types of modifications. Perhaps approval could be recommended with the trash enclosure and landscaping to come back to the Site Review Committee for alternative plans. The main problem seems to be how to water the plant areas, and the installation of an irrigation system would be very costly. Mr. Kee noted that hose bibs might be an acceptable alternative; and, Staff would be in agreement with the Site Review Committee's approach. Commissioner Olszewski suggested that the applicant look into drought tolerant plant species that require little watering. Commissioner Toshach felt that the air-conditioning equipment for this building was a minimal intrusion, and noted that screening of roof-mounted equipment was an expensive enterprise. Commissioner Christ noted that since the roof-mounted equipment is minimal, the screening might be more offensive than the equipment itself. M/S: Kasolas, Toshach - That the Planning Commission conditionally approve MM 85-28: (1) Trash enclosure plan submitted for approval of Planning Director prior to issuance of building permit. (2) Landscaping plans to come back to the Site and Architectural Review Committee; with irrigation plan not being required if provision for adequate watering of planting areas can be demonstrated on plans. (3) Roof-mounted equipment will not require screening at this time. (4) Other conditions as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Olszewski, Toshach, Dickson NOES: Commissioners: Fairbanks ABSENT: Commissioners: None. Chairman Fairbanks commented that she understood the applicant's problems; however, the requirements are standard and she is in favor of these types ___ of improvements. : ~ -14- MM 85-29 Application of Mr. Helmut Dombrow for a Dombrow, H. modification to allow the construction of an automobile spray booth in the parking area of an existing garage on property known as 238 Curtner Ave. in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. M/S: Kasolas, Christ - That MM 85-29 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). ,r SA 85-51 Mukuno, D. Application of Mr. Douglas Mukuno for i s gning on property known as 2970 S. Winchester Blvd. in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. M/S: Kasolas, Christ - That SA 85-51 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986. Motion carried unanimously ~ (7-0-0). . .~ * w S 84-11 Appeal of the Planning Director's =~ UP 84-08 - decision denying the applicant's . Lincoln Pro ert Co. P Y request to modify the approved building elevations to permit a patterned horizontal treatment in lieu of a colored granite veneer accent band on property known as 2105 S. Bascom Ave. in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. M/S: Kasolas, Christ - Election of Officers That S 84-11/UP 84-08 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). Nominations and elections of Planning Commission Officers for 1986. M/S: Dickson, Christ - That a white ballot be cast electing Commissioner Kasolas as Chairman of the Planning Commission for 1986. Motion carried unanimously. 15- M/S: Dickson, Christ - That a white ballot be cast electing Commissioner Perrine as Vice-Chairman of the Planning Commission for 1986. Motion carried unanimously. Informatinal Item City Council/Planning Commission Study Session. It was the consensus of the Commission that the Planning Commission Study Session be changed to Monday. January 20, 1986. OTHER ITEMS BROUGHT UP BY COMMISSION Commissioner Christ highlighted his attendance at a Traffic Mitigation Seminar put on by Transportation 2000 and MTC: needs to be a joint communities program; needs to be an agreement to study densities and development so that higher densities can be placed adjacent to alternative transportation. Commissioner Dickson asked Staff to do an informational parking study comparing Campbell with other cities. Commissioner Olszewski asked for information on the City's tree saving processes from various commissions. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. APPROVED: JoAnn Fairbanks Chairman ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee Secretary RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis Recording Secretary CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 85-16 APPLICANT: Indiveri, J. -- SITE ADDRESS: 250 N. San Tomas Aquino Rd. P.C. MTG. December 10, 1985 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 to be submitted to the Site ~ Architectural Revie~r Cotrnn. 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 of 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 pezmit. 5. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount of $5000 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 PG&E 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. FILE NO.: S 85-16 APPLICANT: Indiveri, SITE ADDRESS: 250 N. P.C. MTG.: December Page 2 J. San Tomas Aquino Rd. 10, 1985 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. 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. 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. Uniform Fire Code. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 18. Meet all Title 24 requirements. FIRE DEPARTMENT 19. Wood shake roofing prohibited on apartment building. 20. Roof covering shall be fire retardant. FILE NO.: S 85-16 SITE ADDRESS: 250 N. SAN TOMAS AQUINO RD. APPLICANT: INDIVERI, J. P.C. MTG.: 12-10-85 PAGE 3 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 21. Obtain an excavation permit, pay fees and post surety for all work in the public right of way. 22. Driveway approach shall be a minimum of 25 feet wide plus 3 feet on each end to rise to the existing curb. 23. Relocate the existing P.G.6 E. pole as necessary to maintain five feet of clearance from the driveway approach. 24. Provide three sets of on-site grading and drainage plans. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FILE N0: S 85-17 APPLICANT: McMURDIE, V. SITE ADDRESS: 2069 ~ 2075 S. WINCHESTER BLVD. P. C. MTG. 12-10-85 1. The proposed building will match the existing buildings on the site and create a pleasant visual environment. 2. The parking provided satisfies the code requirements. 3. Adequate on-site landscaping is provided to enhance the appearance of the site. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 85-17 APPLICANT: McMtTRDIE, V. SITE ADDRESS: 2069 ~ 2075 S. WINCHESTER BLVD. P.C. MTG. 12-10-85 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 site plan 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 of a building permit. 4. Fencing plan indicating location and design details of fencing; walls; and parking lot lighting plan 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 $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. 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. 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: 11,395 sq.ft. of office use. 8. All 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. 10. 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 85-17 APPLICANT: McMURDIE, V. SITE ADDRESS: 2069 ~ 2075 S. WINCRESTER BLVD. P.C. MTG. 12-10-85 PAGE TWO 11. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code. 12. 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. 13. 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 bq Planning and Building Departments (Section 21.68.030 of the Campbell Municipal Code). 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City requirements for the handicapped. FIRE DEPARTMENT 17. Provide one on-site municipal fire hydrant within 150 feet of the most remote portion of the rear building. BUILDING DEPARTMENT No comments at this time. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT No comments at this time. lIG- ~ P.~. nrG iZ~,o~$s -- December 5, 1985 Mr. Arthur Kee Planning Director City of Campbell 70 North First Street. Campbell, CA 95008 Attention Mr. Tim Haley, Planner II Dear Mr. Kee: ~~ Santo Cloro Volley Water District w 5150 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95118 TELEPHONE (408) 265.2600 ~~~~oe~~ ~E~ :.1985 CITY pF CAMPpELL PI-ANNINC3 DEPARTMENT We have reviewed the site plan for Pepper Tree Terrace, File ZC85-09, sent to us on November 19. The site's southerly property line is adjacent to a Page Percolation System pond. The pond right of way i.s fenced with chain link fencing. This fencing should be shown and labeled on improvement plans with a note stating that any fence damaged due to construction is to be replaced in kind and in accord with Section 80 of State~specificati.ons. Site drawings and grading should be designed so there is no drainage into the percolation pond. - In accordance with District Ordinance 75-6, the existing well shown on the plans should be properly registered with the District, and either maintained or abandoned in accordance with District standards. Improperly constructed or abandoned wells can be a hazard and may be a source of groundwater contamination. We request that wells be sealed i.n accordance with District standards unless they are to be used for the proposed development. In this case, they should only be used after proper testing and inspection. Please call Mr. David Zozaya at 265-2600, extension 382 or 254 for information regarding permits and the registering of or abandonment of any wells. We request written confirmation from the developer or his engineer regarding the existence of any wells and their proposed disposition. Site grading and improvement plans should be sent for our review prior to start of construction. _ Sincere y, /1/~ . F. Carlse Division Engineer Design Coordination Division cc: Hedley and Stark, Inc., 346 East Campbell Avenue, Campbell, CA 95008 ` ~ Public Works Department, City of Campbell, 70 North First Street, Campbeli, CA 95008 AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER ~2a. ~' October 30, 1985 City of Campbell 70 N. 1st. Street Campbell, CA 95008 ATTN: Arthur A. Kee/Director of Planning Mr. Kee, ~~ -~ ~_ .:'.:~. .; ~. ~_. ,; ,~ ~~. I am writing you in regard to a letter dated September 30, 1985 from Marty Woodworth pertaining to a structure on my property located at 1030 San Thomas Aquino Road. On or about August 10, 1985 I went to the planning department and spoke with Mr. Tim Halley about filing for a variance on the sideyard set back, after obtaining the form and explaining what I wanted to do I asked Mr. Halley what the chances of getting a variance were, he replied to the effect that there was no chance at all. It was after this encounter with your office that I decided to go ahead without a permit. As to the variance application the main item that I see needing to be addressed is Section 21.50.20 Item ~6, in which this structure tends to promote off street parking and improve traffic flow and visibility on a street that right now is perilous. My need for this structure is for protection of my vehicle and sto- rage of my tools, If this was built within the five foot setback I would suffer in that one of the aforementioned would be exposed to the elements and deterioration would result. Further, I am not asking for any priveledge not granted to others as everyone has this variance procedure available to them under state law. In addition, my neighbor Kevin Smith enjoys benefits from this struc- ture,(see attached) and does not jeopardize any plans that he has. In closing, since this does not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of others. I ask that we not forestall .the inevitable nor incur great expense, as I am willing to pay any applicable fees. Sin el , Richard Norman P.S. Of course if we cannot resolve this at this level I would require full disclosure of any findings as per state law. ~ ~~~~~~ N4V 0 41985 CITY OF CAMPBELL ~L:ANNINO . DEPMTMENT. ~` ~~ ;~. :~~ ~.r ~~ ; ., „~~, of d ~,~ . _ ~•r . ~~ _ ;~~ ~. _. .. .. .. _. .~ - s _ _ ,.., y~%"~) Wit- W L.'n~`' ~'~:....~L ;~T. :a5 -ric Cahn.=:=~, ~1=~_~..ti"~ Q~= ..~3t> LQ~%=-- A:i.Ti!`(~~^++AY?Sc-!!-~~, ~ ~!~5 FSwc.^, V ik.,ta ~- ~"._.~.r i.=. ^r:'~ h4CTa.```1.VLi Ai~~`L~= !~-`]Q IS ClJ1Vl.~i~iY~.Lf Tt;AT 1 AY: '~~~ Ate.:^-..:~5" ~Y=~-A:?:J tiC:?.".A~ CC~S-rfi~C"-ita A CA!~ PC?T h:SA- ..~.Y S=-P.?_ Per'?=:.. . --`~i=. ".^. ~;C.~"4'~ Ch.~:i; -r,C 'tC?=~1` AD,C_i~ii^ ~. ~:itiC P.~QtiC ~-'S SQL' ~,._:?~ cC:iI4JA,Y'.'. S i 1 :._ -S S'=Ct= ~ C `S"-.~;'C-: Gti C = ~ : ~ CA,z ?Q ' . rA~t~ =I4 .lC~4`cL~ 1`r,i?c ?~: _'vr~~:.~. A1^ -a~.-. :kQ"" _ ._ __ =: iY~ _ ", .: C;~ =;~ tiC i c i . is P.-+i~flC'='rS A4C S =`"c .._--- _- SUi_-. -? -,. J -- - ~~, -~ - M_ CA's S_ ~tSAC -S~ , A~`~` ~~-=~_ 1Q. ~= . S:? 5 : J(7 s. S~C~CC.t ~1', ~~ ~~__ __ _ D NOV 0 41985 CITY OR CAMP6ELL PL'ANNINO DEPARTMENT RECOMI~NDED FINDINGS FILE N0: MM 85-22 APPLICANT: NOACK, M. (BURGER RING) SITE ADDRESS: 49 W. HAMILTON AVE P.C. MTG.: 12-10-85 1. The greenhouse addition is architecturally compatible with the existing building. 2. The applicant is reducing the number of seats by 3, and increasing the number of parking spaces by 8, which should help ease the parking problem at this restaurant. 3. The number of parking spaces at this restaurant will exceed the code requirement by 24 spaces. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: MM 85-22 APPLICANT: NOACK, M. (BURGER RING) SITE ADDRESS: 49 W. HAMILTON AVE. P.C. MTG. 12-10-85 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 to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Planning Director prior to application for a building permit. 3. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount of $ 500.00 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. All mechanical equipment on roofs and all utility meters to be screened as approved by the Planning Director. 5. 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. 6. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code. 7. Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City requirements for the handicapped. 8. 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. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 9. Restaurant to be limited to a maximum of 96 seats. FIRE, BUILDING, AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS No comments at this time. ~' RECOt~IENDING FINDINGS FILE N0: MM 85-28 - APPLICANT: CAMARENE, J. (DAIRY QUEEN) SITE ADDRESS: 2255 S. WINCHESTER BLVD. P.C. MTG. 12-10-85 1. The addition will match the existing building. 2. The parking provided exceeds that required by the code. 3. With the new landscaping, screening of roof equipment, and trash enclosure the appearance of the site will be improved. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: I+~I 85-28 APPLICANT: Camarene, J. (Dairy Queen) SITE ADDRESS: 2255 S. Winchester Blvd. P. C. Mtg.: 12-10-85 The applicant is notified as part of this application that he 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 the type and size of plant material, and method .of irrigation, to be submitted for approval of the Site and Architectural Review Committee. Irrigation plan will not be required if provision for adequate watering of planting areas can be demonstrated on plans. 3. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount of $1,000 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. Trash enclosure plan to be submitted for approval of Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. 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. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6. Applicant to submit a plan for the approval of the Planning Iirector indicating location of trash enclosure prior to issuance of a building permit. FIRE DEPARTMENT 7. Provide panic hardware for exit doors. BUILDING DEPARTN~NT No comments at this time.