Loading...
PC Min 05/14/1985PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 7:30 P.M MINUTES MAY 14, 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, Olszweski, Fairbanks; Planning Director A. A. Kee, Planner II Marty Woodworth, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, City Attorney J. Robert Dempster, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent Commissioners: Toshach, Dickson. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Fairbanks introduced the newly appointed Planning Commissioner, Mr. Bruce Olszewski. Mr. Kee indicated that communications received pertained to specific items on the agenda and would be discussed at that time. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS Capital Improvement Program - 1985-86 through 1989-90. Assistant City Manager Tara Adams presented the proposed Capital Improvement Program for 1985-86 through 1989-90, and requested that the Planning Commission make a finding that the CIP is consistent with the General Plan. There were no questions from the Commission, nor additions/deletions to the proposed CIP. M/S: Olszewski, Kasolas - That the Planning Commission find that the proposed Capital Improvement Program for 1985-86 through 1989-90 is consistent with the General Plan. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). -2- ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS S 85-06 Continued application of Mr. Jere LaGuisa, J. LaGuisa for approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of a 10-unit apartment complex on property known as 3645 S. Bascom Ave. in an R-3-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Christ reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. Discussion included concerns about the ingress/egress and the driveway was moved, as well as improvements made to ~~ the stairwells. Additionally, all concerns expressed in the prior Staff Comment Sheet were addressed to the satisfaction of the Committee, therefore the Committee is recommending approval. Mr. Kee reported that Staff is also recommending approval. M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the Planning Commission accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project; and, that the Planning Commission approve S 85-06 subject to conditions as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet (attached) and redlining of~presented plans. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). S 85-07 Continued application of Mr. William Cooper, W. Cooper for approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of an office/warehousing & manufacturing building on properties known as 842 & 854 Camden Ave. in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Commissioner Christ reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The applicant has addressed all the concerns previously expressed, therefore, the Committee is recommending approval. Mr. Kee noted that Staff is also recommending approval of this project. M/S: Kasolas, Christ - That the Planning Commission accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project; and, that the Planning Commission approve S 85-07 subject to conditions as indicated in - the Staff Comment Sheet (attached). ~ ~ Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). ~ -3- Commissioner Kasolas asked if there is a Local Improvement District for this area. Mr. Helms indicated that there was an LID for a water transmission line; however, attempts, for an LID for street improvements have not been successful; consequently the City requires developers to construct street improvements when they take out building permits. S 85-09 Application of Mr. John Neves for Neves, J. approval of 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 Ct. in an R-2-S (Multiple Family Residential) Zoning~District. Commissioner Christ reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. This applicant is requesting a continuance to May 28 in order to address concerns indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet and the driveway situation, traffic circulation, and landscaping. The Site Committee is of the opinion that the proposed project density of 19.5 units per gross acre is acceptable because the site backs up to a shopping center. M/S: Perrine, Christ - MM 85-07 Sternberg, K. That S 85-09 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 28, 1985, at the applicant's request. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). Continued application of Mr. Kenneth Sternberg for a modification to approved plans to allow an addition to an existing restaurant (Remington's) on property known as 1730 W. Campbell Ave. in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning~District. Mr. Kee stated that the applicant has requested a continuance of this item to May 28. Hi/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That MM 85-07 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 28, 1985. Motion carried .unanimously (5-0-2). -4- PUBLIC HEARINGS PD 85-02 Continued public hearing to consider the Navai, K, application of Mr. Kamil Navai for a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations and development schedule to allow construction of two townhomes on property known as 96 S. Third St, in a PD (Planned Development/Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Christ reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee, and approval is recommended at this time. Mr. Kee indicated that Staff is also recommending approval of this application. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the public hearing on PD 85-02 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2332 recommending that the City Council approve PD 85-02, subject to conditions of approval (attached) as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: ~~~ Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Olszewski, Fairbanks. NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Toshach, Dickson. PD 85-03 Continued public hearing to consider Harris, R. the application of Mr. Ron Harris for approval of a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of an office/warehouse and manufacturing building on property known as 140 Gilman Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/Industrial) Zoning District. -5- Commissioner Christ reported that this item was considered by the .Site and Architectural Review Committee, and the applicant worked with the Committee in reducing the problems with the development. To address the concern of the Architectural Advisor, the applicant has agreed to continue the textured block around the window treatments in the back of the building. The Committee is recommending approval. Commissioner Olszewski expressed a concern about the sidewalks in the area. Mr. Helms indicated that one of the conditions of approval requires the applicant to install street improvements across the frontage of his property. Currently, the code does not require sidewalks in the industrial area; however, this may be a requirement by the time this property is developed. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Perrine, Christ - That the public hearing on PD 85-03 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Perrine, Kasolas - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2333 recommending that the City Council approve PD 85-03 subject to conditions (attached) indicated in the Staff comment Sheet. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Olszewski, Fairbanks NOES: Commissioners:. None ABSENT: Commissioners: Toshach, Dickson. PD 85-04 Continued public hearing to consider Millen, R. the application of Mr. Richard Millen for a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of an office building on property known as 45 N. First St. in a PD (Planned Development/ Commercial) Zoning District. -6- Commissioner Christ reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee.. Although the problems with the parking and site layout have been solved for this very narrow parcel, there are still problems with the building's appearance, landscaping, and the parking area lighting. However, the applicant has agreed to the red-lining of the presented plans. Commissioner Christ noted that it was his understanding that the applicant was supposed to bring plans for the meeting which indicated the changes discussed in the Site Committee meeting. Mr. Kee stated that the revised plans have not been submitted at this time, and the Commission may wish to consider a continuance. Mr. Kee continued that it is Staff's opinion that the proposal will work on this difficult site. Commissioner Christ explained that the red-lining included the facade below the stairwell as a screening to lighting under the building for the parking and pipes, and the wood on the planter boxes was extended to the upstairs of the building. Responding to a question regarding the retaining of the large redwood tree on this site, Commissioner Christ indicated that the "tower" feature of the building has been designed to fit in with the tree. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in .the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Perrine, Christ - That the public hearing on PD 85-04 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2334 recommending that the City Council approve PD 85-04 subject to red-lined plans coming back to the Site and Architectural Review Committee, and conditions of approval as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine,~Christ, Olszewski, Fairbanks NOES: Commissioners: None ABSEATT: Commissioners: Toshach, Dickson. DisruGSinn Commissioner Christ noted that the proposed building color is gray, which the Site Committee found acceptable. He asked if the Commission was ameniable to this color. -7- Commissioner Kasolas expressed a concern that the Commission gets .involved in building colors, noting that the Commission is not a policeman. He continued that there has been several discussion regarding a theme for the downtown area, and he would assume, because no one has taken any action, that the people in the area want the freedom to decide on these types of issues. Commissioner Kasolas noted his concern about the attention with detail that has been going on recently, in that the Commission's charge is with the general plan and overall planning--not detail. Commissioner Christ responded that the Site Committee is not concerned with colors; however, he recalled this discussion regarding the Apple Computer building, and the Site Committee would like to Commission to have all the facts. ZC 85-02 Continued public hearing to consider LaGuisa, J. the application of Mr. Jere LaGuisa for approval of a zone change from R-M-S to PD (Planned Development); and approval of a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of 7 townhomes on property known as 570 W. Sunnyoaks Ave. in an R-M-S (Multiple Family ResidentialJLow-Medium Density) Zoning District. Commissioner Christ reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval, subject to red-lining and conditions of approval as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Mr. Woodworth indicated that Staff is also recommending approval. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mrs. Pat McCullough, 771 Old Orchard Rd., spoke against the zone change, the density of the project, and the traffic in the area. Commissioner Christ explained that. the zone change was necessary to allow these units to be sold individually. Mr. Jack Young, 524 W. Sunnyoaks Ave., spoke regarding the_landscaping for the project. t~ir. Kee explained that the landscaping plan is to come back to the Site Committee prior to issuance of a building permit. ~ Commissioner Kasolas added that this project must be handled just like any other project in the past, and that the landscaping plans are developed after the zone change and the plans are approved. -8- Commissioner Perrine added that the building permit will not be issued until the landscaping plan is submitted. This project was continued from the last meeting because. Commissioner Dickson wanted to see the actual site layout which provided for the fire access, not for submittal of landscaping plans. Mr. Cecil Hunter, applicant/property owner, spoke regarding the poor condition of the trees on the site; and, noted that the zoning ordinance allows for 8 units on this site; however, 7 are proposed in order to provide more landscaping. A letter received from Mr. Hunter was made a _ part of the record (attached hereto). Mr. Jere LaGuisa, applicant building designer, explained turf block in response to a question from Mr. Young; noted that this project's density is less than-those adjacent; and, that he understands the requirement for submittal of a landscaping plan. M/S: Kasolas, Perrine That the public hearing on ZC 85-02 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). There was brief discussion regarding the condition of the cedar tree in question. Mr. Dempster noted that it is not City policy to determine the condition of on-site trees, and that there is no one on the Staff with expertise in this field. Commissioner Kasolas noted that the only time this issue comes up is when there is an application before the Commission. He felt that caution should be exercised, or the conflict regarding on-site trees may result in developers completely grading their properties before they make an application. Commissioner Olszewski noted that the City is a bird sanctuary and large trees are necessary to maintain their habitat; however, if other large trees have been retained on this site, he is satisfied that the birdlife habitats are sufficient. M/S: Perrine, Kasolas - That the Planning Commission recommend ' that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project. That the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the zone change from R-M-S to PD. That the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve plans, elevations, and development schedule for ZC 85-02. -9- Discussion Commissioner Christ stated that he would be voting against the motion because he felt there were special circumstances on this street--the design of the street does not allow for street parking. Commissioner Christ continued that he felt there is inadequate on-site parking for guests. The project from a design point is acceptable; however, he felt that the location of the site makes the density improper. Commissioner Kasolas asked why this issue wasn't presented previously, and why the Site Committee indicated that all concerns had been addressed, and now, Commissioner Christ was voting against the project. Commissioner Christ explained that this issue was discussed at the last meeting; and, he felt that as a member of the Site Committee, his job was to look at the design of a building and make recommendation on that issue. He continued that he did not feel that his sitting on the Committee meant that he must prejudge any application. Commissioner Christ noted that what he had said was that the applicant made all the changes desired by Staff and that is what the recommendation is based on. Commissioner Kasolas stated that he was not satisfied, and that it was his understanding that all project provided for on-site parking on the site--there are no provisions for parking on the street. He continued that with the recommendation for approval, the Site Committee should have included the parking requirements issue. By their recommendation for approval, it was his understanding that the Committee had looked at that issue. Commissioner Christ stated that the parking on-site meets the requirements for a project of this type. However, his opinion is that this site is a special situation in that there is no on-street parking allowed in this area. When an application meets the standards of the City, he felt it was inappropriate to hold the project up from a Site Committee standpoint. Commissioner Olszewski noted that he lives in an area where the parking situation is unbearable, and he would not want to see the same situation elsewhere. Mr. Dempster stated that the City has a parking standard, and one cannot start applying some other parking standard because someone passes judgement that this is a different situation. The Commission has not heard from Public Works or anyone else that because of the street design there will be different parking standards. Applicants are not bound by off-site parking. Commissioner Perrine noted that he drove by this site and through some of the other development in this area.., which is zoned for this density. He noted that this plan exceeds the parking requirements on-site. This development will be sold to individual homeowners, which usually results in better care; and, he will be voting for the project. -10- Chairman Fairbanks noted that she will be voting against the motion. This project is in the San Tomas Area, and the policy notes careful consideration of landscaping and zoning for this area. She felt that with the traffic situation on Sunnyoaks, the area should be developed at the low end of the density scale. Vote on Motion AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine NOES: Commissioners: Christ, Olszewski, Fairbanks ABSENT: Commissioners: Toshach, Dickson. Motion for approval of ZC 85-02 failed. ,,. Motion M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the Planning Commission request that the City Council review the "San Tomas Policy". If the Council, after this review, reaffirms it's position on this policy, that the policy be clarified and made a part of applicable ordinances of the City. Discussion Chairman Fairbanks stated that she would be speaking against the motion, in that she felt committees and residents spent a great deal of time studying this area and found it unique. Commissioner Kasolas noted that if it is an appropriate policy, it should be reaffirmed. It would appear that questions have arisen on numerous occasions regarding the geographical area, street improvements, density, landscaping, development standards, etc. Vote on Motion AYES: "Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Olszewski NOES: Commissioners: Fairbanks ABSENT: Commissioners: Toshach, Dickson. * ,t ,r ZC 85-03 Continued public hearing to consider the Bowen, B. application of Mr. Bruce Bowen, on behalf of Ainsley Financial Corp., for 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 6 single family homes on property known as 1200 W. Latimer Ave. -11- Commissioner Christ reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is happy with the revised plan and is recommending approval. Mr. Kee noted that Staff is also recommending approval. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mrs. Darlene Sprajc, 1210 W. Latimer Ave., expressed concerns with the driveway and site layout, and the possibility of second story additions in the future which would take away all her privacy. A letter from Mrs. Sprajc is attached hereto and made a part of the record. Commissioner Christ explained that the revised site layout was to provide on-site guest parking, thereby preventing guest traffic from impacting the neighborhood; and, that the parking provided should be in one area which would encourage that it be used for guest parking rather than for extra parking for the homeowners. Mr. Bruce Bowen, applicant, noted that he has worked with the neighbors in the area, and feels that the submitted plan is a good compromise. He added that these homes will be single family and single story. Mrs. Joy Bright, 1140 W. Latimer Ave., thanked Mr. Bowen for working with the neighborhood; and, she would be inclined to agree with Mrs. Sprajc who liked the original layout better. Mr. Wally Perry, representing property owners of Montesorri School, stated that he felt the project would be good for the neighborhood, and noted his sympathy for Mrs. Sprajc's situation. Mr. Perry asked about the fencing along his property line, as well as the removal of the silk trees (letter attached). Commissioner Christ indicated that the applicant is in agreement with a wood fence as requested in Mr. Perry's letter, and a fencing plan will be coming back to the Site Committee. DS/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the public hearing on ZC 85-02 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Kasolas, Christ - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which. has been prepared for this project. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution Nos. 2336 and 2337 recommending that the City Council approve ZC 85-03, subject to the conditions indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet, with Condition 4 changed -12- to read "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." Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Perrine, Christ, Olszewski, Fairbanks NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Toshach, Dickson. Commissioner Perrine asked that Mrs. Sprajc be notified when the landscaping''"plans are submitted for this project. The Commission recessed at 9:10 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:25 p.m. PD 85-OS Public hearing to consider the applica- Wu, C. tion of Mr. Chao Wu and Mr. Robert Emami for a Planned Development Permit; and approval of plans, elevations, and - development schedule to allow the construction of a 12-unit apartment complex on property known as 107 & 119 E. Latimer Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Christ reported that this item was before the Site and Architectural Review Committee; and, the applicant is requesting a continuance in order to address concerns expressed in the Staff Comment Sheet. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. M/S: Perrine, Christ - That PD 85-05 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 28, 1985. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). -13- ~ UP 85-07 Public hearing to consider the applica- Collins, T. tion of Mr. Tom Collins for a Use Permit ._ and approval of plans to allow the conversion of an existing service station to a retail tire sales store on property known as 1311 Camden Ave, in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Christ reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee.. The applicant is requesting a continuance to address concerns indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Chairman Fairbanks opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to-speak for or against this item. M/S: Perrine, Christ - That UP 85-07 be continued to the Planning Commission. meeting of May. 28, 1985. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). MISCELLANEOUS MM 85-11 Application of Frogdesign Inc. for a Frogdesign, Inc. modification to an approved Planned Development Permit to allow an addition to an existing office building on property known as 34 S. Second St. in a PD (Planned .Development/Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Christ reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. Although a representative was not present at the. Committee meeting, word was received from the applicant that they are in agreement with all the conditions expressed in the Staff Comment Sheet; therefore, the Committee is recommending approval. P4r. Y.ee noted that Staff is also recommending approval. Chairman Fairbanks- questioned the condition stating that the addition would have to be removed at a later date. Mr. Kee responded that this addresses possible parking problems if a new user occupies to building. It allows the new user to come back to the Commission to justify the parking ratio. -14- M/S: Christ, Perrine - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve MM 85-11, subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). MM 85-12 Application of Mr. Robert Medlin for a UP 84-15 modification to a previously approved Medlin, R. Use Permit to allow an auto sales office; and, reinstatement of previously ' approved plans for property known as 2305 S. Winchester Blvd. in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reviewed the request for the Commission, and noted that Staff is recommending that an .auto brokerage use is an allowed use for this site, and reinstatement the use permit for a 6 month period subject to previous conditions of approval, and additional conditions (attached hereto) as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Discussion ensued regarding the number of parking spaces being provided on the site. Originally, the square footage of the building required 8 parking spaces, with modification to the landscaping; however, the applicant now believes that 5 spaces will be adequate for the proposed auto brokerage use. Staff is recommending that 8 parking spaces be ~ ~ provided in case a future use requires that many spaces. Mr. Fred Schneider, applicant, stated that he would rather leave in the landscaping and provide 5 parking spaces at this time. Mr. Schneider stated that he is willing to sign an agreement whereby he will provide the additional 3 spaces should the use warrant 8 spaces; however, he would like the flexibility at this point. Commissioner Christ asked if there would be a problem providing the 5 spaces across the front of the building, rather than taking the doors off the garage. °'' Mr. Schneider stated that this would not present a problem. M/S: Christ, Perrine - That the Planning Commission approve MM 85-12 subject to conditions stated in the Staff Comment Sheet; and, subject to the use coming back for review of the Planning Commission 6 months from the date of occupancy; and, subject to an agreement being recorded, satisfactory to the City Attorney, that the applicant will provide parking according to the original approved layout (8 spaces) if the Planning Director determines there -15- is a parking problem on the site; and, subject to the parking plan coming back to the Site and Architectural Review prior to a 6 month review of the Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). ,r UP 84-04 One year review of approved Use Permit Isaacs, J. allowing the establishment of a church in a previous school site (Dover School) on property known as 1300 Sheffield Ave. in a P-F (Public Facilities) Zoning District. Mr. Woodworth reviewed this Use Permit for the Commission, noting that Staff has received no complaints regarding the church, and it appears that the use is compatible with the neighborhood. Although the parking area was to be striped as a condition of approval, a recent inspection indicated that the parking stalls have not been striped. Church official indicated that it was their understanding that the intent of the presented parking plan was to indicate that adequate parking was available, and that the striping was not required. Under the circumstances, and because the parking has not created a problem, Staff can support the church's request that the parking area not be striped at this time. -- There was brief discussion regarding neighborhood use of the school site's open space/playground area. 1d/S: Perrine, Kasolas - That the Planning Commission review and file this report; and., that the Planning Commission make a determination that the parking area need not be striped at this time. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). SA 85-18 Signing request - Ricardo's Fast Foods - Arias, J. 1750 S. Winchester Blvd. - C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Christ reported that this item was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee, and the applicant was not present at that meeting. The Committee is of the opinion that the height of the sign for this location is not a problem; however, the Committee did have a concern with the amount. of wording on the sign, and is recommending that the wording be changed but the height be allowed to remain. Commissioner Christ further explained that the applicant refaced an existing sign without a permit. -16- Chairman Fairbanks asked the applicant if he would like a continuance to work with Staff on the wording of the sign. Commissioner Kasolas asked about the size of the sign, how long it's been up, and the cost of the sign. Mr. Arias indicated that the sign has been up about 4 months and cost about $450. M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the Planning Commission approve SA ~~ 85-18 as presented. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). ~, r.. MM 85-13 Modification to approved plans - Babet Financial Heritage Village Offices - 51 E. Campbell Ave. - PD (Planned Development/ Commercial) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that Staff has been advised that the U. S. Post Office plans to lease approximately 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area in the new Heritage Village office complex for a substation. The approved parking ratio for the office complex was 1:225, and the Zoning Ordinance requires a ratio of 1:200 a post office use. Since Staff does not have the authority to approve changes to parking ratios, this matter is before the Commission for consideration. Commissioner Kasolas asked if a post office use is an approved use within this building and zoning. Mr. Kee responded that this is an approved use if adequate parking is provided. Commissioner Kasolas noted that he would not like to see the entire complex segmented and coming before the Commission with a different parking requirement for each use. Commissioner Christ indicated that since this is not going to be a full-service post office, but rather a substation use, there should be more than enough parking. Mr. Dan Bryant, applicant, explained that this. will be a non-personnel operation used for sorting mail and post office boxes with an estimated 200 customers per 12-hour day. Chairman Fairbanks expressed a concern that the post office may wish to expand, and the use will impact the offices and the area residents. Commissioner Kasolas spoke in favor of this facility, noting that this substation is a great idea in that. one of the problems in the downtown ~I area is no post office. Businesses need someplace where they can send and ; receive mail. With the substation being a non-personnel facility, with - machines only, the usage will be spread over a longer time frame. -17- Commissioner Christ asked if there. should perhaps be a condition that there be no counter service available at this substation. Chairman Fairbanks added that perhaps there should be a review of the use, on the premise that any alterations of what is stated in the applicant's statement would impact the residential area, especially during heavy mail seasons. Chairman Fairbanks noted that she would like to make sure that the use is going to be just what has been stated. Mr. Dempster explained that if the post office wishes to increase the use of this site, they will have to come back to the Commission for approval. Commissioner Olszewski felt that customers at the substation could be spending the same amount of time as those at the regular post office; however, this substation will be good thing for the downtown area as well as relieving pressure from the Latimer Ave. site. Commissioner Kassolas indicated that parking ratios are based on 100$ occupancy, and if parking does become a problem it would be 5 years down the road. M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - Staff Report That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council apprive the proposed use of 2400 sq.ft. of floor area by the U. S. Post Office in the Heritage Village office complex. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). Continued Staff Report on revisions to the Zoning Ordinance. It was the consensus of the Commission that this item be continued to the next meeting when more commissioners are present. Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would volunteer to serve on this committee, and would do so at this time in that he will be on vacation ..during the next meeting. Staff Report Staff Report regarding building heights in the R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. It was the consensus of the Commission that this item be continued to the next meeting when more commissioners are present. -- Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would like to go on record that he saw no need to change the existing codes, noting that the real question is amenities--if you don't go up then you go out with no open space or amenities. -18- M/S: Kasolas, Perrine - That the Planning Commission be adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p,m. APPROVED: Joann Fairbankss Chairman ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee Secretary RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis ~~~. Recording Secretary ITEM N0. 10 ZC 85-03 2C 85 - 03 1200 W. Latimer Ave. Attentions Jo Ann Fairbanks I am writing to you in regards to the P.D. planned for 1200 W. Latimer. The plan is to build six houses on this lot. I live next door at 1210 W. Latimer. Prior to the last meeting of the planning commission I reviewed the building plans and found them to mY liking, these plans showing the long driveway along my property, and the placement of the houses .pleasing to the eye. fiance then I have also seen tht~ new plans which show four houses along my property and the driveway along the nursery school I feel strongly opposed to these plans. I don't think it's fair that six houses are going in there and I'm getting four of the backyards. i now have five backyards along my property and .four more will make nine, the nursery school has none as do two. houses along the back. One of my main concerns is that later on these four houses may qo two- story, leaving us no privacy at all. Anothsr concern is the nursery school. Parents are bringing their children in the morning and picking them up in the evening at the same time the people living in these homes would be going to and from work. Six houses, 12 cars. Traffic is congested enough. I'm asking you to please reconsider the first plans which were revised to accommodate more parking which I realize was your concern. I hope we can .reach an agreement on this problem. We will be at the meeting Tuesday as will the neighborhood to support us on this satter. Respectfully yours, ~Gc~t.~~x~~}a~~C.. Vic and Darlene Sprajc ~ ~~~od~ MAY 131985 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT WALLACE D. PERRY ~ associates REALTORS SPECIALIZING IN: • Land, tncoma and Commercial Developments • Real Estate Investments • Residential Properties: Almaden Valley • Member: San Jose Real Estate Board- 1CM ~MLS Services Apr i 1 18, 1985 Bruce Bowen Ainsley Financial Corp. Re: PD/ZC 85-03 33 No. First St., Suite A Campbell, California 95008 r, Dear Mr. Bowen: I am one of the property owners at 1190/96 W. Latimer Ave., Campbell, adJoining your proposed development at 1200 W. Latimer. I have recently inspected your plans and drawings st the Campbell Planning Department and, while 1 have no objection to your development, 1 would like to make the following suggestions. The plans indicate the continued use of the existing fences surrounding the subJect property. The fence at the rear property line of my site is over 25 years old and in extremely bad condition for almost all of its' 160 feet plus another 20-30 feet along the rear of the Westerly property line. I strongly suggest you consider replacing those fence sections with similar or compatable redwood fencing, and I would be happy to allow you to build such a fence along the common property line. in addition, there are four large-trees which were planted some tithe ago by the former tenants along the rear fence on the Westerly property line of my site. These trees are extremely close to the fence and should never havd been planted there in the first piece. They are absolutely the wrong trees in the wrong place, shed their pollens, seeds, needles and debris the entire year long, and nothing on either side of the fence will grow under their impact. They're a mess and should be removed. I know the City is reluctant to cut any trees but, while I don't know what species of tree this is, I am quite sure they would not be allowed to be planted in this location were someone to ask for the City's list of approved trees at this site. Please take a close look at the trees and see if you, and 1, can convince the City to allow them to be removed. Please let me know if I can help your company in any way on the proposed development - it looks like a good plan to me. See you Tuesday night. Thank you. Sin rely Wallace D. Per WDP:dp P.O. BOX 20204 • SAN JOSE, CA 95160 • (406) 997-1171 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 85-06 - APPLICANT: LaGuisa, J. ' SITE ADDRESS: 3645 S. Bascom Avenue ~--- The applicant is notified as part of this required to meet the following conditions Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the California. P.C. MTG. 5-14-85 application that he/she is in accordance with the Laws of the State of 1. Revised elevations and/or site plan indicating changes to carport elevation, and railing/stair design and provide color/material samples 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 to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. (trash enclosure) ___' ~ 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. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 85-06 APPLICANT: LaGuisa, J. SITE ADDRESS: 3645 S. Bascom Ave. P.C. MTG.: 5-14-85 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 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 developDient 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. Note: It is understood that this project consists only of apartment housing. No'-'interior property .lines can be involved. No construction comments at this time. FIRE DEPARTMENT 19. Provide on-site fire hydrant or provide residential sprinkler system for both buildings. 20. Access driveway shall be posted as a fire lane with all parking prohibited except in designated spaces. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 21. Obtain an excavation permit, pay fees, and post surety to modify the driveway, install sidewalk and any other work in the public right-of-way. 22. Provide three sets of on-site grading and drainage plans. * * • CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 85-07 APPLICANT: Cooper, W. SITE ADDRESS: 842 & 854 Camden Ave. P.C. MTG. May 14, 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 ,indicating relocation of entry and addition of patio to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Planning Director 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 x: 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 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 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. Applicant to submit a letter to the Planning Department, satisfactory K to the City Attorney, prior to application. for building permit, limiting the use of the property as follows: 5,600 sq.ft. warehousing/manufacturing use; and 2,475 sq.ft. 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 85-07 APPLICANT: Cooper, W. SITE ADDRESS: 842 & 854 Camden Ave. PAGE 2. 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 by 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 i.n 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. 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. FIRE DEPARTMENT 18. Provide on-site fire hydrant or automatic sprinkler system for all areas of the building. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 19. Dedicate right-of-way to 30' from centerline along Camden Ave. 20. Install street improvements in Camden Ave. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 85-07 APPLICANT: Cooper, W. SITE ADDRESS: 842 & 854 Camden Ave. PAGE 3 21. Obtain an excavation permit, pay fees and psot surety for all work done in the public right-of-way. 22. Pay the storm drainage-area fee. " 23. Process and file a parcel map to combine the two lots. BUILDING DEPARTMENT No comments at this time. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: NI~4 85-11 APPLICANT: Frogdesign, Inc. SITE ADDRESS: 34 S. Second St. P. C. Mtg.: 5/14/85 A. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant to have recorded an agreement satisfactory to the City Attorney agreeing to remove this addition on the termination of their lease. The property owner must be a party to this agreement. B. Applicant to obtain any necessary building permits and approvals from the Fire Department prior to ~?~ construction of this addition. EXHIBIT A ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS MM 85-12/UP 84-15 2305 S. Winchester Blvd. 1. The auto brokerage use shall not display or work on any cars at this location. Not more than two cars which are awaiting customer pick-up may be parked at the property for not more than 24 hours. 2. Use permit shall void in 6 months from date of reinstatement unless project is completed. 3. Building shall not be occupied until all conditions of approval have been satisfied and an occupancy permit granted. Occupancy prior to issuance of an occupancy permit shall result in revocation of use permit. * t PLANPJING C0~~1~1ISSION 4. Applicant shall record an agreement, satisfactory to the City Attorney, to provide parking according to original approval (UP 84-15) if, in the opinion of the Planning Director, a parking problem becomes apparent. 5. Parking layout shall be reviewed by the Site and Architectural Review Committee prior to coming back to the Planning Commission for 6 month review of proposed auto brokerage use.