Loading...
PC Min 04/26/1983PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, 7:30 P.M. MINUTES APRIL 26, 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(8:17), Kotowski; Planning Director Arthur A. Kee, Principal Planner Philip J. Stafford, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, City Attorney J. Robert Dempster, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent None APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 26, 1983 It was moved by Commissioner Meyer, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of April 12, 1983 as submitted. Motion carried with a vote of 4-0-2-1, with Conxnissioners Kasolas and Dickson being absent, and Commissioner Howard abstaining due to absence on April 12, 1983. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Kee noted that correspondence received pertained to specific items on the agenda and would be presented at that time. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS S 83-03 Continued application of Mr. Jack Nelson for approval Nelson, J. of plans and elevations to allow the construction of a 10,890 sq.ft. industrial/office building on property known as 1320 Whiteoaks Road in a M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Commissioner Fairbanks reported that this item had been considered at the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting this morning. The Committee is re- commending approval subject to redlining of the plans and conditions as listed in the Staff Comment Sheet. This recommendation is based on the discussion with the applicant this morning in that the Committee feels comfortable with the re- commended changes coming back to the Planning Director for his approval. Chairman Kotowski asked if the applicant is committed to the reduction in build- ing square footage of approximately 1,000 sq.ft. to reduce parking required for this project. -3- Mr. Kee stated that it is his understanding that with the conditons as recommended for this project, the applicant would be committed to this recommended reduction in building square footage. It was. moved by Commissioner Meyer, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the Planning Commission approve S 83-03 subject to conditions as listed in the Staff Comment Sheet and as red-lined. Motion carried with a vote of 6-0-1, with Commissioner Dickson being absent. S 83-04 Application of Mr. Gary Kraft on behalf of People's Kraft, G. Restaurants, Inc., for approval of plans and ele- vations to allow the construction of a 625 sq.ft. addition to an existing restaurent (Jolly Roger) on property known as 1555 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Fairbanks reported that this item had been considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee this morning. The Committee is recommending a continuance to the meeting of May 10, 1983 in order that the applicant may address concerns presented by Staff. The applicant is in agreement with this continuance. Commissioner Campos requested clarification on the occupancy levels as addressed by the Fire Department. Commissioner Fairbanks noted that the Fire Department, in it's comments, re- stricted the occupancy of the restaurant to 170 people. The Committee has suggested that the applicant discuss this with the Fire Department. It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that S 83-04 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 1983 in order that the applicant may address concerns expressed by Staff and the Site and Architectural Review Committee. Motion carried with a vote of 6-0-1. S 83-06 Application of Mr. Marv Iverson on behalf of Pay-n-Pak Iverson, M. Stores for approval of plans and elevations to allow exterior modifications to an existing building and the addition of a 4,382 sq.ft. mezzanine on property known as 1750 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Fairbanks reported that this item had been reviewed by the Site and Architectural Review Committee, and the Committee is recommending approval, sub- ject to conditions listed in the. Staff Comment Sheet. The applicant is in agree- ment with Committee and Staff recommendations, and will address these concerns to the satisfaction of the Commission. Mr. Kee noted that Staff is in agreement with the recommendation of the Committee. -3- It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the Planning Commission approve S 83-06, subject to conditions listed in the Staff Comment Sheet. Motion carried with a vote of 6-0-1. *** PUBLIC HEARINGS PD 83-02 Continued public hearing to consider the application Crocker, R. L. of Mr. Dale Drumm on behalf of R. L. Crocker , Inc., fora Planned Development Permit to allow the con- struction of a 45,440 sq.ft. mini-storage warehouse 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 was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee this morning. The Committee is recommending a continuance. Some of the items discussed in the Site meeting were: larger unpaved area around the trees; a wider setback from the property line adjacent to the residential area; the landscaping on the county right-of-way in the area; and the traffic. Mr. Helms noted that Public Works Staff has spoken with County Staff regarding the landscaping on their property, and the County will be happy to trim the landscaping. Additionally, Staff is comfortable that the applicant has addressed the concerns expressed pertaining to traffic. Commissioner Fairbanks noted her personal concern with the fact that the building is designed as a two-story facility. Commissioner Howard expressed his concern with the location of the building being too close to the adjacent residential property lines, and noted he did not have a concern with the two-story height. Commissioner Fairbanks further reported that at the last meeting, residents of the area had presented a list of "wants" for the development. She noted that the applicant is meeting all those requests except for the single story building. Chairman Kotowski questioned the discrepancies in the square footage of the building as presented in the staff report. Mr. Kee noted that the original notice of hearing was published representing 45,440 square feet of building area; however, the original plans calculated to be 40,878 square feet. The revised plans, as presented this evening, indicate 44,860 square feet of building area. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Dale Drumm, applicant, stated that revised plans have taken into consideration the concerns expressed by Staff and the Commission. -4- Commissioner Campos asked Mr. Drumm if he had solicited the petition that is presented to the Commission this evening (attached hereto); and, how many signatures on Old Orchard Road were adjacent or abutting this develop- ment. Mr. Drumm responded that he had solicited the petition, and noted that signatures from the three properties abutting the subject development had not been obtained. The signatures obtained from Budd Avenue were to show the need for this type of facility in the area. Chairman Kotowski noted that although the Commission is concerned with the residents in the area, they are particularly concerned with those residents closest to the subject development. Commissioner Kasolas stated that petitions should not be limited to any one area, but rather to anyone who wished to speak on an item. Commissioner Meyer asked Mr. Kee if this petition is the first that has been submitted in favor of a particular project. (Commissioner Dickson entered the chambers at 8:17 p.m.) Mr. Ron Harris, 817 Dillon Avenue, property owner, appeared before the Commission to give a history of the developments which have been proposed for this site. He noted that this particular use would have a minimum im- pact on neighboring streets, would be a good noise buffer between Winchester Blvd. and the residential area, would be an attractive building, would have a resident manager, and would provide a needed service. He asked the Commission for a favorable decision. Mrs. Marilyn Harris, 81i Dillon Avenue, appeared before the Commission to speak in favor of this project. Ms. Lynn McLaugherty, La Valencia Apartments, Budd Avenue, appeared before the Commission to speak in favor of this project, noting that it would provide a needed service to the area. Ms. Rita Barker, 3016 Glen Canyon,,Scotts Valley, appeared before the Commission to speak in favor of this project, noting that she had lived in this area until just recently, and that a mini-storage facility was needed. Mr. Brian Kelly spoke in favor of this project. Mr. Bill Puterbaugh, 916 Old Orchard Road, stated that he did not feel this project was aesthetically right for this site, and asked if a traffic study has been done particularly as it pertains to the ingress/egress of the site. Chairman Kotowski asked Mr. Helms for the recommendation of the Public Works Department regarding traffic. Mr. Helms noted that Staff is recommending approval. -5- Mrs. Jody Puterbaugh, 916 Old Orchard Road, asked if the Commission would like to have a two-story "wall" to look at from their home. Mrs. Pat Woodstock, Old Orchard Road, spoke on the history of the site, and noted that a two-story building would block off the sunlight to her home. She also noted the traffic problems in the area. No one else wishing to speak at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Kasolas, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that PD 83-02 be con- tinued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 1983. Motion carried with a vote of 7-0-0. Mr. Helms noted to the Commission that he would not be in attendance at the meeting on May 10; however, there would be a representative from Public Works present. Commissioner Kasolas stated that he would like to suggest that the amount of sunlight upon the adjacent residents be calculated in the revised plans, noting that he would like to have some facts regarding this. Commissioner Campos noted that he would like to see some of the traffic studies from previous proposals on this site, as far as traffic flows, speeds, traffic lights, etc. Mr. Drumm noted that a new traffic study has been completed, and this in- formation has been included in the Commission's packets this evening. *** V 83-02 Public hearing to consider the application of Jaques Jaques Con- Construction Inc. for a 3-foot variance to the sideyard struction setback to allow the construction of a carport on pro- perty known as 1045 Shady Dale Avenue in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that the applicant is requesting a 3-foot variance to the side- yard setback to allow construction of a carport. A 10-foot masonry wall is pro- posed to be built on the property line with the carport attached to it. The carport is proposed to be constructed in front of, and attached to, an existing two-car garage. This garage has setbacks of only 1-foot on two sides. Staff is of the opinion that a hardship unique to the property itself has not been demonstrated in this case; additionally, a 10-foot wall on the property line to support the carport is not considered desirable. Staff realizes that with the carport setback 3-feet as required, it would be more difficult for a car to park because of the narrow depth of the driveway and the position of the house. How- ever, these factors were created when the house was originally constructed and the garage was constructed to allow access by two cars at that time. He con- cluded that Staff is recommending a denial of this request. Commissioner Howard questioned the need for a carport when there is already a garage. Mr. Kee responded that it is his understanding that the applicant has a need for additional covered parking. -6- Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the _ audience to speak for or against this item. Mrs. Diane Jaques, 1061 Shady Dale Avenue, appeared before the Commission to speak in favor of this application, citing reasons of privacy. Mr. John Jaques, 1061 Shady Dale Avenue, noted that because of the grading on the adjacent commercial property the wall is only 45" high from the subject property's side, thus creating a privacy problem for the resident. Mr. Greg Robinson, 1045 Shady Dale Avenue, spoke in favor of this request, noting that there is a lack of privacy for his residence. Mr. Joe Gemma, 2160 S. Bascom Avenue, appeared before the Commission noting that when he originally designed his project, this problem was addressed. However, because Mrs. Robinson did not want the commercial building abutting the property line, the building was redesigned thus creating the problem she is presenting this evening. Mr. Gemma continued that the additional height to the existing wall would not be aesthetically pleasing, and asked that it remain the way it is. Chairman Kotowski asked about the type of businesses in the commercial building which might generate the type of trash that is being thrown over the fence onto the residential property. Mr. Gemma responded that there is no such business in his building, and noted that he is screening the types of businesses that might lease from him in order that the development be quiet, office-type uses. Chairman Kotowski asked about the differences in grades on the two properties. Mr. Kee noted that the measurement for the grade is usually taken from the lowest site. Mr. Kee continued that Staff has taken a very strict stand in their recommendation to the Commission, in that Staff does not recall any other instances where the differences of grades on the property has provided the necessary stipulations for a variance. Commissioner Dickson stated that perhaps the Commission should consider the measurements for the fence height from the commercial property rather than the residential property. Mr. Jaques noted that the reason Mrs. Robinson did not wish to have the commercial building constructed on the property line, in the original application, was that it would have blocked out all of her sunlight. The proposed wall will be con- st~rueted of slumpstone and will have some clear tiles in it in order to preserve some natural light coming into the carport. The wall will not run the entire property line at the same height, but will drop down to the existing level along the garage. No one else 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). -7- Motion It was moved by Commissioner Kasolas and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that V 83-02 be denied. Discussion of Motion Commissioner Dickson stated that because of the grade separation, a uniqueness exists that could validate a variance. Commissioner Fairbanks noted that she was in agreement with Commissioner Dickson. Vote on Motion for Denial AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Meyer NOES: Commissioners: Campos, Fairbanks, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski ABSENT: Commissioners: None Motion It was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that V 83-02 be approved. Discussion of Motion Commissioner Kasolas noted that the commercial development adjacent to this subject residential lot is one of the nicest commercial developments in the area; and, that he is concerned that if there is to be a carport and an extension to the existing slumpstone wall, that the wall be carried all the way down the property line to make it architecturally attractive. He con- tinued that the wall should be made of the same material as the existing wall so that it does not detract from the commercial development. Commissioner Howard stated that he was in agreement with Commissioner Kasolas. He felt that a mental hardship possibly exists in this instance, pertaining to a lack of privacy for the residential property. Amendment to Motion for Approval Commissioner Kasolas moved, and Commissioner Howard seconded, that the motion for approval be amended to include that the wall be carried all the way down along the property line, not only along the carport. Discussion of Amendment to Motion for Approval Commissioner Fairbanks stated her concern that the recommendation for approval would now require the applicant to do something that has not been discussed with the applicant. She noted that she would prefer to continue this item rather than require the applicant to do something that may not be financially possible. Mr. Jaques stated that he understood the proposed amendment; however, he would like to work with the Building Department to design something that would screen the residential property, yet provide light. He noted that there is a problem in getting into the area behind the yard (abutting the property line of the Yardstick) and he would not be able to carry the wall to the most northerly point. -8- Chairman Kotowski noted that perhaps a continuance might be desirable in order that the applicant might draw up plans addressing the concerns ex- pressed this evening. At this time, Commissioner Howard withdrew his second on the amendment to the motion for approval; Commissioner Kasolas withdrew his motion for an amendment to the motion for approval; and, Commissioner Howard withdrew his second on the amendment for approval, and Commissioner Fairbanks withdrew her motion for approval. It was moved by Commissioner Meyer, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the public hearing be re-opened. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). Commissioner Fairbanks moved, and Commissioner Meyer seconded, that V 83-02 be continued to the meeting of May 10, 1983 in order that the applicant could submit plans addressing the concerns expressed by the Commission. It was the concensus of the Commission that Item No. 9, SA 83-19, be taken out of order at this time, as well as Item No. 10, S 82-16. MISCELLANEOUS SA 83-19 Signing request for Pay-n-Pak located on property Pay-n-Pak known as 1750 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. __ Commissioner Fairbanks noted that this item had been considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee this morning, and the Committee is re- commending a continuance to the meeting of May 10, with the concurrence of the applicant. It was moved by Commissioner Kasolas, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that SA 83-19 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 1983. Motion carried unanimously (7-0-0). S 82-16 Request of Mr. Richard Pasek for a modification of Pasek, R. a condition of approval on previously approved site plans on property known as 940 McGlincey Lane in a M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Mr. Kee reported that at its meeting of January 11, 1983, the Planning Commission approved the application of Mr. Richard Pasek to allow the establishment of a lumber storage yard on the subject property. Condition 0 of that approval re- quired the applicant to submit a letter, satisfactory to the City Attorney, agreeing to vacate the property within 3 months (on or before May 12, 1983), if project improvements were not ~i.nstalled as required by Condition M. The applicant at this time is requesting an extension to June 12, 1983 to vacate the subject property due to a delay in construction of his new facility in the City of San Jose. Staff considers the request reasonable due to the unusual weather and would recommend that Condition 0 be changed to read: "0. Applicant to submit a letter, satisfactory to the City Attorney, within 10 days of approval of this modification, agreeing to vacate this property on or before June 12, 1983." -9- It was moved by Commissioner Kasolas, and seconded by Commissioner Campos, that the Planning Commission approve this request for a 30-day extension of time to vacate the subject property. Motion carried with a vote of 6-1-0. *** The Commission took a break at 9:22; the meeting reconvened at 9:32 p. m. *** PUBLIC HEARINGS EIR 83-01 Public hearing to consider the City-initiated Draft City-initiated Environmental Impact Report for a proposed redevelop- ment project for the elimination of blight in the Downtown Area of the City of Campbell. Mr. Stafford presented the Draft EIR noting that the draft has been referred to the persons and agencies indicated in the Commission's packet. Additionally, comments received from those agencies notified have been received and have been responded to by Staff in Exhibits B and C. Since the City Council has denied the application for the Prometheus Development's proposed office com- plex, Staff is recommending that any reference to this project be excluded from consideration. However, Staff does not recommend deleting the area of the mobilehome park at 920 E. Hamilton Avenue from the project area because the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Zoning Map indicate a commer- cial use for this site. Mr. Stafford continued that Staff is recommending that the Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council certify the Draft EIR as complete; and, that the Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Central Campbell Redevelopment Plan. Commissioner Fairbanks asked if the additional recommendation regarding the adoption of the Plan required legal noticing. Additionally, Commissioner Fairbanks asked if financing of this project was to be .discussed this evening, referring to the statement in the resolution (included in packet) regarding method of financing and economic feasibility. Mr. Stafford responded that the EIR was properly noticed for hearing; and, it is Staff's understanding that noticing is not required for the Plan. Al- though methods of financing and economic feasibility will not be discussed this evening, these subjects were addressed in a special study session earlier this year. Commissioner Fairbanks stated that she is concerned about addressing herself to the subject of financing and economic feasibility, in that as a Planning Commissioner she is feeling that this is not her charge. Mr. Stafford indicated that the particular wording of this phrase states that the Commission has "reviewed" these topics, and this is not taking a particular stand on the issues. -10- Commissioner Campos referred to the letter from the Public Utilities Commission, and asked if there is anything in those rules that would affect or impact what the Commission is voting on. ~ ~, Mr•. Stafford stated that there is not. Essentially the PUC is saying that any actions affecting them would require PUC approval. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against.this item. Mr. Jack Schoop, County Planning Director, appeared before the Commission to speak of the concerns of the County of Santa Clara. Mr. Schoop noted that the items of concern are currently being negotiated,; however, he would like the Commission to be aware of these concerns. Regarding the tax increment approach of financing, the redevelopment agency would not only be capturing the yearly taxes, but also the county taxes, the school district taxes, and the special districts taxes. Mr. Schoop discussed at length the comments from the County, and Staff's responses, as indicated i;n~ the Commission's packet. Mr. Schoop continued that it is the County's contention that the City has not responded adequately to their concerns about cumulative resources, and the County would ask that the City look at this closer. The City has indi- cated in negotiations that the County will get 2% of the taxes, instead of 24%. The County is requesting that the City move closer to the 24%. Commissioner Campos asked if the pending legislation regarding redevelopment projects is adopted, what impact would it have in the adoption of this re- development plan. Mr. Schoop stated that this has not been determined at this time. Commissioner Kasolas asked if the County was primarily concerned that the development that is proposed in the redevelopment area would be accomplished without redevelopment, on a private level. Mr. Schoop noted that it is the County's belief that a large number of projects in this area would be accomplished without redeveloped, in that the market is picking up and development would occur. Chairman Kotowski asked if there has been any discussion regarding the overlapping of services between the County and the City, i.e. paramedical, fire, police. Mr. Schoop responded that most services are operated so that there is no over- lapping. Mr. Kee stated that Staff appreciates the comments from the County, and has not taken them lightly. Staff would disagree, however, with the section regarding cumulative development projects. Staff has attempted to follow the environ- mental rules, as understood by Staff, right down the line. City Manager Ed Schilling spoke at length regarding the various aspects of the EIR. Mr. William F. Jennings, 219 Dillon Avenue, asked how long it would be before his property would be condemned and what kind of plans he should be making. -11- Mr. Schilling responded that the timing of the project for the Gilman/Dillon area is uncertain; however, it is not likely that it will happen in the first five years of the project because of the scope and cost of the project. No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried unani- mously. RESOLUTION N0. 2185 It was moved by Commissioner Dickson ,and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2185 recommending that the City Council certify the Draft EIR as complete. Discussion on Motion Commissioner Fairbanks noted that she will be speaking against the motion to adopt the EIR based on (page 8) the report not considering recreation. Also, on page~l4 of the EIR, Commissioner Fairbanks noted that she was uncomfortable that theEIR does not address in more detail that 11 acres referred to; or any of the open space within the project area, how it would impact the project area, and the outlining areas. Commissioner Fairbanks stated that she was uncomfortable that it was determined that this subject was not significant. She also expressed concern with mitigating measures for the impacting of out- lying areas. Vote on Resolution AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Meyer, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski NOES: Commissioners: Fairbanks ABSENT: Commissioners: None RESOLUTION N0. 2186 It was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2186 recommending that the City Council adopt the Central Campbell Redevelopment Plan. Discussion on Motion Commissioner Dickson stated that he is making this motion, with the policy in mind of the charge of the Planning Commission to look at things that come before the Commission with relation to the General Plan--it is his belief that the Plan is in accordance with the General Plan. Commissioner based on conc about the rea ject area, as tinned that t to a smaller ments; and is of refusal. Fairbanks noted that she will be speaking against this resolution ern for the expanse of the project area. She expressed concern sons that the Hamilton Mobilehome Park site is included in the pro- well as the Hamilton School site. Commissioner Fairbanks con- he redevelopment area dealing with blight needs to be brought down area; she has concerns about using redevelopment for public improve- concerned that the persons being displaced should have first right -12- Commissioner Kasolas stated that at a previous meeting he had indicated some _ concerns with the expansiveness of the project, and that subsequently he has undertaken a study of those concerns. He continued that the Hamilton School site is included because of ingress/egress problems; Salmar Avenue is a pro- blem with traffic movement; and 920 E. Hamilton Avenue has roblems with in ress/ P 9 egress and displacement of residents in the future. There is also a need to have a large enough project area to make redevelopment viable. Commissioner Kasolas stated that he is supporting this resolution. Vote on Resolution No. 2186 AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Meyer, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski NOES: Commissioners: Fairbanks ABSENT: Commissioners: None TA 83-02 Public hearing to consider a City-initiated text City-initiated amendment adding Chapter 21.19 (Secondary Living Units) to the Campbell Municipal Code, allowing secondary living units in Single Family and other residential districts under certain conditions. Mr. Kee reported that on September 27, 1982, the Governor signed into law SB 1534, the "Companion Unit" bill carried by Senator Mello. Unless local jurisdictions enact their own ordinance by July 1, 1983 the bill requires a jurisdiction to grant a conditional use permit for the creation of a second residential unit of an existing single family dwelling located in a single family zone, if the second unit would comply with the prdv~sions indicated in the bill. Mr. Kee continued that Staff is recommending that the Commission review the draft ordinance and that they come back on May 10 to discuss any changes that need to be made. The approach taken by Staff is one of placing limitations and requiring a use permit. Commissioner Kasolas noted that he would like to see a rationale of legislative intent, in that it would appear that this is a case of the State usurping local jurisdictions power. He added that he would be willing to attend a study session to discuss this issue. Commissioner Dickson noted that he is also in favor of a study session. Addi- tionally, Commissioner Dickson expressed concern with the 12,000 sq.ft. lot size, noting that this was an unnecessary restriction. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Bruce Reed, 1509 Walnut Drive, questioned the availability of sewage facilities for these types of units, as well as the lot size restrictions. He suggested that a study be done pertaining to the impact of this type of unit on the areas with --- larger lots. He also noted his concern with the parking requirements, stating that this type of unit should have a separate covered parking area. -13- Mr. Frank Corral, 137 Cherry Lane, stated that he is opposed to this type of use in a single family area because it leads to an area being full of rental units and multi-family uses. (Commissioner Fairbanks left the Council Chambers at 10:30 p.m.). It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that TA 83-02 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 1983. Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). *** Commissioner Dickson requested that the problem of multi-units and rentals in R-1 districts be put on a future study session agenda. TA 83-03 Public hearing to consider amending the Campbell City-initiated Municipal Code to include Chapter 20.22 (Park Dedication). Mr. Kee reported that as part of a general review of funding sources for the City, the City Manager has suggested that the Council consider adopting an ordinance which would require that developers either dedicate land or pay an in-lieu fee for the purpose of providing park facilities. Provisions for this type of ordinance are found in Chapter 66477 of the California Government Code and commonly referred to as the Quimby Act. 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, it was moved by Commissioner Meyer, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried unani- mously. Commissioner Dickson asked what the estimate of cost per unit would be. Mr. Kee responded that the estimated cost per unit is $1100. Commissioner Kasolas asked how much money is being discussed, based on the remaining space for development of housing in this community. Mr. Kee indicated that this would be approximately $220,000, in that there are roughly 800 dwelling units remaining to be built per the existing General Plan. Commissioner Kasolas expressed his concern that this would only be adding additional cost to housing. It was moved by Commissioner Dickson that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt 'the proposed draft of Chapter 20.22. Motion dies for lack of a second. -14- RESOLUTION N0. 2187 It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the Planning Commission --- adopt Resolution No. 2187 recommending that the City Council not adopt the proposed Chapter 20.22 (Park Dedication). Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Campos, Meyer, Howard NOES: Commissioners: Dickson, Kotowski ABSENT: Commissioners: Fairbanks MISCELLANEOUS Staff Report Staff Report regarding PG&E utility boxes. Mr. Stafford reported that recently a concern was raised by the Commission re- garding PG&E utility boxes which are sometimes placed in highly visible areas on a site. Staff is recorr~nending that the Commission adopt a standard condi- tion of approval addressing this concern. It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Meyer, that the Planning Uommission adopt a standard condition of approval reading "Applicant to submit a plan prior to installation of PG&E utility (transformer) boxes in- dicating the location of the boxes and screening if boxes are above ground for _ approval of the Planning Director." Motion carried unanimously (6-0-1). *** Staff Report Report from City Attorney regarding the Brown Act. City Attorney Dempster noted that all pertinent information had been presented to the Commission at its last meeting, and that he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission might have. *** ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Dickson, that the meeting be adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. APPROVED: Michael F. Kotowski Chairman ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee Secretary RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis Recording Secretary