Loading...
PC Min 05/24/1983PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, 7:30 P.M. MINUTES MAY 24, 1983 The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular session at the regular meeting place, the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 75 N. Central Avenue, Campbell, California. ROLL CALL Present Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Meyer, Fairbanks, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski; Planning Director Arthur A. Kee, Principal Planner Philip J. Stafford, City Attorney J. Robert Dempster, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent None APPROZ'AL OF Dff r~[TTES Dfay 10, 1983 It was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of May 10, 1983 as submitted. Motion carried with a vote of 4-0-0-3, with Commission- ers Kasolas, Drcksen and Kotowski abstaining due to ---- absence from that meeting. `Note: Correction on 6/14/83.. Corrmli.ssioner Dickson did not CO~PIG~IGATIONS abstain. Mr. Kee reported that items of communications received pertained to specific applications, and would be discussed at that time. ARCHITECT[JRAL APPROVALS S 83-05 Continued application of Mr. A. R. Hitchcock for Hitchcock, A.R. approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of an addition of approximately 2,000 sc{.ft, to an existing building on property known as 749 Old Camden Avenue in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Commissioner Fairbanks reported that this item had been considered at this morning's Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting. The Committee is recommending approval subject to conditions stated in the staff report, in- cluding that the applicant obtain abandonment of a portion of Camden Avenue. Additionally, the Committee is recommending that the front elevation, and the long side elevation be covered with horizontal siding, rather than all sides as suggested by the Architectural Advisor. Commissioner Meyer asked if items 2 $ 5 - staff concerns -listed in the staff ~- report of May 10, 1983 have been addressed (signing and outdoor storage). -2- Commissioner Fairbanks indicated that these concerns have been addressed to the satisfaction of Staff and the Committee. It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that . the Planning Commission approve S 83-05, subject to conditions listed in the Staff Comment Sheet (attached hereto) and as red-lined. Motion carried unani- mously (7-0-0). * !k 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS It was the consensus of the Commission that Item No. 3 be considered before Item No. 2 on this evening's agenda. UP 53-03 Continued public hearing to consider the application Apker, D. of Mr. Danforth Apker for a use permit and approval of plans to (1) construct an addition to an existing building and use a portion of the building for a residential living unit; and (2) construct a new 1,100 sq.ft. commercial building on property known as 2180 F, 2190 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Fairbanks reported that UP 83-03 had been considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee this morning, and the Committee is recommend- ing that this item be continued in order that the applicant might submit revised elevations and address the concerns presented by Staff. The applicant is in agreement with this recommendation for a continuance. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open on UP 83-03 and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. No one wishing to speak at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that UP 83-03 be continued to the Planning Commissioner meeting of June 14, 1983 in order that the applicant might submit revised elevations and address concerns expressed by Staff. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). * ~ ~ PD 83-02 Continued public hearing to consider the application of Crocker, R. L. D4r. Dale Drumm, on behalf of R. L. Crocker, Inc., for a Planned Development Permit to allow the construction of amini-storage warehouse of approximately 41,000 sq.ft. on property known as 241 W. Sunnyoaks Avenue in a PD (Planned Development/Commercial, Office or Industrial) Zoning District. Commissioner Fairbanks reported that this item had been before the Site and Architectural Review Committee this morning, and the Committee is coming before the Commission without a recommendation in that the Committee felt that because of the controversial nature of this application, it should be considered before the entire Commission. -3- Commissioner Fairbanks continued her report, noting that the concern previously expressed regarding method of trash collection for the site has been addressed by the use of a typical trash can which would accommodate the resident manager. _ Additionally, a condition will be added that will allow Staff to require a larger container and enclosure should the determined trash collection method not be adequate. Letters from Mr. Donald Kelly, 23634 Skyview Terrace, Los Gatos; and, Mrs. JoAnne Puterbaugh, 916 Old Orchard Road, were read into the record by the Recording Secretary (copies attached hereto). NIr. Kee noted t}iat a petition containing approximately 73 signatures had also been received pertaining to this item (attached hereto). Mr. Kee additionally reviewed the concerns that had been presented by Staff, noting the changes that have been made on the plans being presented this evening; and, reviewed the staff report with the Commission. Mr. Kee also presented transparencies indicating the distances relating to the driveway and the intersection. Commissioner Kasolas asked Mr. Helms what the approximate distance would be from the entrance of this site to the nearest point of the intersection on Winchester Boulevard. Dir. Helms responded, using a transparency, that the line of vision at the point the vehicle starting taking the turn off Winchester Blvd. onto Sunny- oaks Ave. would be approximately 120 feet. Commissioner Campos asked if this measurement was presented under ideal con- ditions, or under conditions are currently exist; and, would the presented _ traffic movement be a safe movement. Dlr. Helms noted that Staff has made a condition of approval that a clear sight distance be maintained within the southeast triangle of the property so that a vehicle on Winchester Blvd. would have clear visibility, as well as vehicles on 5unnyoaks Ave., all the way up to the "throat" of Winchester Blvd. Commissioner Dickson asked if there have been any assurances from the County indicating that they will maintain that line of sight also. Mr. Helms stated that with the development of the proposed application, all the area within the southeast triangle would be taken care of with sidewalks or parking, and the City would have control over the maintenance. Above the triangle there is same County right-of-way, and they have agreed to trim the landscaping to maintain visibility. Commissioner Kasolas asked Mr. Helms if Staff foresees this development as a traffic problem. Mr. Helms stated that the developer has retained a traffic engineering consultant, George Nolte $ Associates, and their report concludes that this development would be a safe installation and should not constitute any additional traffic at this intersection. Staff has reviewed this report and is in concurrence with it. Commissioner Dickson commented that despite all the various reports from con- - sultants on the traffic situation in this area, he traveled it ofitep and felt trore uneasy at this intersection than arty other traffic movement he makes. -4- Mr. Helms indicated that has also driven this area several times, and felt that the movement discussed is most comfortable at about 25 m.p.h.; however, one of the things to remember about this proposed development is that it will generate such a limited number of vehicle trips per day and that the peak trip hours for this use do not coincide with peak commuter traffic hours. Mr. Helms continued that, in his opinion, the traffic movements in this area can be safely done, and that the amount of traffic generated by this proposal is really quite small . Commissioner Kasolas asked about the number of accidents at this intersection, and referred to the commercial development across the street from this site. Air. Helms noted that the traffic report from A+olte $ Associates indicated these figures--~ in 1979, 7 in 1980, 5 in 1981, and 2 in 1982. These collisions were primarily right-angle collisions, and were taken into account under the traffic signal warrant analysis. Staff feels that a signal would not be appropriate at this time, and would not facilitate traffic movement in the area at this time. Staff does expect, however, that at some time in the future it will be necessary to install a signal at this intersection. Commissioner Kasolas asked if there were any other situations in the community where an ingress/egress might occur within the first 84 feet after the inter- section. Air. Helms indicated that this condition probably exists at almost every inter- section in the City and probably in most other cities, citing as an example the Barger King at Winchester Blvd. and Hamilton Ave. Avery high traffic volume exists at this point and the driveway is much closer than the driveway under discussion this evening. Commissioner Dickson questioned the downlights and security chain with reflectors. Air. Kee noted that it is the intention of the project to have anon-sight care- taker which will simplify the maintenance of the development. Chairman Kotawski declared the public hearing open and invited arryone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Dale Drumm, applicant, reviewed the project for the Commission noting that they have tried to do everything possible in working with Staff and residents to make this a desirable pmject. The proposed building will be approximately 1 foot above the grade of the residential properties; parking will be 3 feet below the top of curb at Winchester Blvd.; garbage cans will be used by the caretaker and kept out of sight; the manager will be parking his car in his garage; hours will be from 7 a.m. - 8 p.m., with office hours being 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. The construction of the building caters to residential and apartment dwellers and long-term storage. As discussed at the previous meeting, the sunlight received by the residential properties to the iJ-IInediate west will not be affected. Mr. Drumm concluded that he felt there is a need for this type of facility, and that the building will be an asset to the neighborhood, as well as block out a lot of traffic noise. Mr. Ron Harris, property owner, presented pictures to the Commission showing numerous examples of two-story residences in the neighborhood, .noting that - these homes were greater in height that the proposed building, and that there will be no windows overlooking the residential backyards. -5- Mrs. Pat Woodstock, 970 Old Orchard Road, presented pictures to the Commission showing other storage facilities which have been developed by R. L. Crocker, Inc., noting that none of these facilities are located in a residential area. She noted that the development should have a fence higher than 6 foot; that many traffic accidents are not reported because they do not involve injuries; that lunch time is very busy at the 7-11 Store across the street, and this is supposed to be a busy time for the storage facility; and, that the impact on the neighborhood fmm the size of the building is great, in that it covers almost all three adjacent property lines. Mr. Dave Perry, Old Orchard Road, stated that it would only take one car at this intersection to cause an accident. He added that he felt the property was totally unusable. D9rs. Vass, 819 Kenneth Avenue, spoke against the project citing traffic safety. ]~fr. Dod Woodstock, 970 Old Orchard Road, stated he would like to go on record as opposing the development because of traffic hazards, noting that the City should ask it's attorney what position the City would be in if an accident should happen at this intersection after all the debate against development of this site. Mr. Woodstock asked if a signal is to be installed at this intersection, would the entire cost be borne by the developer. Dir. Helms indicated that in the past, the City has not required that the developer construct a signal adjacent to his development; however, Council might develop that policy if it were clearly evident that the development would significantly alter the traffic of the area. Commissioner Kasolas asked Mr. Woodstock if he would still be opposed to this project if there was signalization at this intersection. D'ir. Woodstock responded that he felt a signal would be the only practical solution toward warranting a development at this site. His objection to development is primarily because of traffic hazards. I~~s. Jackie Hammond, Old Orchard Road, stated that she is definitely opposed to this project, citing traffic and aesthetic reasons. Dsrs. Pat McCullough, 771 Old Orchard Road, stated that she had presented a letter to the County asking that they buy this property and straighten out the off-ramp. Since she had not heard from the County as yet, Mrs. McCullough requested that this item be continued until an answer is received from the County. Mrs. JoAnne Puterbaugh, 916 Old Orchard Road, stated that she felt there would be no light coming into her property until mid-morning, and that her view will go directly across a 20 feet building. Mr. Herb Killmeyer, 696 Fmory Avenue, stated that the County has amoral obligation to help solve this problem, in that they created it; and asked that this item be continued until a response is received from the County. Mr. Ken Campbell, 1440 Juanita Way, spoke regarding the traffic patterns on Winchester Blvd. -6- bfr. Ken Rutter, 983 Rabin Lane, spoke against the project citing traffic. Mr. Dale Drtu-un noted to the Commission that a solar study had been presented at the last meeting, indicating that there will be no sun-light blockage after 9-9:30 a.m. Mr. R. L. Crocker stated that they recognize that this is a difficult site, and a highly sensitive area. He felt that the majority of people in the neighborhood are in agreement with this project. The developer has addressed all the issues regarding Staff concerns, neighborhood concerns, and the Commission's concerns, to mitigate the impact of the project on the area. Tir. Crocker continued that if this project is denied, effectively the Planning Commission is condemning this piece of property. R. L. Crocker, Inc., has entered into a contract based on approval of this project; and, experts conclude that this project will not substantially affect the area. Mr. Crocker concluded that the real issue for the Commission to consider is the conformance of this project to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried unani- mously (7-0-0). Commissioner Fairbanks asked that Mr. Dempster respond to the request for continuance made earlier by the audience. Mr. Dempster indicated that the item should not be continued at the audience's request. It was moved by Commissioner Meyer, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Coun- cil approve PD 83-02, subject to conditions as list- ed in the Staff Comment Sheet. T'btion failed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Meyer, Howard NOES: Commissioners: Campos, Fairbanks, Dicksan, Kotowski ABSENT: Commissioners: None Discussion Commissioner Kasolas stated that there appears to be three issues involved in this project: traffic, proper use (mini-storage), and should the property remain open space. He continued that the proposal meets the land use designa- tions set forth by the City Council and appropriate zoning. Regarding traffic, Commissioner Kasolas, continued that the Commission has to rely on the studies completed and the reports made by Staff. He stated that he felt more than comfortable that this project is probably the most desirable type of use from a traffic generation standpoint. Regarding the proper use (mini-storage), Commissioner Kasolas expressed his concern with putting a warehouse on this particular property from the standpoint that this Commission has always been concerned with the aesthetics along Winchester Blvd.; however, he felt that there have been some alternative steps taken to improve the appearance of the building, and would like assurances that the landscaping and property mould be well-maintained. Commissioner Kasolas continued that he felt this -~- project should be favorable considered, in that it is an exercise in futility to think that some governmental agency is going to buy the property and leave it as open space. Commissioner Campos stated that he is speaking against the motion for approval, noting that the .Commission should not be intimidated by the possible condemna- tion of the property. He continued that he saw this intersection as a traffic hazard, in that any additional vehicle trips added to the already reported 35,000 on Winchester Blvd. daily would only be compounding the problem. He added that he has also felt that the property is unusable. To safely negotiate the driveway at 84 feet from the intersection at SO m.p.h. requires a very quick reaction time, and although it looks good on paper, one must also consider the human element. Commissioner Campos concluded that he would submit that this is a traffic hazard. Commissioner Meyer stated that she felt the project is very good in terms of intensity of use. Commissioner Fairbanks stated that she is speaking against the motion for approval based on the feeling that this project would have an adverse impact-- visually and solarly-- lacking compatibility, too large a footprint, and that she was uncomfortable with the traffic movement in and out of the site. Commissioner Howard stated that he was in favor of the project, in that it would have the least traffic impact on the neighborhood. Additionally, the shadow studies presented show that there will not be less sun-light on the adjoining properties, and in fact, the trees growing along the property lines create more of a shadowing problem than the proposed building. He added that he did not see the County relieving this problem. Commissioner Dickson stated that he is against this project. Although the developer has done a good job, the Commission must make sure that the transitions from one type of area to another are smooth. He felt that a single story structure with a little different design would be helpful. Regarding traffic, Commissioner Dickson stated that he felt this area was a bad situation. Additionally, he felt that the density of the use should be looked at, and he felt that the proposed use was too intense. He noted his concern that nothing has been received from the County pertaining to the easements. In conclusion, Commissioner Dickson noted that in regard to the "least impact" situation, the Commission must also make sure that they approve a project with the "right" impact. Chairman Kotowski stated that he is in concurrence with most of the positions expressed by the Commission, and that.he felt that this particular type of development would be disruptive on the area. *** The Commission took a break at 9:25 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:35 p.m. ~~~ -8- GP 83-02 Public hearing to consider the application of Henry Stoner, H, and Elizabeth Stoner for a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan from Low Density Resi- dential to Medium Density Residential and/or Pro- fessional Office on property known as 107 F, 119 E. Latimer Avenue in a R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that the applicant is requesting an amendment to the General Plan Map to change the designation from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and/or Professional Office on the subject property. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed land use designation of Medium Density Residential and/or Professional Office is appropriate in that (1) Latimer Avenue is a busy street and all other properties on the north side between Winchester and Central Ave. (except for 3 single family properties adjacent) are zoned for multiple f~nily or commercial use; (2) Medium Density Residential property is located adjacent to the proposal on the east; (3) the Post Office is located across the street which generates substantial traffic which is not appropriate for a single family area; and (4) the former West Valley College site (adja- cent to the Post Office) has the same designation as requested and is currently being developed with townhomes. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Al Beckett, 1330 E1 Solyo, spoke regarding the zoning on the property. Dir. Kee noted that the proposal is recognizing the use that has been in existence on this property for a long time, and is a legal non-conforming use. No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and second- ed by Commissioner Meyer, that the public hearing be closed. Dbtion carried un- animously (7-0-0). RESOLUTION N0. 2191 It was moved by Commissioner Kasolas, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2191- recommending that the City Council approve GP 83-02. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Meyer, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski NOES: Commissioners: Fairbanks ABSENT: Commissioners: None Discussion Commissioner Fairbanks stated that she was not in favor of the proposed change, noting that this is going to be eating, again, into the properties along Esther Avenue. She also expressed difficulty with the Medium Density Resi- dential and/or Professional Office proposal, noting that she might be in favor of the Professional Office zoning, but not the residential zoning. ~~~ -9- GP 83-06 Public hearing to consider a City-initiated General City-initiated Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and/or Professional Office on property known as 65, 73 $ 85 E. Latimer Avenue in a R-1 (Single Family Residential~_ Zoning District. Mr. Stafford reported that this item is directly related to the previous item (GP 83-02) and the parcels are adjacent to those previously considered. In response to Commissioner Fairbanks concern regarding protection of Esther Avenue residences, Mr. Stafford noted that all the lots discussed this evening are fronting onto Latimer Avenue rather than Esther Avenue, and Staff has taken this into consideration in their recommendation. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited airyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. No one wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried unani- mously (7-0-0). RESOLUTION N0. 2192 It was moved by Commissioner Campos, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2192 recommending approval of GP 83-06. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Meyer, I-bward, Dickson, Kotowski NOES: Commissioners: Fairbanks ABSENT: Commissioners: None Discussion Commissioner Fairbanks noted that she was not in favor of GP 83-06 based on previously expressed concerns under GP 83-02. She indicated that she under- stood how a higher density can be used as a buffer for residential area, but she felt that a better buffer in this area might be something of a lesser use, and that the narrow street is going to create same traffic conerns. ~** GP 83-03 Public hearing to consider the application of Mr. Brown, D. Dan Brown on behalf of Public Storage, Inc., for a General Plan Amendment to add the Industrial land use classification to the existing designation of Medium Density Residential and/or Professional Office on property known as 64 N. Harrison Avenue in a PD (Planned Development) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that the applicant is proposing an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan to .include "Industrial" as a development alter- native for this site, which was the Campbell U-Save Rockery. ~At the present _. time, the site is vacant. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. -10- Mr. Don Buntz, 9665 E1 Costa Ave., San Ramon, appeared before the Commission to represent the applicant and answer arty questions. No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Howard, and second- .. ed by Commissioner Dickson, that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). It was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution ~ recommending that the City Council approve GP 83-03. I~btion failed with the following roll call vote: Discussion Commissioner Kasolas expressed his concern with the possible uses that are allowable under the "Industrial" zoning classification, noting that the mini-storage facility, as discussed earlier, would be one such possibility. He noted that this type of use would not be aesthetically pleasing in the downtown area, and added that the City is now in the middle of a redevelopment project to change the character of the downtown area. Corrnnissioner Fairbanks stated that she concurred with Commissioner Kasolas, in that this property was in the physical downtown area of the City, and she did not think that this was the place for an industrial type of use. Commissioner Howard commented that the Commission is not voting on a possible mini-storage use for this site nor for any other specific plans, it is only considering a change to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Commissioner Kasolas stated that he did not agree with any type of industrial use on this particular piece of property. Vote on Motion for Approval AYES: Commissioners: Meyer, Dickson, Kotowski NOES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Fairbanks, Howard ABSENT: Commissioners: None ~** GP 83-04 Public hearing to consider the application of Mr. Curtis, B. Brian Curtis on behalf of Daiwa House Corporation of America for approval of a General Plan Amendment from Law Density Residential (less than 6 units per gross acre) to Medium Density Residential (14-20 units per gross acre) for properties known as 440 F, 456 Llewellyn Avenue. Mr. Stafford reported that the applicant is requesting approval to change the subject property to Medium Density Residential (14-20 units per gross acre) in order to allow the development of between 28 and 39 residential units. The present general plan designation mould allow a maximum of 11 dwelling units on the 1.99 acre parcel. -11- Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in . the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Brian Curtis, applicant, stated that he is in agreement with the conditions of approval as recommended by Staff, and that he would ,be happy to answer any questions the Commission might have regarding this proposal. Mr. Curtis noted that Daiwa House Corporation will be proposing 31 units for this property. Ms. Suzanne Auger, 453 N. Carlyn Avenue, spoke in opposition to this general plan amendment, noting that she will be directly affected since her property is adjacent to the subject site. She felt that the density change is not compatible with the neighborhood, and would be adverse to the existing neigh- borhood which contains all single family homes. bis.: Auger also cited traffic situations on Hamilton Avenue. In conclusion, she asked that the Commission take, as a matter of record, the petition that was filed opposing development on the parcel the last time a project was proposed. Chairman Kotowski asked Mr. Kee if the former petition could be used in this application. Mr. Kee stated that he was not certain, however, he would ask the City Attorney. Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would object to the introduction of some- thing regarding an application presented in 1981 in that he felt the Commission should make a decision on the merits of the proposal presented this evening. Mrs. Virginia Beckett, 441 N. Carlyn Avenue, spoke in opposition to the Medium Density zoning, noting that she would prefer a professional building. She also noted that the area could not stand any additional traffic. Mr. Alvin Beckett, 1330 E1 Solyo Avenue, spoke against the Medium Density zoning, noting that the entire area was currently Low Density. He added that traffic is a problem, and that the sewer cannot be connected through these properties at this time. He also questioned the situation of the gas tanks on the adjacent property which would be quite near the proposed residential units. Mr. Beckett continued that the City Council would only rule against this proposal once the Commission passed it, and that the decision to stop this project should be made her this evening. Mr. Henry Griffith, 410 N. Carlyn Avenue, spoke in opposition to this proposal, citing the stability of the existing neighborhood, and that this type of pro- ject would have a great impact on the established neighborhood; and, if the higher density was allowed it would be setting a precedent to develop the entire area at a higher density. Mr. Brian Curtis noted that the previous plan being referred to by the residents was for 40 units consisting of 7 three-story buildings and 1 two-story building. He is proposing all one-story buildings on the eastern portion of the property and two-story buildings next to the street. He felt that a higher density was needed to mitigate the zero-lot-line commercial building abutting the property, and did not feel that an additional 20 units would have any impact on the current traffic in the area. -12- No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried animously (7-0-0). Commissioner Howard requested clarification on the sewage problem. Nir. Helms reported that Sanitation District 4 has indicated that it will be possible to provide services to the property. It was moved by Commissioner Meyer, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the Planning Commission adopt 'a resolution recommending that the City Council approve GP 83-04. Motion failed with the following roll call vote: Discussion Commissioner Howard stated that the density is being increased a little too much, and asked about the possibility of Low-Medium Density and/or •Gom~nerf3-e3. Professional. Commissioner Kasolas stated that the request to increase the density does not necessarily mean that the maxim~un amount of units will be built on the parcel. He noted that he was in favor of this general plan amendment because of the statement regarding the 175 foot long commercial building "wall", and that by approving this application, the City may have better flexibility for this property. Vote on Abtion for Approval AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Meyer NOES: Commissioners: Campos, Fairbanks, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski ABSENT: Commissioners: None Commissioner Meyer left the Council Chambers at 10:30 p.m. *** GP 83-05 Public hearing to consider the application of Mr. Hamilton, Ai. Tiichael Hamilton on behalf of Landstock, Inc. , for a General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential (less than 6 units per gross acre) to Industrial for a portion of property known as 750 McGlincey Lane in an R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Kee stated that Staff is recommending a continuance of GP 83-OS to June 14, 1983 in order that this item might be properly noticed in the newspaper, in that the address of the property had been incorrectly published. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Fred Wagner, 690 Parkdale Drive, requested clarification of the proposal, and stated he would be in agreement with the proposal if it was going to be light industrial. No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Campos, that GP 83-OS be continued to the meeting of June 14, 1983. Notion carried with~a vote of 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner Meyer being absent, and Commissioner Kasolas abstaining due to a possible conflict of interest. ~*~ -13- V 83-01 Public hearing to consider the application of Mr. McClements, J. John blcClementsfor a variance to the fencing height requirement to allow the construction of a 7'3" fence in a required front yard area on property known as 1244 Harriet Avenue in an Interim (Low Density Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Stafford reported that Staff is of the opinion that the applicant has not demonstrated that this property is unique or different from others in the area; consequently Staff cannot support the variance requested. Additionally, Staff is of the opinion that the layout of the living unit has created self- imposed hardship which is not associated with the land or parcel. However, if the Commission supports the applicant's request for a variance to the setback requirement, Staff would support the request for a higher fence due to the slope of this lot, ili that it decreases in elevation as it moves from the street frontage. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr John McClements, applicant, presented pictures of the property to the Commission, and noted that in his opinion the property would be unique in that the design of the house does not allow the owner the use of the french door--and this development was approved by the City. The fence that is being proposed is a way of giving the owner some usefulness to the doors, and will not harm or affect anyone in the neighborhood. No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). Discussion Commissioner Kasolas noted that he would like to remind the Commission that the issue of fences and fence types has been before the Commission several times, with similar types of requests for properties off Pollard Road -- and each has been denied. Commissioner Campos asked if the 6 foot height requirement was part of the Fire Department requirements. bir. Kee responded that he did not believe it was; and, again, Staff does not have a problem with the height of the fence in this instance--only with the setback. RESOLUTION N0. 2193 It was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2193 denying V 83-01. Dbtion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Fairbanks, Howard, Dickson NOES: Commissioners: Kotowski ABSENT: Commissioners: Meyer Mr. Kee informed the applicant of the appeal pmcess. ~** -14- V 83-03 Public hearing to consider the application of Mr. West, L. Lewis West for a variance to Section 21.08.020(7) of the Campbell Municipal Code to allow (1) a variance from 5' to 1' for the required sideyard setback; (2) a variance from 10' to 5' for the required setback between buildings; and (3) a variance to the requirement that an accessory building be located on the rear half of the lot, on property known as 1350 Juanita Way in an Interim (Low Density Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Stafford reviewed this application for the Commission, noting that Staff cannot support this variance request in that it is Staff's opinion that a hardship unique to the property has not been demonstrated. This is a building which was constructed illegally and failed to meet City standards, and is in further violation of City code in that it is being used as a living unit. Although the present property owner may not have been aware that the building was illegal when he purchased the property, Staff is of the opinion that this does not justify the request. The Recording Secretary read into the record a letter from Mr. Charles T. Schroll, 350 Budd Avenue, Campbell (attached hereto) regarding the history of the property. Commissioner Kasolas asked if this situation might be made legal under the A4ello Bill or Granny Flats legislation. bir. Stafford stated that the law would require the building be in compliance with all zoning setbacks, and the code violations that exist would be the setbacks. Tir. Kee noted that it is his understanding that if the Additional Living Units ordinance were approved by the Council, it would permit the additional unit. Then the applicant could apply for that additional unit under a Use Permit procedure, which would then bring a Use Permit application and a Variance application before the Commission. }-bwever, there would be some difficulty in meeting the building codes with the wall only 1 foot off the property line. Commissioner Fairbanks asked about the permits for the structure and when the structure was built. Mr. Kee indicated that the property came into the City in 1980, and the pro- cedure is that if it was a legal use in the County, then it would be a legal use in the City. However, the County has no evidence of it being approved, and Staff can only come to the conclusion that it was not legal in the County. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mrs. Claire Daggett, 102 LuRay Drive, Los Gatos, adjoining property owner, noted that the building is approximately 10" from her property line and the eaves actually hang over into her property. She added that it is her understanding that the structure did not meet the standards for 30 years ago, and she requested a denial of the variance. She also presented pictures of the structure taken from her property, noting that the building presented a solid wall. -15- Commissioner Fairbanks asked how the applicant might bring this structure up to code. Dtr. Kee responded that the applicant would have to bring the building up to code for an accessory building. Commissioner Howard asked the size of the lot. Dir. Kee indicated the lot size to be approximately 10,500 sq.ft. Mr. Greg Bacon, 1350 Juanita Way, stated that he is renting the front residence, and that it is true that there are two separate residences on the property. He noted that he has been trying to get the property owner to deal with the code violations that exist on the property for some time, however to no avail. Mr. Bacon continued that the accessory building is a complete house with some- one living in it, and he did not think the Commission should allow this situa- tion to continue. Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would like to record to show that if there is a problem between the tenant and the landlord, it does not concern the Commission. Mr. Lew West, applicant, stated that he has been searching for the permits however the search has not been completed yet. The intent is to attach the accessory building to the existing house in order to comply with the granny flat legislation. Commissioner Fairbanks asked Mr. West if he would prefer to have this item continued. Mr. West indicated that he would prefer to have it settled this evening. Mr. Kenneth Campbell, 1441 Juanita Way, stated that he knew the "little" house very well and had never heard arty complaints about it. He has lived in the area since 1957, and that several years ago residents on the street assured him that the structure had a permit. Mr. George Dallas, 17491 Hicks Road, Los Gatos, property owner, stated that he would like to retain the back living unit, and that he felt the property was unique in that this structure has been in existence for 28 years. It would be a terrible burden if he had to tear it down. City Attorney Dempster noted that the City cannot consider anything pertaining to granny flats until an ordinance is adopted, or the State law takes affect. He suggested that this item be continued and that the applicant continue his search for building permits until an ordinance is adopted. Discussion ensued concerning the possible requirements of the Additional Living Units Ordinance, the possibility of finding the necessary permits, the use of the accessory building as a living unit at this time, and the acceptability of a continuance. Mr. Bill Dallas gave a brief history of the problem, and noted~he would like to hear what the Commission had to say this evening. -16- Mr. George Dallas stated that he would be in favor of a continuance. It was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that V 83-03 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 14, 1983. A9otion carried unanimously (6-0-1). *** TA 83-04 Public hearing to consider the application of b1r. Hester, L. Larry Hester for a Text Amendment to amend Sections 21.32.020 and 21.64.080 of the Campbell Municipal Code to allow the conversion of single family residences to office use in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District, with approval of a use permit. Mr. Kee reviewed this application for the Commission, noting that a similar restriction on the use of residential buildings also applied to the commercial zoning districts; and, in 1978 under proceedings known as TA 78-1, the Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. 1704 recommending residential conversions be permitted in the commercial zoning districts subject to approval of a use permit and site and architectural approval. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Tor. Warren Jacobson, 621 E. Campbell Ave., spoke in favor of allowing these types of conversions. No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). RESOLUTION N0. 2194 It was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 219 4 recommending approval of TA 83-04, allowing the conversion of single family residences to office use in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District with approval of a use permit. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Fairbanks, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Meyer ~*~ GP 82-05 Continued public hearing to consider possible amend- City-initiated ments to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Mr. Kee reviewed this item for the Commission, noting that additions to the present Circulation Element have been recommended which address the concerns for alternative street improvements in certain areas of the City. -17- At this time, a petition dated February 28, 1983, opposing any changes to' the Circulation Element and asking that any plans for widening or extending Abbott Avenue or other streets in the San Tomas Area be eliminated from the Circulation Element (attached hereto). Dir. Helms reviewed the Circulation Element, speaking specifically regarding policies enumerated on page 3 pertaining to the construction of new streets in the City. Commissioner Fairbanks asked if the map in the Circulation Element showed the proposed street extending Campisi Way over the creek and through the mobilehome park. Dir. Helms explained that this proposed street was not shown on the existing Circulation Element Map, but is referred to in the "Policies" portion of the proposed element (page 3). Commissioner Fairbanks asked if the enumerations are intended to be the written text for the Circulation Element in total. Mr. Kee indicated that the text would be the Circulation Element Policies as they are stated. Commissioner Fairbanks noted that she believes, for the most part, that these 12 enumerations are the existing policies, and expressed her concern that Policy #1 appears to dilute Section C. Community Needs on page 5. She added that she would not like to see 'those enumerate po ides be separated from the Community Needs. She also noted that she did not want to see only the streets that were indicated with "hash marks" on the Alternative Street Improvement map be the only streets that might be considered for these alternative types of improvements. Commissioner Fairbanks added that she would like to see a "rural" standard for improvements included, as well as one for industrial areas. Dir. Kee noted that he understands Policy #1 to state that all through traffic should be contained on arterial-tvue streets. Dir. Helms indicated, regarding the map showing streets possible for alternative improvements, that San Tomas Aquino Road and Burrows were not included because of all the types of uses on the street. He noted that the streets listed here are only suggestions. Staff was attempting to exhibit the streets that it felt comfortable with for consideration for alternative improvements, and felt that they did not necessarily have to address the specifics at this point regarding standards . Commissioner Campos asked when the extension of Abbott was first proposed (regarding the petition received on this item). Dir. Helms indicated that it was around the time the shopping center at Rolling Hills was constructed, at the corner of San Tomas Aquino Road and Hacienda. In order to have a reasonable circulation pattern in the area, it would be necessary to widen the Burrows extension. It was a Council Polity decision that this should ultimately become the arterial because of impact on resi- dential properties, and other streets in the area. -18- Commissioner Campos asked if all the improvements on Harriet Avenue have been made on the premise of widening that street. Nlr. Helms indicated that one section of Harriet already existed at the time of the policy decision. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Nlr. Clement Tobacco, 1181 Abbott Avenue, asked about the status of Route 85. Nfr. Helms noted that Route 85 is quite active at this time, and funds were recently appropriated to acquire right-of-way and initial designs have been started. Nlr. Tiilton Brown, 1181 Steinway Avenue, if there are any plans to run Abbott Avenue all the way down to Winchester Blvd. NIr. Helms indicated that Abbott would terminate at Pollard Road. Nir. Bill Topolsky, 1545 Hacienda Avenue, stated that he felt Harriet presently serves the San Tomas community very well, and putting the street all the way through to Pollard does not help the community,in that it will take up open space and create traffic hazards. No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Campos, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that the public hearing be closed. Notion carried unanimously (6-0-1). Discussion Commissioner Dickson noted that no one likes traffic going through the neigh- borhood, and that main arterial streets were necessary to take the brunt of the traffic off the residential streets. RESOLUTI~1 N0. 219 5 It was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2195 recommending approval of GP 82-05 - Circulation Element. Notion carried with the following roll call vote: Discussion Commissioner Fairbanks stated that she is speaking against the motion for approval, in that she is not in favor of putting Harriet through to Abbott, and did not feel that this would be a service to the community. She felt that there should be away to route the traffic around the City--not through it. Additionally, Commissioner Fairbanks stated that she felt now was the time to incorporate rural standards and industrial standards into the element; and, that it be made clear that streets proposed for alternative improvements, as indicated in the element, may be altered to include or delete other streets in the area. Commissioner I-bward stated that he did not see any way of getting around the extension of Harriet, and would be speaking for the element as presented. -19- Commissioner Kasolas stated that the Circulation Element is meant to address the even flow of traffic through the community, the present street patterns are not going to be changed and the only thing that can be done is to improve what is existing. Commissioner Campos stated that he felt the development of the streets as proposed in the circulation element would help the traffic on the side streets, and will enhance the total community by alleviating some of the traffic problems. Vote on Motion for Approval AYES: NOES ABSENT: Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski Fairbanks Meyer MISCELLANEOUS **~ It was the consensus of the Commission that Item No. 15 be considered at this time. Fencing Appeal Appeal from the decision of the Planning and Public Works Directors to reduce fence setback on property known as 1162 Bucknam Avenue in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Fairbanks reported that this item had been considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee this morning, and the Committee is recommend- ing that the Commission uphold the decision of the Planning Director and the Public Works Director. Mr. Kee reviewed this request for the Commission, noting that it is before the Commission because the neighbors are appealing the decision to allow the fence to remain. Commissioner Fairbanks stated that the reason for the Committee's recommenda- tion to uphold the decision of the Planning Director is that the fence is nicely done and hides some rather unsightly things. The Committee felt that it was not a detriment to the neighborhood at all. Commissioner Howard commented that there does not appear to be a problem with line of sight for the adjoining property at 1160 Buckram Court, and he felt that the fence improved the looks of the neighborhood. Commissioner Kasolas asked if there had ever been a similar fence approved in the City, and if so, where. Mr. Kee indicated that there were several examples of this type of fencing-- Latimer Avenue, Brandenberry Avenue, Hazel Avenue--usually corner lots. The code provides for a 15 foot setback on corner lots, unless there is no visibility problem. Then the code provides for Planning Director and Public Works Director approval . -20- Commissioner Kasolas asked how this situation was different from the previous fencing request discussed this evening. City Attorney Dempster indicated that this request is for a corner lot, whereas the previous request was an interior lot requesting fencing in it's front yard setback. Mrs. Mary Roberts, 1165 Bucknam Court, stated that the fence caused a site problem, and she objected to the "crude looking" fence facing her property. Mr. Allan Sanderson, 106 Pinewood, Los Gatos, stated that he is purchasing the house at 1165 Bucknam Court, and noted that the wood fence does not fit in with the neighborhood, and it obstructs the view causing safety hazards for small children in the area. Dors. Sophie Pounding, 1167 Buclmam Court, stated that the fence degenerates the neighborhood, and that the one foot setback from the sidewalk will not be easy to landscape. Additionally, she felt the fence was a great place for graffiti. She asked that the fence be set back, since it was built without approval, and that she did not want it there. Dis. Kathryn Nadel, Bucknam Court, stated that she is in concurrence with what the other speakers have said. Dir. Bob Roberts, 1165 Bucknam Court, asked what purpose was served in having zoning laws for one man to go against, and that the fence served no purpose. It was moved by Commissioner Kasolas, and seconded by Commissioner Campos, that this appeal be granted, and that the decision of the Planning Director and the Public Works Director be reversed. Discussion Commissioner Howard stated that he would be voting against this motion, in that he felt that a sideyard is always a problem when you have a corner lot. He felt that the fencing has been done in a very nice manner, and that the property owner has every right in requesting a variance. Commissioner Campos stated that he was not in favor of the fence because it appears to cause site problems. Commissioner Fairbanks indicated her concern that the fence was constructed without a permit. Vote on Notion to Grant Appeal AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Dickson, Kotowski NOES: Commissioners: Fairbanks, Howard ABSENT: Commissioners: Meyer. ~~* -21- PUBLIC HEARINGS TA 83-02 Continued public hearing to consider a City-initiated City-initiated text amendment adding Chapter 21.19 (Additional Living Units) to the Campbell Municipal Code, allowing addi- tional living units in Single Family and other resi- dential districts under certain conditions. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. No one wishing to speak at this time, it was moved by Commissioner I-bward, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that TA 83-02 be continued to the meeting of June 14, 1983 due to the lateness of the hour. Notion carried unanimously (6-0-1). *** GP 83-07 City-initiated public hearing for the purpose of City-initiated consolidating the existing General Plan Elements into a single document with common format. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. No one wishing to speak at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that GP 83-07 be continued to the meeting of June 14, 1983 due to the lateness of the hour. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). AsISCELLAI`'EOUS Staff Report Staff report regarding proposed procedure for Landscape Advisor. It was the consensus of the Commission that this staff report be continued to the meeting of June 14, 1983. *~* ADJOUR'~A'IEN'T It was moved by Commissioner Kasolas, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that the meeting be adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 12:50 p.m. ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee ecretary APPROVED: Michael F. Kotowski airman RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis ecor ing ecretary