Loading...
PC Min 03/08/1983PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, 7:30 P.P1. MINUTES MARCH 8, 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, Fairbanks, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski; Planning Director Arthur A. Kee, Principal Planner Philip J. Stafford, Engineering Planager Bill Helms, City Attorney J. Robert Dempster, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent Commissioners: Campos, Meyer APPROVAL OF FIINUTES February 22, 1983 It was moved by Comrnissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of February 22, 1983 be approved as submitted. Motion carried with a vote of 5-0-2. Commissioner Kasolas noted that he would like to record to reflect that under the "Special Reports - Redevelop- ment" he only wished the subjects "discussed" rather than "questioned". Additionally, on page 3, last para- graph, the last sentence should read "He felt that the project area is too expansive by including the Hamilton School Site." February 24, 1983 It was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Dickson, that the minutes of the special meeting regarding the Land Use Element and Circulation Element in the San Tomas Area held on February 24, 1983 be approved as submitted. tlotion carried with a vote of 3-0-2-2, with Commissioners Howard and Kasolas abstain- ing since they were not in attendance. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Kee noted that communications received pertained to items on the agenda, and would be discussed at the same time as the corresponding item. PUBLIC HEARINGS ZC 83-02 Continued public hearing to consider the application Reed, S. of Mr. Stuart Reed fora zone change from R-M-S to C-PD (Condominium Planned Development), and approval __. of plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of three condominiums on pro- perty known as 236 N. Central Avenue in a R-h1-S (Multiple Family/Low-Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. -2- Commissioner Fairbanks reported that this item had been discussed by tihe Site and Architectural Review Committee this morning. Under Condition A in the Staff Comment Sheet, the applicant will come back with different siding materials which allow the water to run off better. The Committee is requesting a textured pavement be used because of the long driveway. Additionally, fencing should be "stepped-down" towards the street. The Committee's major concern was with the setbacks, specifically pertaining to proposed decking which projects into the setbacks; however, under the C-PD the setbacks are whatever the Commission allows. The Committee would like to draw the Commission's attention to this deck- ing, since it is close to the property line. The Committee is recommending approval, subject to conditions in the Staff Comment Sheet. The Committee feels that the design of this project is compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Kee stated that Staff is also recommending approval. 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 Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). Discussion Commissioner Howard stated that he felt the design is very well done, and treats the neighborhood well. Additionally, he felt that the design of the building warranted the balcony treatment. RESOLUTION N0. 2178 It was moved by Commissioner Kasolas, and seconded by RESOLUTION N0. 2179 Commissioner Howard, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolutions No. 2178 and 2179 recommending approval of plans, elevations and development schedule allow the construction of three condominiums, and zone change from R-M-S to C-PD, for property known as 236 N. Central Avenue, subject to conditions listed in the Staff Comment Sheet. Motion carried with the following roll call vote r AYES: Commissioners: Kasolas, Fairbanks, Howard, Dickson, Kotowski NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Campos, Meyer *** GP 83-01 Continued public hearing to consider the City- City-initiated initiated amendments to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Mr. Kee stated that Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the subject Land Use Element; however, since there are two commissioners absent this evening, the Commission may wish to continue this item. Commissioner Fairbanks asked which of the policies listed in the element, if any, are :new.; in particular, policies number 6 and 7. -3- Mr. Kee responded that to the extent that these policies have never been identified previously in the Land Use Element, they are new. Commissioner Kasolas suggested that, if there were no objections from the other Commissioners, this item be continued to the next meeting in order that it could be discussed by the full Commission; and, perhaps the Commission could meet with Staff prior to the regular meeting to discuss this issue.. Commissioner Fairbanks stated she did not have a problem with this suggestion; however, she was willing to indicate her areas of concern this evening. Commissioner Dickson asked if, relevant to policy number 17, there are still some areas within the City's sphere of influence that have not been annexed. t1r. Kee indicated that there were two areas: between l~hiteoaks Road and Highway 17, and near Leigh and Hamilton Avenues. Commissioner Fairbanks stated her concern with policy number 7 in that she felt the land use policy should come closer to what is stated in the Open Space Element. Regarding policy number 11, Commissioner Fairbanks expressed concern about protecting residential properties in the form of noticing procedures-- particularly where proposed development abuts an existing residential area of lower density. Additionally, Commissioner Fairbanks noted she would like to know which of the policies presented in this draft are existing, and which are new. Commissioner Kasolas noted that it might be appropriate, regarding policy number 14, for Staff to report on the status of the sign ordinance and the enforcement of non-conforming signs; the new state legislation affecting sign ordinances; and an analysis of costs to business owners if the ordinance is enforced. 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 Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that GP 83-01 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of April 12, 1983. tAotion carried unanimously (5-0-2). *~* GP 82-05 Continued public hearing to consider possible amend- City-initiated ments to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Mr. Kee stated that Staff is recommending a continuance of this item to the meeting of April 12, and would welcome comments relating to the proposed element. 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 Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that GP 82-05 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of April 12, 1983. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). *** -4- TA 83-01 Public hearing to consider possible text amendments City-initiated to Sections 21.08 (Single Family Residential) and 21.56 (Exceptions to Area Provisions) of the Campbell Piunicipal Code. Mr. Kee reported that this item is directly related to the two previous items on this evening's agenda, and Staff would recommend a continuance to the meeting of April 12, 1983. Commissioner Fairbanks asked about Section 21.56.080 as indicated in the Staff Comment Sheet. Mr. Kee explained that this section is currently in the zoning code, and allows an additional dwelling unit on lots that are two or more times the area required and if other conditions are met. He noted that Staff is calling the Commission's attention to this section of the code, and recommending that,in light of recent policy actions pertaining to the San Tomas Area, this section be eliminated. Mr. Kee added that this is different from recent legislation regarding second-unit housing for the elderly. Commissioner Howard stated he is totally against taking this section out of the zoning code, since he felt it's deletion could create undue financial hardships in subdividing property. Commissioner Fairbanks expressed her concern with the section (page 3) dealing with home occupations, in that there are a number of people that have home occupations and she did not wish to inconvenience these people. P•tr. Kee noted that the statement Commissioner Fairbanks referred to is taken directly from the existing code, and it requires that all the home occupations comply with the provisions of the subject title. Most of the current home occupations do comply with the regulations, and Staff is not proposing any change in the code. Mr. Kee felt that perhaps this item could be clarified for the Commission at the next meeting. Chairman Kotowski noted that page 2, item 2 "There shall be no outdoor storage of materials, supplies, equipment, or vehicles" could possibly be construed that a person could not park a vehicle at his home that had a sign on it. He felt that this regulation may need some clarification. Mr. Kee noted that the intent of this regulation is that there not be more than one vehicle at the residence pertaining to the home occupation. Chairman Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Bruce Reed, 1509 l~alnut Drive, appeared before the Commission to receive clarification as to when this item would be continued to, and noted that he would speak at that time. No one else wishing to speak at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and second by Commissioner Howard, that ~P 83-01 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of April 12, 1983. ~1otion carried unanimously (5-0-2). *** -5- DIISCELLANEOUS SA 83-10 Sign application of Mr. Ron Puksar on behalf of Puksar, R. Best Products to allow the erection of a 93 sq. ft. wall sign on property known as 550 W. Hamilton Avenue in a PD (Planned Development/Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Fairbanks reported that this item had been considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee this morning. ghe noted that the applicant was not present at this morning's meeting. The Committee expressed concern with regard to the fact that the applicant is requesting a sign of 93 sq.ft.; however, when looking at the present sign which is 380 sq.ft., the Committee feels the new sign is quite an improvement. Commissioner Kasolas asked why there is a condition of approval that the existing free-standing sign be brought into conformance with the sign ordinance, when the sign ordinance enforcement procedures are in a state of flux at this point. Mr. Kee stated that the sign ordinance has been referred to Staff for a report back to the City Council in May; however, the current sign ordinance is very specific and Staff is following the ordinance that has been in effect to this point. The ordinance provides that Staff review the signing on each development when anew application is made. A similar situation to this applica- tion would be the recent signing request for the Liquor Barn on Hamilton and Bascom Avenues. Mr. Kee noted that the ordinance also provides that the Planning Commission has the authority to approve higher or larger signs. Commissioner Kasolas felt that this application fora wall sign had no relation to the existing free-standing sign on the property. Commissioner Kasolas also expressed concern that the applicant was not present this evening. It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Kasolas, that the Planning Commission continue this item to the next meeting in order that the applicant could be made aware of the condition of approval that the existing 28 foot free-standing sign be lowered to 14 feet. Discussion of lotion Mr. Kee asked Marty l~oodworth, Planner II, if the applicant had contacted the Planning Department regarding the conditions of approval. Mr. Woodworth indicated that Mr. Puksar had telephoned the department to say that he could not be in attendance at the meeting, and was in agreement with the conditions recommended by Staff. Per. Woodworth noted that he told Mr. Puksar at that time that if the Commission had any concerns with the application, they might continue it in order that the applicant could attend. Commissioner Fairbanks noted that it appears that the applicant has received the Staff Comment Sheet and the recommended conditions, and does not have a problem with this. Commissioner Kasolas felt that the applicant should have a chance to be heard, and he wanted to be sure that the applicant understood the conditions of approval. -6- Commissioner Dickson noted his agreement that the applicant should be given every opportunity to be heard, should he desire; however, in this instance it appears that the applicant is fully aware of the conditions of approval. Vote on Plotion for Continuance Motion for continuance fails with a vote of 2-3-2, with Commissioners Fairbanks, Dickson, and Kotowski voting "no". Motion It was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that the Planning Commission approve SA 83-10, subject to the conditions as listed in the Staff Comment Sheet (attached hereto). Motion carried unani- mously (5-0-2). Commissioner Kasolas requested that the applicant be notified of the status of the sign ordinance and enforcement of non-conforming signs, and the con- cerns expressed this evening. *** Staff Report Staff Report regarding police reports for the ~linchester Drive-In. Mr. Kee reported that at its previous meeting, the Commission requested Staff to check with the Police Department to determine the number of police responses to problems associated with the drive-in operation. The Police Department has indicated that there have been three written police reports during the last year, although other calls have been made with no reports taken. Commissioner Fairbanks asked that the management and owners of the theater be apprised of the concerns of the area residents, as expressed at the public hearing when a use permit for a flea market was considered. P4r. Kee stated that he has talked with the General Manager, Mr. Jack Haigh, specifically about the problems expressed by area residents. Mr. Haigh has indicated that he is taking steps, through the management of the drive-in, to abate any problems. P1r. Dempster commented that Mr. Haigh also indicated that anyone who is having a problem with drive-in patrons should contact him or the theater management directly. h1r. Dempster added that perhaps Staff could send letters to the people who spoke at the public hearing telling them to get in touch with the theater management when they have any problems. Commissioner Dickson felt that perhaps this situation should be reviewed again in six months. It was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that this item 6e reviewed in six months (September 1983), and that area residents who expressed concern with the operation be notified to contact the theater management with their concerns. Motion carried with a vote of 4-0-2-1, with - Commissioner Kasolas abstaining because he felt this was not necessary. *** -7- Staff Report Staff Report regarding sidewalks in industrial areas. t1r. Helms reported that Staff is in agreement with the idea of instituting a policy for sidewalks in the industrial areas of the City. Staff recently surveyed other cities in the area and determined that some of the cities are now requiring sidewalks in the industrial zones--on a case by case basis. It might be appropriate at this time for the Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council that they consider amending its policy to require sidewalks in industrial areas. Commissioner Fairbanks noted that ~erha:ps the Council would consider possible alternative improvements, such as those available in the San Tomas Area. She added that these alternative improvements may be appropriate for the industrial areas, with Staff's monitoring. Commissioner Howard stated that he was in agreement with Commissioner Fairbanks. He felt it was necessary to provide some type of pedestrian pathways in these areas. It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks, that the Planning Commission adopt a recommendation that the City Council consider amending the current policy pertaining to sidewalks in the City, to include provisions for sidewalks in industrial areas along with possible "alternative" standards similar to those allowed in other areas of the City. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). *** Referral from Referral from City Council regarding request of City Council Mr. Robert 0. Hughes for waiver of installation of street improvements along Kenneth Avenue at Budd Avenue. tir. Helms reported that a minor subdivision was approved some time ago for t~lr. Hughes property on the corner of Kenneth and Budd Avenues. At that time the applicant was informed that he would have to provide street improvements at some time in the future, or provide the City with a bond. Mr. Hughes has requested a waiver of these improvements from the Council. Staff has dis- cussed the "alternative" street improvements with tir. Hughes, and advised him that because the Council is looking at this area at this time, it would not be appropriate for him to install the improvements at this time, but rather enter into an agreement to construct the improvements at a later date when the area situation has been settled. This particular street is a candidate for the alternative street improvements. Chairman Kotowski asked P1r. Helms if Staff could perceive a date that the improvements would be required in the area. t~1r. Helms stated he did not at this point, and that it could take a long time to put together an improvement district for this area, since most of the area is already developed. Mr.-Helms explained, at length, the City's method for requiring bonds and agreements for improvements. Chairman Kotowski expressed concern that the applicant's funds might be tied up for a considerable length of time. -8- Mr. Robiert Hughes, 2241 Foxworthy Ave., Suite B, San Jose, noted that the process of renewing a bond each year can be very expensive. He added that if the improvements are not waived, this lot will be the only one on the block to have improvements. Mr. Helms stated that the policy would require the improvements on the parcel being improved, in this case -- Parcel B. Commissioner Fairbanks asked if there was some type of action that the Commission might take that would stay within the ordinance requirements, and still lessen the impact on the developer. ~1r. Helms noted that there have been a few instances in the past where the City has added a "sunset clause" to the agreement, or taken a second deed of trust on the property for the amount necessary for the improvements. Mr. Hughes stated that he would rather construct the improvements himself at this point, rather than place a lien on the property or tie up funds in a bonding situation. He asked what type of improvements the City wished constructed. Mr. Helms indicated that the City could tell f~lr. Hughes what type of improve- ments were necessary (standard or alternative) in a very short time. In the meantime, Staff would recommend that the applicant enter into an agreement with the City to construct these improvements, thereby allowing the Public Works Department to release his needed building permits. P~?r. Hughes stated that he would rather not have to put in the improvements at all, since he did not see any benefits to the area. Mr. Helms noted that a statement could be added to the agreement putting a time limit on the bond. Staff is recommending that the improvements be deferred until it is determined what standards will be required. Commissioner Fairbanks noted she was concerned not only about the applicant's request fora waiver, but also with this entire area of the City. She asked if there was some way to work within the ordinance and still provide some alternatives for the property owner. fair. Helms indicated he was not aware of any way to accomplish this without tieing the property up with liens--unless the applicant constructs the im- provements at the same time as the development. Commissioner Dickson asked what happens regarding improvements on Parcel A. f?r. Helms noted that it is the City's policy to require improvements only on the parcel that is being improved--in this case, Parcel B. In this particular case, Staff feels that it is possible to have a reasonable transition from the corner site to Parcel B. Commissioner Howard stated that, with the ndture of the surrounding area, he felt that it creates a hardship to put these restrictions on this property owner at this time. -g- It was moved by Commissioner Fairbanks, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, _ that the Planning Commission consider granting a waiver of the required street improvements as requested by P1r. Hughes. Discussion of Motion Commissioner Dickson stated he was opposed to the motion because it is not in conformance with the policy of the City and will cause problems in the future. This is the only way there will ever be sidewalks constructed in the City. Commissioner Kasolas left the Council Chambers at 9:10 p.m. Pr1r. Dempster noted his agreement with Commissioner Dickson. Commissioner Fairbanks stated that she made the motion for waiver because she felt that in this particular case, she would like to recommend that this street,. Kenneth Avenue, be looked at with regard to the alternative street improvements in that it is an area that is already developed, and Staff has stated that it is not an area with any flooding problems. She felt that this would be the one lot in the neighborhood with street improvements, and this concerned her. Commissioner Dickson stated that he is in agreement with the alternative street improvements and the rural atmosphere; however, the City is going to have improvements eventually. Thus, making it more costly for the -_. City. He felt the developers should bear the responsibility of the cost of improvements. Commissioner Howard stated that the reason he seconded the motion was because he feels that the City needs to take a look at ways to control the problems discussed this evening, especially the problems presented in this area. Vote on Plotion The motion for waiver of the street improvements failed with a vote of 1-3-3. Motion It was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the developer of the vacant parcel near the southeast corner of Kenneth and Budd be required to construct street improvements as a condition of obtaining a building permit; that the applicant enter into an agreement to construct improvements when called upon to do so by the City Council, and to post a cash bond with the City guaranteeing the improvements; and that the Public Works Department provide the applicant with the necessary street standards for this property within twelve months from this date.. Notion carried with a vote of 3-1-3, with Commissioner Fairbanks voting "no". Commissioner Fairbanks requested that Staff put into place the policy for alternative street improvements for this site. It was the consensus of the Commission that a copy of the minutes pertaining to this item be referred to the City Council for their information. -lo- Commissioner Dickson felt that the Commission should take a look at how to handle the improvements on Parcel A. Mr. Helms noted that this would be brought up with the Circulation Element. *** UP 82-07 Continued six-month review of use permit allowing Schuman, R, an auto repossession storage yard and allowing the use of a mobilehome as an office on property known as 175 Curtner Avenue in an P1-2-S (Heavy Industrial) Zoning District. ~1r. Kee reported briefly on this item, noting that as of this meeting the required trash enclosure has not been constructed. He noted that Staff is recommend that the Commission set a date of hearing to consider revocation of the use permit if the conditions of approval are not met by March 22, 1983. It was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Commissioner Dickson, that the Planning Commission set the date of April 12, 1983 for public hearing to consider revocation of UP 82-07 if the required trash enclosure is not con- structed by P1arch 22, 1983. Motion carried unanimously (4-0-3). *** OTHER ITEMS BROUGHT UP BY C0~IMISSIONERS Commissioner Fairbanks asked Mr. Dempster if he was able to gather information pertaining to any controls the City might be able to exert regarding the impact of HUD project residents on the surrounding community. Mr. Dempster noted he would have this information for the next meeting. Commissioner Howard stated that he would like to recommend that a request be made to the City Council fora study session to review information obtained at the League of California Cities Conference, especially the Brown Act. Commissioner Dickson asked if the City Attorney might review with the Commission the differences between the previous Brown Act and the new one. ~1r. Bruce Reed, 1509 Walnut Drive, appeared before the Commission, stating his concern with the notification of meeting procedures, as well as the fact that the downtown area's problems have been solved--but San Tomas Area's problems keep being continued. P1r. Kee stated that he would be willing to meet with t1r. Reed at any time, in the office or at P~1r.. Reed's home, to review with him the process that taken place with regard to notification, and hearings. ADJOURNt1ENT It was moved by Commissioner Dickson, and seconded by Commissioner Howard, that the meeting be adjourned. The meeting was adjourned at 9:28 p.m. -11- APPROVED: Michael F. Kotowski C airman ATTESTED: Arthur A. Kee Secretary RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis ecor Ong Secretary